GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: White House briefs Hill aides on IG dismissal

• 80749
  

  What's to brief? Why this Administration failed to follow the requirements of the law by firing IG Walpin without first providing 30 day written notice to Congress with the stated cause? This was not the only IG to be "purged" this week, and probably not the last. Let's see who gets nominated to be the next CNCS (AmeriCorps) Inspector General, another Czar from Chicago?

  Thomas Debouch Posted June 18, 2009 11:29 PM
• 80747
  

  Hey go after 1 of michelles buddies catch him dirty to the tune of $750,000 and the IG gets canned not the crook. Only in Chicago

  dan m ketter Posted June 18, 2009 10:27 PM
• 80704
  

  Oh my Lawd, Tuck, talk about rewriting history... I read, "Someone keep track of the number of people that Obama puts in these type organizations over the next few months." No single president, since the elimination of the "Spoils System", appointed as many folks into non-competitive positions as did King Shrub. The GovExec article "Transition could create leadership void, report says" dated May 6, 2008 pointed out:

  "There are roughly 7,800 political positions, half of which are part-time jobs on boards and commissions" and... "The remaining positions include 1,200 appointments requiring Senate confirmation, 1,400 Schedule C officials, 800 noncareer senior executives and 800 members of the new White House staff." "President Bush named 12 percent more political appointees and 33 percent more Schedule C appointees than President Clinton."

  Man, the Body Politic was so thick with fleas and ticks I'm not surprised in the least it took this long for the POTUS to eliminate one more. He probably wouldn't have if the man and be present, accounted for, and competent; but, still, the entire story is not yet out. I don't believe he'll ever totally repair the damage.

  And then I read, "Just like the silencing of staff/general Officers."

  Try reading the New York Times "More Retired Generals Call for Rumsfeld's Resignation", Apr 14, 2006, and guess who resigned or retired; definitely NOT The Donald! The Shrub administration shut down the military leadership and caused quite a few resignations. If you don't like the Times, like Tom, just Google any number of sources for "generals retire Rumsfeld".

  Tip off Posted June 18, 2009 2:51 PM
• 80703
  

  To William R. Cuming: Sorry, you're wrong. The Inspector General Act of 1978 certainly does NOT require a firing to be "for cause." It clearly specifies, at Sec. 3(b), Title 5a, USC, that the President may remove an IG. The only qualification in that act, as amended by the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, is that the President communicate his or her reasons for the removal to Congress no later than 30 days before removal. Obama has provided that notice and is in compliance with the law.

  Zuzu Posted June 18, 2009 2:45 PM
• 80700
  

  B.O. and his administration have put the basic psychological triangle on its ear - literally. B.O. and the Chicago gang play the victim and make everyone else the perpetrator. NOW - we know who the enablers are - the voters. I pray they wake the heck up! Soon!

  Sharon Posted June 18, 2009 2:12 PM
• 80695
  

  Sounds as if this trend of "concern" continues, most employee will be shown the door. The IG should have cheated or have been "confused" on his taxes. This would have shown them that he knew how to play the game.

  TDK Posted June 18, 2009 1:52 PM
• 80641
  

  Michael Edmonson said: "It sounds like president Obama is playing God again".

  He probably learned how to do that from watching GWB in action.

  OverPaid Peon Posted June 18, 2009 11:23 AM
• 80557
  

  It sounds like president Obama is playing God again. He is pushing through this dismissal just like he pushed through a stimulus plan before Congress could read what they were voting on. Government is moving too fast and we all are going to pay a heavy price for it. I can certainly see the fingerprints of the Bilderberg Group on this one.

  Michael Edmonson Posted June 17, 2009 8:27 PM
• 80542
  

  The buzz word for this administration is "transparency." The failure to notify Congress prior to the dismissal of the IG sends a clear and transparent message to the IG community...

  bob p Posted June 17, 2009 5:19 PM
• 80494
  

  Good ole Chicago politic at its best. I guess you don't mess with "Friends of Obama".

