The Buzz

Backlog Blues

It started when Office of Personnel Management officials announced that they would hold off on a plan to absorb the Defense Security Service, which conducts background checks of applicants for the Pentagon. Some experts had thought OPM's initial plan would have sped up the backlogged security clearance process for federal employees and contractors.

Demand for security clearances-from federal employees as well as contract workers-has risen significantly since Sept. 11, 2001. In fiscal 2003, it took 375 days on average for a Defense-related security clearance application to be approved, according to the House Government Reform Committee. Defense had identified about 188,000 backlogged cases for private-sector workers as of the end of March 2004.

OPM had planned to address the problem in part by merging DSS into its operations. After review, however, an OPM official said the agency decided not to bring the unit under its umbrella. "DSS business practices were not up to the standard we hoped they were," says Stephen Benowitz, OPM's associate director of human resources, products and services.

The day after the agency's announcement, House lawmakers launched a blistering attack on Defense and OPM officials about the backlog, saying it would cost taxpayers more and provide less security.

Keeping More Secrets

Most of the increase came from the Defense and Homeland Security departments, which is "not unusual, given the current scope of military and counterterrorism operations," the report said. But other agencies also reported dramatic increases in classification, including NASA (224 percent), the Health and Human Services Department (150 percent) and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (181 percent).

But apparently the information is not all that secret. Classification of information as Top Secret dropped by a "dramatic" 42 percent last year, the report said. Secret classifications went up 25 percent.

The Information Security Oversight Office, which is housed in the National Archives and Records Administration, oversees classification programs in both government and industry.

Office of Nation Building?

"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation building," Bush told an audience at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. "I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war."

"Maybe I'm missing something here," Bush added a few minutes later. "I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not."

Some obvious measures of just how much things have changed in three-and-a-half years are the 135,000 U.S. troops trying to secure and rebuild Iraq, the 13,000 additional soldiers hunting insurgents in Afghanistan and the 2,500 keeping the peace in Haiti.

Another is that a civilian "nation-building corps from America" is exactly what Sens. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., and Joseph Biden, D-Del., had in mind in February when they introduced a bill to establish a 250-member civilian "response-readiness corps" for deployment on short notice to crisis areas. The bill also would create a State Department Office of International Stabilization and Reconstruction-in lay terms, an Office of Nation Building.

Payback Time

According to OPM, in fiscal 2002, 16 agencies provided $3.1 million in student loan repayments to 690 federal workers. The State Department, which assisted with payments to 407 employees, and the General Accounting Office, with 169 cases, were the biggest participants. Several agencies, including the Justice Department, took part in 2002 but helped only one employee with loan repayments.

The student loan benefit was introduced in fiscal 2001 to help agencies recruit high-quality or vitally important employees by helping them pay off existing loans. In exchange, the employees are required to commit to at least three years of employment. They also must pay taxes on the repayment assistance.

Source: OPM, Fiscal 2002 data

ON THE RECORD: Andrew Card

On President Bush's approach when he was elected: There was a recognition, and I think it was kind of a sad recognition, that the previous administration allowed for the erosion of some executive authority. And I'm not casting aspersions on them, because the dynamics of the moment do have an impact. But I think there was some erosion of the traditional expectation of executive authority during the Clinton administration. [President Bush] knows how important it is that the president, who is Article II [of the Constitution] . . . is in a position where he can have unfettered, candid counsel that will allow him or her to be able to make the most important decisions on behalf of the country, and to be able to keep the oath that is also written in Article II. . . . He wanted to restore the executive authority that presidents had traditionally been able to exercise.

On the homeland security effort: It's maturing. It's probably kind of in the teen-age [stage] right now. Some of the teen-agers are a little obstreperous, and some are not. And some are really sucking up to do a good job, and others are hoping they can sleep until 10 o'clock in the morning. But we are working hard to have all of these entities understand the paramount responsibility that they have.

On allegations that Bush is a "cowboy," determined to go his own way: I believe it all comes down to how the president feels he must lead the country and defend it, so I'm very comfortable. I remember Ronald Reagan was a "cowboy," riding around on [antiballistic] missiles. . . . I think the president is actually admired for his leadership and maybe not always respected for the policy that follows it. . . . I don't think it's arrogance.

On openness vs. secrecy: [President Bush] is a very open person, and we've been a very open administration. Those who are looking for access are insatiable, and that's not inappropriate. The media should be insatiable. . . . Then, I think you have Congress, and . . . they have an institutional bias, which is not inappropriate. But that institutional bias generally has them wanting more out of us, Article II. . . . But I think it's a natural tension, and it existed all the way back to George Washington.

Better Bargain Hunters

Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., are backing a bill ordering the Office of Management and Budget to boost training for purchase card users in getting better bargains.

Purchase cards, which are designed to simplify the process of procuring supplies worth less than $2,500, have long been a magnet for fraud and misuse. Agencies have cited numerous instances where employees have used the cards to buy frivolous, nonwork-related items, including designer briefcases, ski clothing and leather bomber jackets.

But Collins and Feingold introduced the 2004 Purchase Card Waste Elimination Act to address a separate problem: overspending that occurs when government employees use charge cards with good intentions, but fail to get the best deals. Agencies have done little to teach employees about available discounts or deals listed on the General Services Administration schedule of pre-negotiated contracts, General Accounting Office auditors told a Senate committee in late April.

For example, at a Federal Aviation Administration field office, two-thirds of managers overseeing acquisitions and 38 percent of card holders went at least five years without any documented training. At the Transportation Department, one purchase card holder bought office supplies at prices 20 percent above those available on the GSA schedule.