Permanent police power for IGs would not save money

Granting permanent law enforcement authority to all federal inspectors general would cost the government little, but would also not produce significant savings, according to a new report from the General Accounting Office. Inspectors general are appointed by the president to investigate waste, fraud and abuse in federal agencies. To date, only IGs at the Agriculture and Defense Departments and in the Treasury Department's Tax Administration office have permanent law enforcement authority that allows them to carry guns, make arrests, and get and serve warrants. The Justice Department awards temporary law enforcement authority to other IGs, deputizing them each year. In 2004, the deputized period will change from one year to three years. In its report, "Inspectors General: Comparison of Ways Law Enforcement Authority Is Granted" (02-437), GAO examined the difference in oversight and costs associated with deputizing IGs every three years as opposed to giving all IGs permanent law enforcement authority. The watchdog agency found little difference in the training, scope of authority or supervision between the two categories of inspectors general, though deputized IGs are subject to more oversight from the Justice Department than their counterparts with permanent law enforcement authority. Deputized IGs receive more oversight because their police powers are renewed annually. Granting permanent law enforcement authority to all IGs would not save the government much money because training and other costs are relatively the same between those with permanent authority and those who are deputized periodically. Deputized IGs are reviewed annually to verify that they've maintained their firearm skills, that their training has been adequate and is up-to-date, and that they are working closely with federal prosecutors and other federal law enforcement agencies when they conduct investigations, according to the report. Deputized IGs also have to report annually to the Justice Department on their activities, including the number of searches and arrests they make, and the number of surveillance activities, interviews and undercover operations they conduct. To date, no deputized IG has been denied a renewal request, the report said. FBI officials told GAO that the current deputizing process "is a much better system of conferring law enforcement authority to the IGs because it provides greater flexibility for the Justice Department and appropriately places oversight responsibilities at the attorney general level." Most of the deputized IGs told GAO that permanent statutory authority would improve their criminal investigations. The President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency, which represents IGs, disagreed with the report's findings. "The GAO draft seems to assume that, unless significant cost savings can be associated with permanent statutory authority, the current temporary blanket deputation system should be retained," wrote Patrick McFarland, chairman of the council's investigations committee.

He criticized the methodology used by GAO as "flawed" and said the agency's analytical conclusions were "marred to some extent by this erroneous methodology." Instead of focusing on the minimal differences between the two authorities, McFarland stressed the need for GAO to focus its efforts on determining which level of authority would bring about the most effective investigative programs.

In its report, GAO clarified that it did not "state or imply" that significant savings were the only impetus for changing the current system. GAO also declined to take a stance on which method of authority was preferable.

In May, Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., introduced S. 2530, which would give IGs statutory law enforcement powers. The bill was approved by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and awaits a vote by the full Senate.