  Red58 Posted June 17, 2009 12:17 PM
• 80490
  

  It seems like a lot of people are jumping to conclusions before the facts are in. The basis for the removal is unknown. Conjecture should not replace knowledge.

  no one special Posted June 17, 2009 12:08 PM
• 80469
  

  Remember, President Obama is a rumored to be a lawyer, how do you tell he is lying, his lips are moving. EVERY speech he has made to date is full of lies and half truths. What's new or unexpected, from the President, his wife and ACORN/AmeriCorps type organizations. Someone keep track of the number of people that Obama puts in these type organizations over the next few months. After all they are from Chicago. Just like the silencing of staff/general Officers. It's my way or the highway are the only choices. Lies and half truths are the gist of Obama's way of doing business.

  D Tucker Posted June 17, 2009 10:43 AM
• 80446
  

  What a chilling effect this firing has got to have on the IG community. Every single IG should resign if this firing is allowed to stand. You do not fire an IG for doing his job and saving taxpayer money. What is the IG's incentive to do such work in the future. I guess you could always check with the White House first to find out if the auditee is a friend of the President. Open Government my foot.

  Michael Slachta Posted June 17, 2009 9:31 AM
• 80439
  

  Walpin's just another irate leftover from the corrupt GWB administration. He needed to go, as do most of the other leftovers.

  OverPaid Peon Posted June 17, 2009 9:05 AM
• 80438
  

  Having previously served on an IG team and remaining objective, sometimes I was reminded by those above who paid my salary and wages in a vague manner of asserting control. This action by the President is not even a vague manner, it is blatant and unacceptable warranting appointment of an Independent Counsel. Oh, I forgot! Who is it that makes appointments of Independent Counsels? Our forefathers are all rolling in their graves as they watch the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches become so biased that we loose the checks and balances envisioned by our founders.

  Jim Tribbett Posted June 17, 2009 9:00 AM
• 80432
  

  The President is finding out what most informed FEDS already know is that the OIG statue passed by Congress years ago has become a law of unintended consequences. OIG's govt-wide are corrupt. They control govt agencies with their failed oversight standards for investigations and audit and are literally driving management's agenda and decisions at many agencies. The end self serving result is that Congress backs them because Congress does not know how corrupt they can be, and in turn provides the OIG's with more money and staff, all based on false or inflated reporting by OIG's. The OIG's budgets and authority should be reviewed and significantly cut. The PCIE is just the OIG's self appointed good old boy and girl club that covers for each OIG that gets into trouble. OIG's should have a fixed, one time, five year term and they are gone. Obama should just fire all the BUSH appointed OIG's. Look how political BUSH made the DOJ. He did the same with the OIG's.

  frank Posted June 17, 2009 8:47 AM
• 80425
  

  So much for oversight of this administration!

  Transparent as mud!

  Change we can believe in?

  Tom Posted June 17, 2009 8:34 AM
• 80423
  

  The Inspector General Act of 1978 requires that IG's be fired for cause. President Ronald Reagan fired all the IGs (some like Charles Dempsey were reappointed)for political beliefs or just because someone else appointed them. The 30 day notice provision is statutory and thus the termination was improper for violation of that notice provision. But what needs to be done is that IG's be given a term certain (suggest 10 years) and then if a firing for cause is necessary the White House should enter a public statement (probably in the Federal Register) giving the official notice of the firing and cause with the 30 day effective date ending stated on the record. Certainly not all IG's are effective. They can send their most difficult criminal referrals to the FBI and DOJ. Nonetheless the IG system is a great help in policing waste, fraud, and abuse, and inefficieny and ineffectiveness in federal programs, functions, and activities.

  William R. Cumming Posted June 17, 2009 8:32 AM
• 80422
  

  It is Bush's fault. What nerve to hire someone who actually does something about fraud in government. Bush should have known that the dems would take over and his IG would get prove to be inconvenient to the Chicago machine. Article does not mention the fact that this dismissal breaks the same law that then Senator Obama co sponsored in 2007. This is consistent with the refusal to go the black panther thugs armed with weapons intimidating white voters on election day. As shown with Raymond Burris, being a minority excludes you from the law with this justice department. Time for hearings.

  cwmcpa Posted June 17, 2009 8:23 AM
• 80387
  

  IG investigation in Historic Oak Park, Sacramento, California remains an interesting case. Reviewing the documents it seems at best an accounting problem, yet millions of dollars and trillions of dollars in several cases is not a problem.

  First Black Mayor of Sacramento, a test case for President Obama will be good.

  Khubaka, Michael Harris Posted June 16, 2009 8:05 PM