Is anyone actually surprised that handing the Bush Administration huge buckets of money, even with requirements for oversight and reporting, has turned out to be a huge mess?
Bailout Lacks Oversight Despite Billions Pledged – washingtonpost.com
In the six weeks since lawmakers approved the Treasury’s massive bailout of financial firms, the government has poured money into the country’s largest banks, recruited smaller banks into the program and repeatedly widened its scope to cover yet other types of businesses, from insurers to consumer lenders.
Along the way, the Bush administration has committed $290 billion of the $700 billion rescue package.
Yet for all this activity, no formal action has been taken to fill the independent oversight posts established by Congress when it approved the bailout to prevent corruption and government waste. Nor has the first monitoring report required by lawmakers been completed, though the initial deadline has passed.
“It’s a mess,” said Eric M. Thorson, the Treasury Department’s inspector general, who has been working to oversee the bailout program until the newly created position of special inspector general is filled. “I don’t think anyone understands right now how we’re going to do proper oversight of this thing.”
Why should the White House worry? It’s not like anyone responsible is actually going to have to be around to clean up the mess after the end of January.
Now, to be fair, it’s not just the Administration’s oversight-aversement that’s responsible. Congress has some oversight responsibilities that have been delayed by trying to hire qualified people, and some of the positions were set up to require nomination and approval, further slowing things down. In short, it sounds like nobody really considered what the startup time was going to be. Heck, they’re as much the problem as the solution.
It is unclear that Barofsky would be confirmed by the Senate, as required, anytime soon. One complicating factor is a battle between the Finance and Banking committees over which has jurisdiction over the confirmation process. Spokeswomen for both panels said the issue has not been resolved and may not be until after President Bush names his choice. Nonetheless, the finance committee has scheduled a hearing for Monday afternoon in the event that a nominee is named.
Several congressional aides, however, said they did not understand how the Senate could possibly do all the proper vetting for such a critical appointment in just a few days. Thorson’s confirmation process, for example, took nearly a year. But Treasury officials and Senate aides worry that if the nominee is not confirmed next week, when Congress is back in town for a lame-duck session, then the process might be delayed well into next year.
[…] For their part, lawmakers have yet to nominate the five-member Congressional Oversight Panel, though leaders of both parties said they hoped they would be named by the end of the month and start work by December. People familiar with the matter said possible nominees included current and former government and industry officials, though some had to recuse themselves because of conflicts of interest.
Your tax dollars at work.