Congressional oversight

Last updated

Congressional oversight is oversight by the United States Congress over the executive branch, including the numerous U.S. federal agencies. Congressional oversight includes the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation. [1] Congress exercises this power largely through its congressional committee system. Oversight also occurs in a wide variety of congressional activities and contexts. These include authorization, appropriations, investigative, and legislative hearings by standing committees; which is specialized investigations by select committees; and reviews and studies by congressional support agencies and staff.

Contents

Congress’s oversight authority derives from its "implied" powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances.

Constitutionality

Oversight is an implied rather than an enumerated power under the U.S. Constitution. [2] The government's charter does not explicitly grant Congress the authority to conduct inquiries or investigations of the executive, to have access to records or materials held by the executive, or to issue subpoenas for documents or testimony from the executive.

There was little discussion of the power to oversee, review, or investigate executive activity at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 or later in The Federalist Papers , which argued in favor of ratification of the Constitution. The lack of debate was because oversight and its attendant authority were seen as an inherent power of representative assemblies which enacted public law. [3]

Oversight also derives from the many and varied express powers of the Congress in the Constitution. It is implied in the legislature's authority, among other powers and duties, to appropriate funds, enact laws, raise and support armies, provide for a Navy, declare war, and impeach and remove from office the president, vice president, and other civil officers. Congress could not reasonably or responsibly exercise these powers without knowing what the executive was doing; how programs were being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials were obeying the law and complying with legislative intent.

The Supreme Court of the United States has confirmed the oversight powers of Congress, subject to constitutional safeguards for civil liberties, on several occasions. In 1927, for instance, the court found that in investigating the administration of the Justice Department, Congress had the authority to consider a subject "on which legislation could be had or would be materially aided by the information which the investigation was calculated to elicit". [4]

Congressional control of agencies

If Congress believes that an agency has drifted from its original mandate, Congress can respond in a number of ways. Congress can pass a law to overrule agency decisions, or to narrow the agency's jurisdiction. Congress can use its appropriations power to restrict the agency's funding. Congress can also narrow the agency's regulatory authority. For example, in the 1980s Congress narrowed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's regulatory discretion using detailed substantive criteria to limit EPA rulemaking. [5]

Principles

Underlying the legislature's ability to oversee the executive are democratic principles as well as practical purposes. John Stuart Mill, the British Utilitarian philosopher, insisted that oversight was the key feature of a meaningful representative body: "The proper office of a representative assembly is to watch and control the government". [6] As a young scholar, Woodrow Wilson equated oversight with lawmaking, which was usually seen as the supreme function of a legislature. He wrote, "Quite as important as legislation is vigilant oversight of administration". [7]

The philosophical underpinning for oversight is the Constitution’s system of checks and balances among the legislature, executive, and judiciary. James Madison, known as the "Father of the Constitution", described the system in Federalist No. 51 as establishing "subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner that each may be a check on the other".

Purposes

Oversight, as an outgrowth of this principle, ideally serves a number of overlapping objectives and purposes:

In sum, oversight is a way for Congress to check on, and check, the executive directors.

Powers and prerogatives

U.S. Constitution

Although the U.S. Constitution grants no formal, express authority to oversee or investigate the executive or program administration, oversight is implied in Congress’s array of enumerated powers. [8] The legislature is authorized to appropriate funds; raise and support armies; provide for and maintain a navy; declare war; provide for organizing and calling forth the Militia; regulate interstate and foreign commerce; establish post offices and post roads; advise and consent on treaties and presidential nominations (Senate); and impeach (House) and try (Senate) the president, vice president, and civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Reinforcing these powers is Congress’s broad authority "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

The authority to oversee derives from these constitutional powers. Congress could not carry them out reasonably or responsibly without knowing what the executive is doing; how programs are being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials are obeying the law and complying with legislative intent. The Supreme Court has legitimated Congress’s investigative power, subject to constitutional safeguards for civil liberties. In 1927, the court found that, in investigating the administration of the Department of Justice, Congress was considering a subject "on which legislation could be had or would be materially aided by the information which the investigation was calculated to elicit". [9]

Statutes

The "necessary and proper" clause of the Constitution also allows Congress to enact laws that mandate oversight by its committees, grant relevant authority to itself and its support agencies, and impose specific obligations on the executive to report to or consult with Congress, and even seek its approval for specific actions.

Broad oversight mandates exist for the legislature in several significant statutes.

