Conflict. Later a look at housing challenges caused by an increase in the aging population. Next, the inspectors general for the peace corps, Justice Department and epa discuss the challenges they face in conducting investigations. The igs testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee about a dx let signed by 47 igs, outlining their concerns. This is two hours. 5d the committee will come to order. Without o, the chair is authorized to have a recess at any time. The oversight committees First Americans have a right to know that the money washington takes from them is well spent. And second, americans deserve an official, effective government that works for them. Our duty on the oversight and Government Reform Committee is to protect these rights, our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to taxpayers. Because taxpayers have a right to know that the money washington takes from them is well spent. Its our job to work tirelessly in partnership, as citizen watch dogs and, yes, the ig watch dogs to deliver the facts to the American People and bring genuine reform to the federal bureaucracy, this is our mission statement. On august 5, 47 inspectors general, 2 3 of the ig community sent an unprecedented letter to Congress Describing serious limitations on access to records, that have recently impeded the work of the inspectors general. Section 6a1 requires agencies to provitd and i quote, full and timely access to Agency Records to their respective Inspector General. Anything less than full corporation of course is unacceptable. These Government Watch dogs play a key role in improving the governments efficiency, honesty and accountability. They conduct oversight and investigations and audits to prevent and detect waste, fraud and mismanagement within government agencies. Their work often protects life of federal workers and the American People. Al they help congress shape legislation and target our oversight and investigative activi activities, but let there be no doubt, they are executive branch employees who in fact were created by an acts of congress and signed by a president so that the tools that they provide are available to the president of the United States to run our government better. The igs have proven to be one of congresss and the American Peoples best investments. In the last fiscal year, the ig community used their 2. 7 billion budget to identify potential cost savings to taxpayers totaling about 46 billion. That means that for every dollar in the total ig budget, they identified approximately 17 in savings. Access is key to that kind of savings. But i make it very clear, many of the investigations including some you will hear today are not about money. Theyre far more valuable. Theyre about liberty. Theyre about your government not trampling on your rights. So when agencies withhold information and their records from these watch dogs, it impedes their ability to conduct their work thoroughly, independently and most of all timely. It runs up the cost to both sides of the ledger, the inspectors general spent many, many, many millions of dollars temperatu simply trying to get access, what your government spends millions and millions of dollars trying to impede. This is one of the greatest wastes we can possibly have. When agencies refuse or deny access to the agencys records, it undermines the intent of congress and the igs abilities to oversee these respected agencies. Today were going to hear from three widely respected igs who have experienced challenges accessing the necessary records to what they do in their work. At the Justice Department, the inspect general cannot gain access to grand jury documents or National Security related documents without approval from the deputy general of the federal courts. Requiring such permission compromise s and impedes igs investigations. At the chemical safety board, they have denied the epa Inspector General, mr. Elkins, access to certain documents on the basis of attorneyclient privilege. But who is the attorney and what is the privilege . Mr. Elkins is in fact the same entity that is in fact the client. He is in fact part of the defined client, which of course is the epa. Further, several offices within the epa itself, including the epa office of Homeland Security have interfered with the oigs investigations themselves. And perhaps most disturbing to me personally, and i spoke to the Vice President last night and i believe he was equally disturbed. At the peace corps, they have refused to provide the Inspector General, ms. Fuller, access to information related to Sexual Assaults on peace corps volunteers absent a memorandum of understanding. Lets understand, last night, we honored and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the enactment of violence against women, designed to do just the act opposite, to ask women to come forward and report their assaults. If in fact the ig cannot oversee a possible pattern of failure to protect women, then we need to ask women to come forward with the record of their assaults. But in all instances, it is the committees position, that these agencies should and must cooperate with the inspectors generals request for information. During the 113th congress, the committee has investigated several instances including the ones facing these watch dogs in which Agency Leadership undermined the effectiveness of the inspectors general. The committee has held several hearings on this issue and facing these Inspector Generals over the past year. The committee has also conducted a deposition of the peace corps general consul to address the access issued the access issue at the peace corps. It has not been resolved. And quite frankly, i look forward to the departure of the General Council as part of the problem. Neither this committee nor the ig community should be wasting time and resources attempting to gain access to records, which the igs have not just a legal entitlealment to but a sworn obligation under the igf. For nearly six years we have seen this administration make unprescedents efforts, it says o fight transparency and block investigations by journalists, congress, but thats not what were here for today. Were not here because the press washl wants to snoop. Were not here because article one, the congress, is trying to look over the shoulder of the president and his administration. Were here because the more or less 12,000 men and women who work for these igs and the others not here today, part of this president s team for efficiency, transparency and an Honorable Service by all has not been getting what they wanted. It is my intention upon the end of this hearing, to write with my Ranking Member, if at all possible, a letter to the president urging him to use his executive order capability to resolve this question once and for all. Notwithstanding that, i want to thank our three witnesses here today. And i want to assure you of one thing, after you testify here today, and for all 47 igs who wrote, i will be looking, i know my Ranking Member will be looking to make sure that in fact no retribution, no punishment is allowed for your coming forward and expressing your concerns under your importa responsibility under the ig act. We do have a response from the executive in response to my letter and ill place it into the record at this time without objection, so ordered and we recognize the Ranking Member for his Opening Statement. I want to thank our witnesses for testifying here today, i want to also thanning mr. Chairman for calling this hearing. Let me start off by saying, what the chairman said with regard to retribution, i agree with, you have come, you do a phenomenal job, a very important job. And every member of this committee, both sides of the aisle, if we hear about any repercussions from you being here, we will be on it. And deal with it effectively and efficiently. Regarding waste, fraud and abuse is a central tenant of this committee, and we take this mission very seriously. Im a staunch defender of the igs and the authorities. For example in 