Putting a lid on improper government spending

The fallout continues for the General Services Administration (GSA) following reports about inappropriate spending at a Las Vegas regional conference. The Fiscal Year 2013 Financial Services Appropriations Bill, just approved by the House Appropriations Committee, cuts about $100 million from the GSA’s budget next year. An amendment to the bill prohibits funding for bonuses for GSA employees under investigation for misconduct.

Here is another installment in our series on ways to control and monitor spending at GSA and other government agencies. Andy Howard, a partner with the Alston & Bird law firm and co-lead of the firm’s Government Contracts practice, offers his views. Howard is based in his firm’s Los Angeles office. Alston & Bird’s headquarters is in Atlanta.

Govpro: Can federal agencies successfully eliminate inappropriate government spending, such as the extravagant spending reported at GSA for a Las Vegas conference?

Andy Howard: Eliminating inappropriate spending entirely is unlikely for at least two reasons. First, there will always be critics ready to castigate public officials for spending on things that — in the critics’ opinion — are “inappropriate.”

Second, and more to the point of the recent scandals involving GSA, greed and irresponsibility will always be part of the human condition for both government officials and, on the other side of equation, government contractors alike. The solution is to fairly and equally enforce the rules that already exist for ferreting out this sort of waste and abuse.

Govpro: What steps should GSA administrators take to rein in extravagant or inappropriate government spending?

AH: Fairly and equally enforce the rules that already exist to ferret out waste and abuse, and hold the irresponsible actors accountable. Neither GSA nor any other agency lacks the tools necessary to curtail wasteful spending. Government officials are subject to conflicts of interest rules, which include reporting obligations and penalties for noncompliance. There are procedures and protocols in place that control authorizations for expenditures. There are whistleblower statutes that seek to encourage the reporting of fraud and abuse by government employees. And then there is the Congress and GSA’s Office of Inspector General that are more than capable of keeping wasteful spending in check.

Govpro: Do most federal agencies successfully and adequately control spending of tax dollars within the agency?

AH: Given the relative infrequency of “scandals” like these compared to the millions of dollars spent by federal agencies every day, the answer has to be, “generally yes.” More importantly, it’s indicative that the rules that are in place work — a case of the exception (i.e., wasteful spending scandals) proving the rule (i.e., that there are rules that work in the vast majority of instances).

So far, in our government spending series,

Ken Donohue, a former inspector general for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and currently a principal and consulting expert on waste, fraud and abuse at Reznick Government, discusses the outcome of Congressional hearings regarding excessive government spending.

Eric Zoetmulder, a director at SciQuest, defines overspendng in government.

Chris Rossie, vice president, Public Sector and International, at
Oversight Systems, reveals
ways that federal agencies use to halt questionable government spending activity.