Besides these general powers, numerous statutes direct the executive to furnish information to or consult with Congress. For example, the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-62) requires agencies to consult with Congress on their strategic plans and report annually on performance plans, goals, and results. In fact, more than 2,000 reports are submitted each year to Congress by federal departments, agencies, commissions, bureaus, and offices. Inspectors general (IGs), for instance, report their findings about waste, fraud, and abuse, and their recommendations for corrective action, periodically to the agency head and Congress. The IGs are also instructed to issue special reports concerning particularly serious problems immediately to the agency head, who transmits them unaltered to Congress within seven days. The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-531), moreover, instructs the IGs to identify and describe their agencies' most serious management and performance challenges and briefly assess progress in addressing them. This new requirement is to be part of a larger effort by individual agencies to consolidate their numerous reports on financial and performance management matters into a single annual report. The aim is to enhance coordination and efficiency within the agencies; improve the quality of relevant information; and provide it in a more meaningful and useful format for Congress, the president, and the public.

In addition, Congress creates commissions and establishes task forces to study and make recommendations for select policy areas that can also involve examination of executive operations and organizations.

There is a long history behind executive reports to Congress. Indeed, one of the first laws of the First Congress—the 1789 Act to establish the Treasury Department (1 Stat. 66)—called upon the secretary and the treasurer to report directly to Congress on public expenditures and all accounts. The secretary was also required "to make report, and give information to either branch of the legislature...respecting all matters referred to him by the Senate or House of Representatives, or which shall appertain to his office." Separate from such reporting obligations, public employees may provide information to Congress on their own. In the early part of the 20th century, Congress enacted legislation to overturn a "gag" rule, issued by the president, that prohibited employees from communicating directly with Congress (5 U.S.C. 7211 (1994)). Other "whistleblower" statutes, which have been extended specifically to cover personnel in the intelligence community (P.L. 105-272), guarantee the right of government employees to petition or furnish information to Congress or a member.

House and Senate chamber rules also reinforce the oversight function. House and Senate rules, for instance, provide for "special oversight" or "comprehensive policy oversight", respectively, for specified committees over matters that relate to their authorizing jurisdiction. In addition, House rules direct each standing committee to require its subcommittees to conduct oversight or to establish an oversight subcommittee for this purpose. House rules also call for each committee to submit an oversight agenda, listing its prospective oversight topics for the ensuing Congress, to the House Committee on Government Reform, which compiles and prints the agendas.

The House Government Reform Committee and the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, which have oversight jurisdiction over virtually the entire federal government, furthermore, are authorized to review and study the operation of government activities to determine their economy and efficiency and to submit recommendations based on GAO reports. In addition, House rules require that the findings and recommendations from the Government Reform Committee be considered by authorizing panels, if presented to them in a timely fashion.

Activities and avenues

Oversight occurs through a wide variety of congressional activities and avenues. Some of the most publicized are the comparatively rare investigations by select committees into major scandals or into executive branch operations gone awry.

Cases in point are temporary select committee inquiries into: China’s acquisition of U.S. nuclear weapons information, in 1999; the Iran–Contra affair, in 1987; intelligence agency abuses, in 1975–1976, and the Watergate scandal in 1973–1974. The precedent for this kind of oversight goes back two centuries: in 1792, a special House committee investigated the defeat of an Army force by confederated Indian tribes.

By comparison to these select panel investigations, other congressional inquiries in recent Congresses—into the Whitewater controversy, access to Federal Bureau of Investigation files, White House Travel Office firings, and campaign financing—have relied upon standing committees.

The impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton in 1998 in the House and in 1999 in the Senate also generated considerable oversight. The oversight not only encompassed the president and the White House staff, but also extended to the office of independent counsel, specifically its authority, jurisdiction, and expenditures. Although such highly visible endeavors are significant, they usually reflect only a small portion of Congress’s total oversight effort. More routine and regular review, monitoring, and supervision occur in other congressional activities and contexts. Especially important are appropriations hearings on agency budgets as well as authorization hearings for existing programs. Separately, examinations of executive operations and the implementation of programs—by congressional staff, support agencies, and specially created commissions and task forces—provide additional oversight.

