Office of Net Assessment

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I have made a career in the Senate fighting against government waste, fraud, and abuse. Most recently, I have found this waste in an office within the Department of Defense called the Office of Net Assessment. Its purpose is to produce an annual net assessment, which is a long-term look at our military's capabilities and those of our greatest adversaries.

I am here to say to my colleagues that that office has lost its way. When I began a review of Stefan Halper's contracting work at the Office of Net Assessment, something didn't look right. So I asked the inspector general to look into it.

For those who are unaware, Stefan Halper was a central figure in the debunked Russia collusion investigation. Stefan Halper secretly recorded Trump campaign officials during Crossfire Hurricane. Halper also received over a million taxpayer dollars from the Office of Net Assessment for several ``research'' projects, but the inspector general found some problems with that contract.

The Office of Net Assessment didn't require Halper to submit evidence that he actually talked to the people he cited in his work, which included Russian intelligence officers.

Secondly, the Office of Net Assessment couldn't provide sufficient documentation that Halper conducted all of his work in accordance with the law.

And, three, the Office of Net Assessment didn't maintain sufficient documentation to comply with all Federal contracting requirements and Office of Management and Budget guidelines.

The inspector general also found that these problems were not unique just to Halper's contracts, which indicates, then, systemic issues within the Office of Net Assessment. Moreover, it has been reported that some of the individuals that Halper cited as sources in his research have denied contributing to Halper's work.

Oddly, Office of National Assessment Director James Baker has repeatedly told me that Halper's deliverables were ``high quality'' and ``conformed to the requirements set forth in the contract.''

What planet does the Office of Net Assessment live on?

The office spends almost $20 million a year of taxpayers' money every year. Yet according to a deposition of Mr. Baker, the Office of Net Assessment hasn't performed any annual net assessments since 2007.

A net assessment is the Office of Net Assessment's core mission. It even says so in the title. Its purpose of doing net assessments got lost along the way.

Moreover, after I began my oversight work at the Office of Net Assessment, a Department of Defense directive regulating the Office of Net Assessment was changed to provide cover for the unit's lackluster performance. Isn't that convenient? When your work is to do net assessment and you have been in existence for decades, and since 2007, you haven't been doing your net assessment, you issue a directive changing what the purpose of the Office of Net Assessment is all about. They did it pretty simply.

On April 14, 2020, the word ``shall'' was removed from the December 23, 2009, version of the directive that required the Office of Net Assessment to produce what their title said--``net assessments.'' The new version also changed the Office of Net Assessment's research scope to generic research, seemingly untethered to a net assessment--how convenient.

This swamp needs to be drained.

Last week, I introduced an amendment to the Defense bill that does several things. First, it reduces Office of Net Assessment's budget to $10 million a year instead of $20 million a year. Second, my amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to create a comprehensive plan to ensure that the Office of Net Assessment performs what the title of the agency says it is supposed to do--an annual net assessment--and complies, at the same time, with every dollar they get with Federal contracting requirements. This would take it back to the reason why it was first created decades ago.

Third, the amendment would require the Department of Defense inspector general to study and report on the Office of Net Assessment's contracting failures and determine if the net assessment can be done for less than $10 million.

And, fourth, it requires the Government Accountability Office to perform an audit of the effectiveness of the comprehensive plan.

Right now, it is pretty clear that the Office of Net Assessment lacks leadership and discipline, and it is also pretty clear that it has wasted tens of millions of dollars over the years. Congress must take a stand. That is why I am here to encourage my colleagues to support my amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source