A government agency is missing over half a TRILLION dollars of taxpayer money.
http://money.msn.com/investing/post-...ocid=ansmony11
- JD Barleycorn
- 08-08-2014, 04:13 AM
- i'va biggen
- 08-08-2014, 06:22 AM
Good old To Coburn. it is always someone else's fault.
- JD Barleycorn
- 08-08-2014, 10:08 AM
Not even going to try???
- Yssup Rider
- 08-08-2014, 07:44 PM
Snick.
Im missing half a billion. One of you fuckers take it?
Im missing half a billion. One of you fuckers take it?
- pyramider
- 08-08-2014, 07:59 PM
Alright, I got it in my freezer.
- IIFFOFRDB
- 08-08-2014, 08:47 PM
Otransparent has not seen it on the news yet... fuckers
http://freebeacon.com/issues/inspect...eral-agencies/
Inspectors General: Watchdog Investigations Stymied by Federal Agencies
Forty-seven Inspectors General sign letter blasting obstruction by ‘most transparent administration in history’
BY: CJ Ciaramella
August 8, 2014 5:00 am
At least three government agencies obstructed independent investigations into alleged wrongdoing, according to a letter sent to congressional oversight leaders Tuesday by 47 independent federal watchdogs.
The 47 Inspectors General (IG) said the Justice Department, the Peace Corps, and the Chemical Safety Board withheld information from their offices, citing various privileges.
“We have learned that the Inspectors General for the Peace Corps, the Environmental Protection Agency (in his role as Inspector General for the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board) and the Department of Justice have recently faced restrictions on their access to certain records available to their agencies that were needed to perform their oversight work in critical areas,” the letter said. “These restrictive readings of the IG Act represent potentially serious challenges to the authority of every Inspector General and our ability to conduct our work thoroughly, independently, and in a timely manner.”
The officials said that watchdogs from other agencies have also “faced similar obstacles to their work, whether on a claim that some other law or principle trumped the clear mandate of the IG Act or by the agency’s imposition of unnecessarily burdensome administrative conditions on access.”
Inspectors General are appointed to provide independent oversight of federal agencies and investigate whistleblower claims.
“Refusing, restricting, or delaying an Inspector General’s access to documents leads to incomplete, inaccurate, or significantly delayed findings or recommendations, which in turn may prevent the agency from promptly correcting serious problems and deprive Congress of timely information regarding the agency’s performance,” the letter states.
According to the letter, the Justice Department originally refused to hand over documents in three Inspector General investigations.
In a statement to the Washington Post, Justice Department spokesman Brian Fallon said the department did not block the IG’s investigation.
“Because the documents at issue included grand jury material, credit reports, and other information whose dissemination is restricted by law, it was necessary to identify exceptions to those laws to accommodate the inspector general’s request,” he said. “But everything sought was provided.”
In the case of the Peace Corps, the letter said the agency failed to provide information on sexual assaults of its volunteers.
A Peace Corps spokeswoman told news outlets the agency is “committed to working with the Inspector General to ensure rigorous oversight while protecting the confidentiality and privacy of volunteers who are sexually assaulted.”
Congressional oversight leaders criticized the stonewalling efforts.
“This is an administration that pledged to be the most transparent in history. Yet, these non-partisan, independent agency watchdogs say they are getting stonewalled. How are the watchdogs supposed to be able to do their jobs without agency cooperation?” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) said in a statement. “Inspectors General exist to improve agencies and get the most bang for every tax dollar. This letter underscores the need for congressional review and possibly legislative action.”
http://freebeacon.com/issues/inspect...eral-agencies/
Inspectors General: Watchdog Investigations Stymied by Federal Agencies
Forty-seven Inspectors General sign letter blasting obstruction by ‘most transparent administration in history’
BY: CJ Ciaramella
August 8, 2014 5:00 am
At least three government agencies obstructed independent investigations into alleged wrongdoing, according to a letter sent to congressional oversight leaders Tuesday by 47 independent federal watchdogs.
The 47 Inspectors General (IG) said the Justice Department, the Peace Corps, and the Chemical Safety Board withheld information from their offices, citing various privileges.