Another avenue of oversight is a resolution of inquiry, which is a simple resolution making a direct request or demand of the president or the head of an executive department to furnish the House of Representatives with specific factual information in the administration’s possession. [10]

Congressional oversight training

The CRS and the Project On Government Oversight, an independent nonprofit watchdog, train congressional staff how to conduct effective oversight.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article One of the United States Constitution</span> Portion of the US Constitution regarding Congress as right

Article One of the Constitution of the United States establishes the legislative branch of the federal government, the United States Congress. Under Article One, Congress is a bicameral legislature consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Article One grants Congress various enumerated powers and the ability to pass laws "necessary and proper" to carry out those powers. Article One also establishes the procedures for passing a bill and places various limits on the powers of Congress and the states from abusing their powers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal government of the United States</span> National government of the United States

The federal government of the United States is the national government of the United States, a federal republic located primarily in North America, composed of 50 states, five major self-governing territories, several island possessions, and the federal district and national capital of Washington, D.C., where most of the federal government is based.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government Accountability Office</span> US federal government agency

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent, nonpartisan government agency within the legislative branch that provides auditing, evaluative, and investigative services for the United States Congress. It is the supreme audit institution of the federal government of the United States. It identifies its core "mission values" as: accountability, integrity, and reliability. It is also known as the "congressional watchdog". The agency is headed by the Comptroller General of the United States. The comptroller general is appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. When a vacancy occurs in the office of the comptroller general, Congress establishes a commission to recommend individuals to the president. The commission consists of the following:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">War Powers Resolution</span> 1973 U.S. federal law (50 U.S.C. 1541-48)

The War Powers Resolution is a federal law intended to check the U.S. president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S. Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States congressional joint resolution. It provides that the president can send the U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization", or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Congressional Research Service</span> U.S. Congress-affiliated think tank

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a public policy research institute of the United States Congress. Operating within the Library of Congress, it works primarily and directly for members of Congress and their committees and staff on a confidential, nonpartisan basis. CRS is sometimes known as Congress' think tank due to its broad mandate of providing research and analysis on all matters relevant to national policymaking.

Contempt of Congress is the act of obstructing the work of the United States Congress or one of its committees. Historically, the bribery of a U.S. senator or U.S. representative was considered contempt of Congress. In modern times, contempt of Congress has generally applied to the refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a congressional committee or subcommittee—usually seeking to compel either testimony or the production of requested documents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States congressional committee</span> Legislative working groups of the United States federal government

A congressional committee is a legislative sub-organization in the United States Congress that handles a specific duty. Committee membership enables members to develop specialized knowledge of the matters under their jurisdiction. As "little legislatures", the committees monitor ongoing governmental operations, identify issues suitable for legislative review, gather and evaluate information, and recommend courses of action to their parent body. Woodrow Wilson once wrote, "it is not far from the truth to say that Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst Congress in its committee rooms is Congress at work." It is not expected that a member of Congress be an expert on all matters and subject areas that come before Congress. Congressional committees provide valuable informational services to Congress by investigating and reporting about specialized subjects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Congress of Colombia</span> Bicameral national legislature of Colombia

The Congress of the Republic of Colombia is the name given to Colombia's bicameral national legislature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Separation of powers under the United States Constitution</span> Overview of the separation of powers under the United States Constitution

Separation of powers is a political doctrine originating in the writings of Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu in The Spirit of the Laws, in which he argued for a constitutional government with three separate branches, each of which would have defined abilities to check the powers of the others. This philosophy heavily influenced the drafting of the United States Constitution, according to which the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the United States government are kept distinct in order to prevent abuse of power. The American form of separation of powers is associated with a system of checks and balances.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NSA warrantless surveillance (2001–2007)</span> Part of Terrorist Surveillance Program

NSA warrantless surveillance — also commonly referred to as "warrantless-wiretapping" or "-wiretaps" — was the surveillance of persons within the United States, including U.S. citizens, during the collection of notionally foreign intelligence by the National Security Agency (NSA) as part of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. In late 2001, the NSA was authorized to monitor, without obtaining a FISA warrant, phone calls, Internet activities, text messages and other forms of communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lays within the U.S.

