Executive Session

Floor Speech

EXECUTIVE SESSION

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I rise in support of the nomination of Congressman Jim Nussle to serve as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

The Congressman served his Iowa district in the House through eight Congresses, chairing the House Budget Committee for the last three. During that time and in his testimony before both the Budget Committee and the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Congressman demonstrated an encyclopedic grasp of the Federal budget, skill in the legislative process, and an understanding of the importance of good relationships between the executive branch and Congress.

A spirit of cooperation has seldom been so needed as it is right now. Much unfinished work on the appropriations bills awaits us. Before the end of next year, the work of transitioning to a new administration will begin. Regardless of which party occupies the White House, America will have moved steadily closer to a looming fiscal crisis as baby boom demographics collide with unfunded entitlement obligations. Devising a fiscal policy that will honor our commitments and meet vital needs without throttling economic growth will be a huge challenge for the Federal Government. I believe Congressman Nussle can help us meet that challenge. With his blend of knowledge, experience, and personal engagement--he told our committee in July: ``I love the budget''--Congressman Nussle can help us define issues, illuminate choices, and debate decisions. His endorsements by Senator Tom Harkin and by House Democratic Budget Committee Chairman Spratt, as well as the overwhelming votes he received from both the Budget Committee and the Homeland Security Committee, demonstrate a bipartisan consensus for this nominee.

As the Presiding Officer understands better than many people, budgets, of course, are not the only concern of the Office of Management and Budget. OMB also assists the President in developing and executing policies and programs. In particular, OMB is involved with legislative, regulatory, procurement, e-government, and management issues. It is not only a locus of authority within the executive branch but also a critical interface between the President and Congress, helping to set direction for the mechanisms of Government.

As Director of OMB, Congressman Nussle would have great influence on a number of important policy issues aside from helping to formulate and present the President's budget.

One of these critical issues is the amount of waste and the lack of effective oversight in Federal contracting. The committee which I was privileged to chair and now am the ranking member of, with Senator Lieberman as our chairman, held extensive hearings last year on the disaster responses on the gulf coast and also on contracting operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. We found the problems of waste, fraud, and abuse in Federal contracting are enormous. Here are just a few examples:

We found that trailers bought to shelter disaster victims following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were undeployable in the areas where they were most needed.

We found repeated pipeline-laying attempts in Iraq used techniques unsuited to the terrain. We found problems in Iraq and Afghanistan, such as $2.3 million in contracts for the Babylon Police Academy in Iraq which was spent unnecessarily or without proper accounting and schools built in Afghanistan that collapsed under the weight of the first snow.

Unfortunately, the examples of poor process and outrageous outcomes in our contracting system are legion, and they are not confined to disaster response or operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is why several of us on the committee--Senators Lieberman, Akaka, Carper, Coleman, McCaskill and I--have joined in authoring legislation to improve our procurement system to obtain better value for taxpayers' dollars. I am hopeful our legislation, which was reported favorably by the committee on August 1, will soon be taken up by the full Senate. It would increase competition, transparency, and accountability in Government contracting and address the critical shortage of qualified Government procurement personnel.

This issue is obviously a high priority for me, and I am encouraged by the Congressman's responses to my questions. They demonstrate his commitment to working to resolve the concerns many of us have about wasteful spending in Government contracting.

He spoke of ``a broad range of issues that are in need of careful attention, including enhancing competition, strengthening the workforce, and improving transparency and accountability.'' I view this response by Congressman Nussle as an encouraging sign of a shared viewpoint on the need to improve performance in an area that accounts for more than $400 billion a year in spending.

I was, however, less heartened by Congressman Nussle's responses to questions about the Department of Homeland Security's grants for State and local programs, for assistance to firefighters, and for emergency management performance. These programs face great cuts under the budget proposed by the administration. Fortunately, we have acted to reject some of those proposed cuts and to respond in a more appropriate way.

The DHS defense of these proposed cuts noted that substantial unexpended funds from prior years are still ``in the pipeline.'' Congressman Nussle appears to share the DHS view that this factor mitigates proposed budget cuts. As the National Governors Association has pointed out, however, planning and coordination to deal with new grants and the procurement process all take time, so that not every granted dollar can be swiftly committed. The Governors further note that States are, in fact, meeting statutory deadlines for obligating and expending funds.

Homeland security grants are a critical factor in strengthening the Nation's security. These funds allow States and localities to fund planning, equipment, training, and exercises to prevent terrorist attacks; support intelligence gathering and information sharing through fusion centers; establish interoperable communications systems; prepare for mass-casualty incidents; and expand citizen involvement in all-hazards emergency preparedness.

I would encourage the Congressman, should he be confirmed--and I hope he will be--to reexamine the facts and figures on homeland security grants, particularly as we move into a new budget cycle for fiscal year 2008. States and communities must receive adequate assistance to conduct their critical roles in helping to prevent terrorist attacks and respond to emergencies of all types.

Turning from budget to management issues, I was also interested in Congressman Nussle's views on Federal agency performance as measured by the President's Management Scorecard. For most agencies, the weak spot is financial management. Indeed, poor financial management hobbles overall planning, management efforts, and the wise use of taxpayers' dollars in far too many agencies. At a time when making good use of every tax dollar is critical, it is simply intolerable for any agency to be unable to track how, when, for what purpose, and with what result it spends the taxpayers' money.

In March of 2007, the OMB scorecard showed that 14 of 26 agencies received unsatisfactory marks in financial performance. But here is what is perhaps most ironic and most troubling: OMB itself, to my dismay, had the worst ratings of any agency surveyed, receiving unsatisfactory scores in four out of five areas.

While noting various agencies' improvements in issuing timely financial statements, reducing auditor-identified weaknesses, and obtaining clean audit opinions, Congressman Nussle told us, ``We should not be satisfied if any Federal agency has unsatisfactory financial performance.'' Indeed, we shall not.

I would note that Congressman Nussle told our committee that he considers OMB's management-scorecard rankings as ``unacceptably low'' and he has pledged to work to improve them as Director of OMB. I welcome that commitment, not simply because OMB should stand as an example to other executive branch agencies but also because its critical work with those agencies and with Congress demands high levels of efficiency and effectiveness.

Madam President, I conclude by saying that the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee did an in-depth review of the Congressman's qualifications and experience and background for this important position. We grilled him on a whole range of issues: on matters ranging from pay-go principles and the alternative minimum tax to low-income heating assistance, to an issue of particular concern to my constituents, and that is the funding of Navy shipbuilding. While many policy disagreements will naturally arise in any such discussion, I believe there was broad agreement within our committee that Congressman Nussle has demonstrated, both in his long service in the House and in the nomination process, that he is well informed on the issues, highly qualified for the position, alert to other points of view, and will work closely with Congress as we tackle the enormous fiscal challenges facing this Nation.

I believe Congressman Nussle would be an effective Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and I urge my colleagues to support his nomination.

Thank you, Madam President.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source