“We have learned that the Inspectors General for the Peace Corps, the Environmental Protection Agency (in his role as Inspector General for the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board) and the Department of Justice have recently faced restrictions on their access to certain records available to their agencies that were needed to perform their oversight work in critical areas,” the letter said. “These restrictive readings of the IG Act represent potentially serious challenges to the authority of every Inspector General and our ability to conduct our work thoroughly, independently, and in a timely manner.”
The officials said that watchdogs from other agencies have also “faced similar obstacles to their work, whether on a claim that some other law or principle trumped the clear mandate of the IG Act or by the agency’s imposition of unnecessarily burdensome administrative conditions on access.”
Inspectors General are appointed to provide independent oversight of federal agencies and investigate whistleblower claims.
“Refusing, restricting, or delaying an Inspector General’s access to documents leads to incomplete, inaccurate, or significantly delayed findings or recommendations, which in turn may prevent the agency from promptly correcting serious problems and deprive Congress of timely information regarding the agency’s performance,” the letter states.
According to the letter, the Justice Department originally refused to hand over documents in three Inspector General investigations.
In a statement to the Washington Post, Justice Department spokesman Brian Fallon said the department did not block the IG’s investigation.
“Because the documents at issue included grand jury material, credit reports, and other information whose dissemination is restricted by law, it was necessary to identify exceptions to those laws to accommodate the inspector general’s request,” he said. “But everything sought was provided.”
In the case of the Peace Corps, the letter said the agency failed to provide information on sexual assaults of its volunteers.
A Peace Corps spokeswoman told news outlets the agency is “committed to working with the Inspector General to ensure rigorous oversight while protecting the confidentiality and privacy of volunteers who are sexually assaulted.”
Congressional oversight leaders criticized the stonewalling efforts.
“This is an administration that pledged to be the most transparent in history. Yet, these non-partisan, independent agency watchdogs say they are getting stonewalled. How are the watchdogs supposed to be able to do their jobs without agency cooperation?” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) said in a statement. “Inspectors General exist to improve agencies and get the most bang for every tax dollar. This letter underscores the need for congressional review and possibly legislative action.”
- IIFFOFRDB
- 08-08-2014, 08:58 PM
the money could have been wasted like this...
http://freebeacon.com/issues/usda-co...lamps-artwork/
USDA Cotton Subsidies Pay for Cars, Elephant Lamps, Artwork
Audit: $2.4 million in ‘questionable’ purchases meant to stimulate textile
BY: Elizabeth Harrington
August 7, 2014 3:30 pm
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) cotton subsidies meant to assist the textile industry are being spent on Ford Explorers, artwork, sound systems, and elephant lamps, according to a government watchdog.
The USDA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) released an audit on Thursday detailing how the government has failed to properly oversee the Economic Adjustment Assistance to Users of Upland Cotton Program (EAAP), resulting in more than $2.4 million worth of “questionable” purchases.
The program, which was created in the 2008 Farm bill, pays textile mills 3 cents per pound of upland cotton they produce to be used on investments, equipment, and new property. However, the OIG found at least $900,000 in payments that went to manufacturer’s “personal use.”
For instance, one recipient used government funds to buy two Ford Explorers, costing over $45,500. The recipient bought a Ford Explorer and then traded it in for a new one 11 months later, the day before a government deadline requiring the funds to be spent or paid back to the USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA).
“Altogether, we questioned 75 expenditures, totaling over $2.4 million,” the OIG said. “This occurred because FSA has not implemented effective internal controls to determine which capital expenditures are eligible uses of EAAP funds.”
A recipient also spent $6,500 worth of cotton subsidies to “to decorate executive offices with carpet and artwork.”
“Another user spent EAAP funds on decor, such as artwork and an elephant lamp for the Chief Executive Officer’s office and for carpet at one of its operating plants for the managers’ offices,” the audit said.
The $2.4 million in unallowable purchases also went towards unused equipment “covered in dust and cobwebs,” and other items unrelated to the cotton industry.
“Twenty-one of the questionable expenditures OIG identified, totaling over $93,000, were not directly related to cotton production operations,” the OIG said. “Examples of these include lawn mowers, a hearing booth, a portable sound system, a TV monitor for a guard station, computers and other IT equipment for corporate offices, grass seed, and road repairs.”
