Hearing on Agency Document Production: Chairman Chaffetz Opening Statement

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Contact MJ Henshaw (202) 225-0037

Hearing on Agency Document Production: Chairman Chaffetz Opening Statement

"Document Production Status Update"

Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)

Remarks as Delivered:

This is an important hearing and I appreciate the participation here. It's our second document production status hearing. Our invitation letters for these hearings went out four or five weeks in advance, as opposed to the normal two week notice. This extra time allows for some cooperation and hopefully some document production.

For our first hearing in January, we invited 10 agencies. When the hearing occurred, we had resolved our differences with five agencies. It was highly productive to do so. For this hearing, we invited eight agencies, but three remain. Three of the most problematic agencies that we have run into.

Our expectations have not changed. When you get a letter from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, it is not optional. When you get a subpoena from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, it is not optional. It is not a game that we're trying to play where agencies try to hide the documents as long as possible and run out the clock. It impedes our ability to do our jobs.

You have a constitutional duty, role, and responsibility to provide those documents to this Congress. We require extensive cooperation. Most of the agencies that we deal with, do it in a fair, honest, and prompt way.

For any given investigation, we often need 10 to 15 witnesses to appear before us for transcribed interviews.

When the Committee sends a document request, we expect an honest effort to collect and respond to those requests. We expect communication. We expect to be informed and we expect those agencies--and the people that represent those agencies--to be honest and straight with us. And we expect you to work with us in good faith, which basically means when you make a commitment, you do what you say you're going to do. For me, personally, as a principle it's one of the most important things you can do - just do what you're going to say you're going to do.

Today, we are going to hear from a group of senior agency officials from three cabinet departments.

The Office of Management and Budget is here to address its response to a subpoena for materials from its OIRA component--the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs--related to the Waters of the United States rulemaking.

OIRA is an office created by Congress, and its job is to review draft and proposed regulations, and to ensure continuity across government in that rulemaking process.

We will also hear from the Department of Health and Human Services. We want to discuss their refusal to produce documents relating to Obamacare CO-OPs and exchanges.

The Department of Homeland Security will discuss our oversight requests related to the Secret Service, the TSA, and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, often known as ICE.

Let's talk first about OIRA.

They have failed to comply with the Committee's subpoena issued over nine months ago. This is a subpoena that was issued on July 14, 2015. The Committee has been investigating this matter for more than a year.

To date, OIRA has produced about 6,000 pages. Roughly 80 percent of these pages are meaningless because they are either duplicates or just copies of the publicly-available rule.

Despite what is in his testimony from Mr. Shelanski--let me repeat--80 percent of that is meaningless, because they're duplicates or they're publicly available.

By way of comparison, the EPA voluntarily produced more than 22,000 pages related to the rule in the same amount of time. Likewise, the State of Michigan voluntarily produced more than 43,000 pages in response to Flint in just two weeks. I'm not saying we're done with them, but you can understand the volume that we are getting and the swift manner that we're getting it.

The problems go beyond withholding documents. OIRA has also intentionally misled and misdirected our investigators. For example, for more than a year, OIRA failed to identify four key officials who reviewed the rule. Let's remember that OIRA has less than one hundred employees. This is not some big, massive bureaucracy with thousands of people. You could literally walk around the halls and around the corner, and go find the person that you need.

It was only after we started conducting transcribed interviews--under oath--the names surfaced, and we still don't know if OIRA searched their emails as well. We hope to find out today.

Administrator Shelanski testified before this Committee that he had no communication with the EPA about this rulemaking and that OIRA does not engage with agencies before a formal rule review is commenced. Although, the Committee has uncovered documents and information proving both of these statements as untrue and false. Mr. Shelanski, we expect you to answer under oath today, and clarify this.

Health and Human Services.

We invited the Department of Health and Human Services today because of persistent problems at exchanges and CO-OPs have cost taxpayers billions of dollars and left many consumers scrambling to find health insurance.

The CO-OP program is particularly problematic. Twelve of 23 CO-OPs have failed. Eight of the 11 remaining CO-OPs are predicted to fail this year.

Health and Human Services has not provided any valid legal reason for withholding information from this Committee. Rather, they assert that if certain information was released publicly, it could cause consumers to think twice before enrolling in CO-OP insurance plans.

We know CO-OPs are failing.

Given the well-documented troubles, the Committee has a strong interest in ensuring the administration is doing all it can to safeguard the $2.4 billion in taxpayer dollars loaned to these failing CO-OPs. There's an additional $5 billion in federal grants on the line the states received to establish their own exchanges.

Exchanges are plagued by security flaws, call center glitches, website failures, software problems, lower than expected enrollment numbers, and deficient processes for determining eligibility.

Our efforts to obtain information about these programs have been met with unexplained delays and what seems like bad faith.

And at Homeland Security, we have a witness here from the Department of Homeland Security.

They are here to answer for three separate inquiries. Each of the inquiries involves a different agency--the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the United States Secret Service.

In each of these cases, the Committee requested documents and testimony directly from the relevant DHS component, but DHS subsequently inserted itself as the gatekeeper for documents and testimony. Homeland Security has perfected the art of stonewalling. Specifically, DHS failed to meet a host of deadlines in response to Committee letters many of which were bipartisan in nature - and provided only redacted materials despite subpoenas clearly instructing otherwise.

Homeland Security also stalled on making employees available for transcribed interviews. When the Committee was finally able to interview one of the employees, DHS attorneys refused to let the employee answer the Committee's question of whether the employee had been discouraged from appearing before the Committee. This is textbook obstruction and it will not stand.

A successful, working relationship between a Congressional committee and an executive branch agency requires effort, communication, and good faith on both sides.

We need transparency. We have to have an understanding of what is happening and it is our decision--Congress's decision--what we investigate, not yours. And we will make sure that we go and follow the truth wherever it may take us and that requires documents and the interaction with people.