2013, i sent a bipartisan letter to the president. I was joined by chairman issa, and the Ranking Member of the National Security subcommittee. In that letter, we pressed the president to finally nominate an Inspector General at the state department, a position that had remained vacant for five years. I have also supported legislation to help igs do their job for effectively and efficiently. Such as the ig reform act of 2008. Last month after receiving the letter from 47 igs, i cosigned a letter with chairman carpenter and Ranking Member coburn and in the Government Affairs committee. And chairman is a, we expressed our concern about access issues raised by three igs testifying here today from the peace corps, the department of justice, and the Environmental Protection agency. When Congress Passed the Inspector General act in 1978, section 6 of that legislation authorized igs to have very broad access to Agency Records. This provision was intended to give igs wide latitude to conduct their audits and investigations. Congress in addition some contend that other federal laws make conflict with this broad random authority and that that is also a concern that we will be discussing today. First we have the peace corps, in 2011, Congress Passed and the president signed the volunteer protection act. This law requires the peace corps to establish a confidential system for volunteers to report Sexual Assault crimes. When the ig sought access to this data in order to prepare a report, also mandated by congress. The peace corps raised a question about providing the personal identifiable information of Sexual Assault victims which was supposed to be confidential. The Agency Signed a memorandum of understanding, provitding the ig with access to all information, except personally identifiable information and explicit details of the Sexual Assaults. I understand that this agreement does not address all the igs access concerns. But i believe it is a very good start when we have two potentially conflicting factors like this. Next the department of justice and Inspector General has expressed concern that when he seeks access to sensitive Law Enforcement information, such as grand jury and wiretap information, he must go through a lengthy approval process at the highest levels of the department. The igs testimony for today says the department has granted access to the records in every case. But it contends that the lengthy delays erodes his independence. According to the department, several other statutes restrict the release of Sensitive Information such as grand jury and wiretap material. So they must be carefully analyzed and we have to look at that. My understanding is that the department has now asked the office of Legal Council to review the issue. I applaud the ig for working through this process with the agency and i look forward to olcs review. Finally the Environmental Protection agency ig has raised two concerns. The ig reports that the epas office of Homeland Security has been denying the ig access to classified threat material. And failing to recognize the igs Statutory Authority over trugss into epa computer networks. Democratic staff has been working with both sides to mediate this issue and on june 19, epa administrator mccarthy proposed a frame work for better cooperation. At this point, my understanding is that the ig still has issues with the proposal. So i hope we can spend some time today hearing about those concerns. Lastly, the dispute between the epa ig and the chemical safety board seems to me the most problemat problematic, the ig has been trying to obtain documents from the csb chairman, but the csb still has not furnished all the requested documents. All throw the csb had compiled substantially with requests, documents still remain outstand. I hope we can work with you closely on a bipartisan basis, to solve 24 issue. Let me close by making one observation. As we have seen, many of these issues involve several laws that appear to conflict. And some have raised the possibility of legislative fixes. I believe this idea should be considered very carefully. I will not hesitate to pursue statutory clarification if necessary, the last thing the igs need is for legislation to be introduced and fail which could have the unintended effect of diluting their authority. For these reasons mr. Chairman, i appreciate your commitment to work with me and my staff in developing bipartisan and widely supported legislative reform proposals, my staff and i have done a to try to solve the challenges constructively and with that i yield back. I think the Ranking Member, all members will have seven days to submit Opening Statements for the record. We now welcome our distinguished panel of witnesses, the honorable michael b. Horowitz is the Inspector General of the u. S. Department of justice. The honorable arthur a. Elkins jr. Is the Inspector General of the u. S. Environmental protection agency. And the honorable ms. Kathy a. Fuller is the Inspector General of the peace corps. Lady and gentlemen, pursuant to the committee rules, would you please rise to take the oath. Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you will give today will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth . Please be seated. Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. Since youre all skilled professionals, and mr. Horowitz, since youre less than 24 hours from a similar event, you know that we would like you to keep your Opening Statements to five minutes, summarize in any way you can and that your entire Opening Statement will be placed into the record without objection. With that, mr. Horowitz, youre up. Thank you, mr. Chairman, congressman cummings, members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today at this very important hearing. Goes to the heart of our mission to provide independent and nonpartisan oversight. That is why 47 inspectors general signed a later late last month to congress expressing their concerns about this issue. I wants to thank the members of this committee for their bipartisan support in response to that letter. The ig act adopted by congress in 1978 is crystal clear, section 6a of the act says that inspectors general must be given complete and timely access to all rorz. By some agencies have not read section 6a and therefore have refused our request during our reviews for relevant grand jury, wiretap and other information, a number of our reviews have been significantly impeded. In response to these legal objectations, the Department Attorney general granted us permission to access the records by finding that our reviews were in future audits and reviews. However there are several significant concerns with this process. First and foremost, the process is inconsistent with the clear mandate of section 6a of the ig act. The attorney general should not have to Order Department components to provide us with access to record records that congress has made clear we have a right to review. Second, requiring the Inspector General to obtain permission from Department Leadership seriously compromises our independence. The oig should be deciding which documents it needs access to. Not the leadership of the agency that is being overseen. Third, while current Department Leadership has supported our ability to access records, Agency Leadership changes over time and our access to records should not turn on the views of the departments leadership. Further we understand that other Department Components that exercise oversight over departments programs and person nell, koochbt to be given access to these same materials without objection. This december per rat treatment is unjustifiable and results in the department being less willing to provide material to the oig presumably because the oig is staff forly independent and lack of independence from the departments leadership, which can only be addressed by granting the statutorily independent oig to investigate all the alleged misconduct at the department. Indeed, the independent made the same recommendation in a rep