Over $58,000 was spent on unused equipment and more than $675,000 was paid for replacement parts that “did not modernize the user’s operations.” Other waste included more than $7,000 on “service warranties for two vehicles, a service contract for a computer, and internal labor.”
“OIG concluded that these types of expenditures, which were allowed by FSA, represent waste and abuse of EAAP funds, as they do not have direct applicability to the manufacturing of upland cotton into eligible cotton products by the user that made them,” the audit said.
Aside from funding being wasted on personal items, the audit also found that the government has no way of knowing whether the program as a whole, which has cost taxpayers more than $300 million, has benefited the textile industry.
The FSA failed to establish a “purpose or goal” for the program, or ways to evaluate its performance.
“Even though the agency anticipated payments would limit market losses, plant closures, and employment declines, FSA has not developed a way to measure this impact,” the OIG said. “Instead, the agency views paying users in a timely manner and assuring that the users spend the money within required timeframes to be its only purpose in administering the program.”
“Without established goals and related outcome measures, FSA cannot demonstrate that the $337 million spent between August 2008 and July 2013 has stimulated the United States textile industry, or determine to what extent the assistance actually improved the condition of users as they compete in a global market,” the audit said.
The EAAP program is meant to boost the textile industry, and keep America competitive with other countries. Manufacturers received 4 cents per pound of cotton produced up until July 2012. They now receive 3 cents per pound.
The USDA has strict guidelines for how money from the program can be spent.
“The payments must be used to acquire new property, plant, and equipment or upgrade the existing capital facilities, and equipment, and the user agrees upon accepting program payments to open its records to audits by the Department of Agriculture (USDA),” the OIG explained. “Payments may only be used for capital investments to acquire, construct, install, modernize, develop, convert, or expand land, plant, equipment, facilities or machinery.”
The OIG concluded that the FSA did not “sufficiently ensure that funds expended are not a waste or abuse of Government funds,” and recommended that the agency prohibit purchases that are “wholly or partially for personal use by executives and employees.”
While the FSA agreed that it would disallow purchases that are wholly for personal use, they disagreed that items sometimes used for personal reasons should be prohibited.
.
http://freebeacon.com/issues/usda-co...lamps-artwork/
USDA Cotton Subsidies Pay for Cars, Elephant Lamps, Artwork
Audit: $2.4 million in ‘questionable’ purchases meant to stimulate textile
BY: Elizabeth Harrington
August 7, 2014 3:30 pm
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) cotton subsidies meant to assist the textile industry are being spent on Ford Explorers, artwork, sound systems, and elephant lamps, according to a government watchdog.
The USDA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) released an audit on Thursday detailing how the government has failed to properly oversee the Economic Adjustment Assistance to Users of Upland Cotton Program (EAAP), resulting in more than $2.4 million worth of “questionable” purchases.
The program, which was created in the 2008 Farm bill, pays textile mills 3 cents per pound of upland cotton they produce to be used on investments, equipment, and new property. However, the OIG found at least $900,000 in payments that went to manufacturer’s “personal use.”
For instance, one recipient used government funds to buy two Ford Explorers, costing over $45,500. The recipient bought a Ford Explorer and then traded it in for a new one 11 months later, the day before a government deadline requiring the funds to be spent or paid back to the USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA).
“Altogether, we questioned 75 expenditures, totaling over $2.4 million,” the OIG said. “This occurred because FSA has not implemented effective internal controls to determine which capital expenditures are eligible uses of EAAP funds.”
A recipient also spent $6,500 worth of cotton subsidies to “to decorate executive offices with carpet and artwork.”
“Another user spent EAAP funds on decor, such as artwork and an elephant lamp for the Chief Executive Officer’s office and for carpet at one of its operating plants for the managers’ offices,” the audit said.
The $2.4 million in unallowable purchases also went towards unused equipment “covered in dust and cobwebs,” and other items unrelated to the cotton industry.
