CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM — MINORITY STAFF
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION
JANUARY 17, 2006

CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF THE
BUSH ADMINISTRATION

PREPARED FOR
REP. HENRY A. WAXMAN



TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................1
I. MANIPULATION OF IRAQ INTELLIGENCE...............................................................................2
II. TREATMENT OF DETAINEES.............................................................................................5
III. LEAK OF A COVERT CIA AGENT’S STATUS........................................................................7
IV. AWARD OF HALLIBURTON CONTRACTS ...........................................................................9
V. WHITE HOUSE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE KATRINA RESPONSE ..............................................10
VI. SECRET NSA WIRETAPS .....................................................................................11
VII. VICE PRESIDENT’S ENERGY TASK FORCE...................................................................12
VIII. WITHHOLDING OF MEDICARE COST ESTIMATES ..........................................................13
IX. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AT MULTIPLE FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE WHITE HOUSE.................14
X. POLITICIZATION OF THE FEDERAL SCIENCE-BASED AGENCIES ..........................................15
XI. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ENFORCEMENT OF VOTING RIGHTS LAWS ........................................16
XII. CONTRACT ABUSES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ................................17
XIII. INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AT EPA ....................................................................18
XIV. INFLUENCE OF TOBACCO INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS ON U.S. TOBACCO POLICIES .....................19
XV. FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT’S CAMPAIGN FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES.............19

Snip (pg. 1)
This report identifies 15 key oversight issues involving President Bush and his Administration that Congress has failed to investigate. They are:

• The role of the White House in manipulating intelligence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda;
• The responsibility of senior Administration officials for the abuse of detainees;
• The role of White House officials in leaking the identity of a covert CIA agent;
• The role of the Vice President’s office in the award of Halliburton contracts;
• The responsibility of senior White House officials in the failed response to Hurricane Katrina;
• The secret wiretapping of U.S. citizens by the National Security Agency; The identity of the energy industry contributors who met with the Vice President’s energy task force;
• The role of the White House in withholding key Medicare cost estimates from Congress;
• Evidence of conflicts of interest at multiple federal agencies and the White House;
• The increasing politicization of science-based federal agencies;
• The failure of the Department of Justice to enforce voting rights laws;
• Contract abuses at the Department of Homeland Security;
• The influence of industry lobbyists in writing EPA regulations;
• The influence of the tobacco industry lobbyists on U.S. tobacco policies; and
• The role of former Attorney General John Ashcroft in illegal campaign finance activities.

The report examines the response of the Republican-controlled Congress to these 15 oversight issues. In each case, a large “accountability gap” has emerged. Despite repeated requests by Democratic members and news reports raising allegations of serious misconduct, the Congress has failed to convene hearings, issue subpoenas, and take the other steps necessary to fulfill its constitutional oversight role.


Snip (pg. 4)...

On multiple occasions, Republican Committee chairmen in the House have denied requests from ranking Democratic members to hold hearings into the manipulation of Iraq intelligence. On July 15, 2003, Rep. Waxman asked Rep. Porter Goss, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, to hold hearings in the use of the forged nuclear evidence.9 On October 4, 2004, Rep. Waxman asked Rep. Tom Davis, the Chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, to hold hearings on new revelations casting doubt on the “nuclear tubes” evidence cited by multiple Administration officials.10 On June 30, 2005, Rep. John Conyers and over 50 other Democratic members of Congress asked Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Chairman of House Judiciary Committee, to hold hearings into the “Downing Street Memo,” a British document suggesting the United States and the United Kingdom may have manipulated intelligence about Iraq.11 And on November 4, 2005, Rep. Jane Harman asked Rep. Peter Hoekstra, the new Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, to examine “how intelligence products and presentations were developed, whether dissents were properly reflected, and what steps, if any, were taken by the IC to correct misstatements of intelligence by senior Administration
officials.”12 All of these requests were ignored or rejected.

On the Senate side, after pressure from Democrats, the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said in February 2004 that the Committee would look at this issue.13 But he subsequently stated the matter is “basically on the back burner.”14 Following the disclosure of the Downing Street Memo, Senator John Kerry and other Democratic Senators again urged Senate intelligence committee hearings on Iraq intelligence, but the Chairman declined this request.15



http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20060117103554-62297.pdf

Rep. John Conyers
03.17.2006

New York Times Shines Shills Again

The New York Times has had some remarkable coverage about Senator Feingold's censure resolution. Remarkable in its naivete and lack of balance.

Snip...

Perhaps more alarming is the transparent manner in which New York Times journalist, David D. Kirkpatrick volunteers as his sources in this article: "Paul Weyrich ... declared last month in an e-mail" or "The Republican National Committee sent the editorial out to its e-mail list of 15 million supporters" or "Rush Limbaugh told listeners on his syndicated radio program" or "The Wall Street Journal's editorial board, a conservative standard-bearer" or "Conservative Web sites and talk radio programs have lavished attention on the impeachment resolutions" or "for three days the Republican Party has sent radio hosts news bulletins."

Perhaps Kirkpatrick's "sources" may have explained to him I have done a bit of work. He mentions that I have "proposed an initial inquiry into a censure or impeachment of Mr. Bush over the war." He continues, "(s)o far, the Conyers proposal has attracted support from about two dozen of the chamber's 201 Democrats." About two dozen? An inquiry into censure or impeachment?

This flippant account of what must count for research is preposterous. There were actually 32 Members of Congress on my resolution. Maybe that's about two dozen. Or maybe that's more than 15% of the Democrats in Congress and a number that's growing every week. Maybe the author could have signed up for my email, or even called me or my staff if he wanted to know the facts. Or he could have gone to Congress.gov to find out who has signed up as a cosponsor.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-conyers/new-york-times-sh_b_17489.html