A United States congressional hearing is the principal formal method by which United States congressional committees collect and analyze information in the early stages of legislative policymaking. Whether confirmation hearings, legislative, oversight, investigative, or a combination of these, all hearings share common elements of preparation and conduct. Hearings usually include oral testimony from witnesses and questioning of the witnesses by members of Congress. George B. Galloway termed congressional hearings a goldmine of information for all the public problems of the United States. A leading authority on U.S. government publications has referred to the published hearings as "the most important publications originating within Congress." The Senate Library in a similar vein noted "Hearings are among the most important publications originating in Congress."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Authorization bill</span> Type of United States legislation

An authorization bill is a type of legislation used in the United States to authorize the activities of the various agencies and programs that are part of the federal government of the United States. Authorizing such programs is one of the powers of the United States Congress. Authorizations give those things the legal power to operate and exist. Authorization bills must be passed in both the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate before being signed by the President of the United States in order to become law. They may originate in either chamber of Congress, unlike revenue raising bills, which must originate in the House. They can also be considered at any time during the year.

The Treaty Clause of the United States Constitution establishes the procedure for ratifying international agreements. It empowers the President as the primary negotiator of agreements between the United States and other countries, and holds that the advice and consent of a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate renders a treaty binding with the force of federal law.

United States Intelligence Community Oversight duties are shared by both the executive and legislative branches of the government. Oversight, in this case, is the supervision of intelligence agencies, and making them accountable for their actions. Generally oversight bodies look at the following general issues: following policymaker needs, the quality of analysis, operations, and legality of actions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Powers of the United States Congress</span>

Powers of the United States Congress are implemented by the United States Constitution, defined by rulings of the Supreme Court, and by its own efforts and by other factors such as history and custom. It is the chief legislative body of the United States. Some powers are explicitly defined by the Constitution and are called enumerated powers; others have been assumed to exist and are called implied powers.

The U.S. Congress in relation to the president and Supreme Court has the role of chief legislative body of the United States. However, the Founding Fathers of the United States built a system in which three powerful branches of the government, using a series of checks and balances, could limit each other's power. As a result, it helps to understand how the United States Congress interacts with the presidency as well as the Supreme Court to understand how it operates as a group.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction</span> U.S. governments leading oversight authority on Afghanistan reconstruction

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) is the U.S. government's leading oversight authority on Afghanistan reconstruction. Congress created the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction to provide independent and objective oversight of the Afghanistan Reconstruction funds. Under the authority of Section 1229 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, SIGAR seeks to conducts audit, inspections, and investigations to promote efficiency and effectiveness of reconstruction programs, and to detect and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars. SIGAR also has a hotline that allows individuals to report suspected fraud.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Administrative Procedure Act</span> US federal statute

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law  79–404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations, and it grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions. According to Hickman & Pierce, it is one of the most important pieces of United States administrative law, and serves as a sort of "constitution" for U.S. administrative law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014</span> United States Law

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 is a U.S. public law that authorizes appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for intelligence activities of the U.S. government. The law authorizes there to be funding for intelligence agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency or the National Security Agency, but a separate appropriations bill would also have to pass in order for those agencies to receive any money.

Presidential reorganization authority is a term used to refer to a major statutory power that has sometimes been temporarily extended by the United States Congress to the President of the United States. It permits the president to divide, consolidate, abolish, or create agencies of the U.S. federal government by presidential directive, subject to limited legislative oversight. First granted in 1932, presidential reorganization authority has been extended to nine presidents on 16 separate occasions. As of 2017, it was most recently granted to Ronald Reagan.

References

  1. ↑ Kaiser FM. (2001). Congressional Oversight. CRS Report for Congress 97-936, 2001 Updated 2012 version: Halchin LE. (2012). Congressional Oversight.
  2. ↑ Final Report of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress – Congressional Oversight Archived 2006-11-30 at the Wayback Machine
  3. ↑ Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress (December 1993). "Organization of the Congress – Congressional Oversight". house.gov. Archived from the original on 2016-12-14. Retrieved 2017-05-18.
  4. ↑ "McGrain v. Daugherty". Oyez.org. Retrieved 2 November 2010.
  5. ↑ Congress, The Supreme Court, and the quiet revolution in administrative law. 1988 Duke Law Journal 819.
  6. ↑ John Stuart Mill, Considerations on Representative Government (London: Parker, Son, and Bourn, 1861), p. 104.
  7. ↑ Woodrow Wilson, Congressional Government (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1885), p. 297.
  8. ↑ Article I, Sec. 8 and Article II, Secs. 2 and 4.
  9. ↑ McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 177 (1927); see also Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 187 (1957), and Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 111 (1959).
  10. ↑ Davis, Christopher M. (November 9, 2017). Resolutions of Inquiry: An Analysis of Their Use in the House, 1947–2017 (PDF). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Retrieved 17 December 2017.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.