“Twenty-one of the questionable expenditures OIG identified, totaling over $93,000, were not directly related to cotton production operations,” the OIG said. “Examples of these include lawn mowers, a hearing booth, a portable sound system, a TV monitor for a guard station, computers and other IT equipment for corporate offices, grass seed, and road repairs.”
Over $58,000 was spent on unused equipment and more than $675,000 was paid for replacement parts that “did not modernize the user’s operations.” Other waste included more than $7,000 on “service warranties for two vehicles, a service contract for a computer, and internal labor.”
“OIG concluded that these types of expenditures, which were allowed by FSA, represent waste and abuse of EAAP funds, as they do not have direct applicability to the manufacturing of upland cotton into eligible cotton products by the user that made them,” the audit said.
Aside from funding being wasted on personal items, the audit also found that the government has no way of knowing whether the program as a whole, which has cost taxpayers more than $300 million, has benefited the textile industry.
The FSA failed to establish a “purpose or goal” for the program, or ways to evaluate its performance.
“Even though the agency anticipated payments would limit market losses, plant closures, and employment declines, FSA has not developed a way to measure this impact,” the OIG said. “Instead, the agency views paying users in a timely manner and assuring that the users spend the money within required timeframes to be its only purpose in administering the program.”
“Without established goals and related outcome measures, FSA cannot demonstrate that the $337 million spent between August 2008 and July 2013 has stimulated the United States textile industry, or determine to what extent the assistance actually improved the condition of users as they compete in a global market,” the audit said.
The EAAP program is meant to boost the textile industry, and keep America competitive with other countries. Manufacturers received 4 cents per pound of cotton produced up until July 2012. They now receive 3 cents per pound.
The USDA has strict guidelines for how money from the program can be spent.
“The payments must be used to acquire new property, plant, and equipment or upgrade the existing capital facilities, and equipment, and the user agrees upon accepting program payments to open its records to audits by the Department of Agriculture (USDA),” the OIG explained. “Payments may only be used for capital investments to acquire, construct, install, modernize, develop, convert, or expand land, plant, equipment, facilities or machinery.”
The OIG concluded that the FSA did not “sufficiently ensure that funds expended are not a waste or abuse of Government funds,” and recommended that the agency prohibit purchases that are “wholly or partially for personal use by executives and employees.”
While the FSA agreed that it would disallow purchases that are wholly for personal use, they disagreed that items sometimes used for personal reasons should be prohibited.
.
- CuteOldGuy
- 08-08-2014, 11:01 PM
You morons can't even agree that losing half a trillion dollars is a bad thing? There is no hope for this country.
- Jewish Lawyer
- 08-23-2014, 01:39 PM
- IIFFOFRDB
- 08-23-2014, 06:21 PM
- Guest040616
- 08-23-2014, 08:57 PM
- IIFFOFRDB
- 08-23-2014, 09:36 PM
- Guest123018-4
- 08-24-2014, 06:26 AM
Took till 11 posts till bigkotex chimed in with his irrelevance and all he had to say was an insult rather than anything at all about his administrations complete failure.
This administration has set things up so that any and all government agencies will be able to operate outside the law with full knowledge that Obama and Holder have their backs.
It is not just a shame that Holder's Justice department continues to violate the law but that it is done in an obvious partisan political manner. Holder should be in prison.
This administration has set things up so that any and all government agencies will be able to operate outside the law with full knowledge that Obama and Holder have their backs.
It is not just a shame that Holder's Justice department continues to violate the law but that it is done in an obvious partisan political manner. Holder should be in prison.
- Jewish Lawyer
- 08-26-2014, 06:28 AM
Took till 11 posts till bigkotex chimed in with his irrelevance and all he had to say was an insult rather than anything at all about his administrations complete failure.I agree. Can you imagine the outcry against Ed Meese if he tried half the BS this guy does.
This administration has set things up so that any and all government agencies will be able to operate outside the law with full knowledge that Obama and Holder have their backs.
It is not just a shame that Holder's Justice department continues to violate the law but that it is done in an obvious partisan political manner. Holder should be in prison. Originally Posted by The2Dogs
- Worldtravler
- 08-26-2014, 10:38 AM
I guess money can get you in the White House, and it's even better when it's not your money.