iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

White House Struggles To Fill Key Watchdog Position To Oversee Afghanistan Reconstruction


First Posted: 08/10/11 03:46 PM ET Updated: 10/10/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- As the Obama administration begins to draw down U.S. troops from Afghanistan and the war effort undergoes significant transition, the office in charge of ferreting out waste, fraud and abuse in reconstruction projects remains without a permanent head.

Last week, Herb Richardson, the acting Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), announced he would be stepping down after only six months on the job, leaving the agency without a head for the second time this year.

Richardson was called to step in after the last inspector general, Arnold Fields, resigned in January after a troubled, much-criticized tenure. Richardson's short time as acting head was garnering positive reviews, and many observers were hoping Obama would keep him on permanently.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who was one of Fields' most vocal critics, said Richardson had "made great progress in a short amount of time."

"The timing couldn't be worse," said a senior Democratic Hill aide. "When we're spending $325 million per day in Afghanistan, now is hardly the time to loosen the strings of accountability tied to each hard-earned American taxpayer dollar. For Herb Richardson to exit so soon after the Congress-demanded departure of Arnie Fields shows something is not merely amiss with management, but that dysfunction runs deep in the Defense Department."

Last month, Richardson's office released a blistering audit that concluded that the $70 billion in U.S. funds sent to Afghanistan for security and development assistance are vulnerable to "fraud or diversion to insurgents."

Steve Trent, the number two at the agency, will be stepping in as acting chief. Trent previously worked in the office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction and the Department of Homeland Security.

In a statement to The Huffington Post, Richardson stressed that the work would not falter as the administration searches for a permanent chief, saying the office "is on the right track."

"I am confident that the leadership team I've put in place over the last six months will continue to get strong results," Richardson said. "Its efforts are critical to ensuring that taxpayer funds are protected during these challenging economic times."

In a farewell letter to Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) sent on Wednesday, Richardson also emphasized this point and the turnaround at the agency. The two had met a few weeks ago.

"SIGAR's Investigative Directorate has made tremendous progress and is now concentrating on major contract fraud and corruption cases where we can provide the greatest return for the U.S. taxpayer," he wrote. "As a result, SIGAR's Investigations Directorate has increased its monetary results from $7 million in November 2010 to nearly $50 million in July 2011."

But Jake Wiens, an investigator with the nonpartisan watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, warned that without a permanent head, the office is left with a significant amount of uncertainty.

"They still have auditors, they still have investigators, so they're still going to be doing work. It's more about leadership and having a good, solid, strategic plan," he said. "Right now, in such a position of uncertainty, it's tougher to make those sort of long-term decisions that are necessary for good, serious oversight. These aren't problems that can just be fixed in two-three months, or something like that. You really have to be looking long-term, and for that to be the case, you really need a permanent inspector general in there who has been through the nomination process and people really trust."

Stuart Bowen, who has been highly praised for his work rooting out corruption in the Iraq reconstruction effort at the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, said the Afghanistan reconstruction watchdog has faced an uphill climb since its founding.

"I think the challenge on the SIGAR side of the house has been first, they were underfunded at the beginning of their organization. So that made the going very tough at the outset," he said. "Second, they weren't authorized or created until seven years into the Afghan program. So a significant amount of waste, fraud and abuse had occurred, and it was difficult to unpack that so late in the process."

He also stressed the difficulty in finding auditors and investigators who are willing to work in war zones.

"I've been fortunate to have a very strong team that's been committed to the mission for seven years, and we've produced some good results in that time -- over a $1 billion in benefits to our audits, and 55 convictions from our investigations, to date. But it took a lot of work at the outset for me to get this investigation up and running from scratch," he added.

It's unclear where the Obama administration is in the process of finding a replacement. According to the National Journal, Richardson was reportedly "the only candidate under serious White House consideration, which means the administration will now need to scramble to find his replacement." The White House did not return a request for comment.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- As the Obama administration begins to draw down U.S. troops from Afghanistan and the war effort undergoes significant transition, the office in charge of ferreting out waste, fraud and a...
WASHINGTON -- As the Obama administration begins to draw down U.S. troops from Afghanistan and the war effort undergoes significant transition, the office in charge of ferreting out waste, fraud and a...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,776
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (75 total)
01:28 AM on 08/13/2011
YES REBUILD AMERICA INSTEAD OF MIDDLE EAST FOREIGN COUNTRIES
NO MONEY WHERE ARE THEY GETTING THE BILLIONS TO IRAN AND AFGAN ASTAN, THIS IS CRAZY.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lowrodiay65
11:28 PM on 08/11/2011
Amazing , spend billions rebuilding afghanistan and republicans say nothing, spend billions rebuilding the U.S. and republicans go nuts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
thetxsndn
Man Plans. God laughs.
11:43 PM on 08/11/2011
I think you have that a little bit backwards.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
a10flatliner
01:06 PM on 08/12/2011
WTH is this? 'Underfunded' seems to be the key word to everything the government agencies use today with their sweaty palms outstreched..
Of course they are underfunded..Ya' just can't squeeze a rock and expect gold to pour out into your hand..oops! (scratch that) I forgot about the money press'es at the mint. mea culpa!
Call me a heartless 'heathen' if you wish, but my idea of a war is to go in and rant, rage, and rampage..tear up everything..and let the defeated think about if it was worth their loss to yank the Eagle's feathers while they fix their crummy 3rd world back to the 'usual'...
Leave Afghanistan in smoldering ash, and get out as soon as done...Why hang out on the tax payers dime, while repairing a da_m thing for them? War isn't about a game so someone like Halliburton can profit at anyone's expense...War...is war!
09:43 PM on 08/11/2011
Aha. NOW I see.
[1] Afghanistan has, by independent estmates, some trillion$ [ with a "t"] of all "rare earth" minerals buried underground; OR, ten to twenty times what exists in the rest of the world put together. [2] the rest of the world's "rare earth" resources are --yes, you guessed it--in China [and there is also some in North India.] [3] in other places, such as Europe and the Americas, known "rare earth" resources are negligible or non-existent. Repeat-- non-existent, or zilch. [4] "rare earth" minerals are needed, and used, in every electronic device we use today; from LCD TVs, to advanced computers, nanotechnology---or, to put it simply, without "rare earths", world technology would regress bak to the 1920s.
So, the US--and indeed, the world-- is playing for much higher stakes than appear on the surface--one that could determine the future of human civilization in the 21st millenium. But it is in everyone's interest, including USA, to keep this matter as secret as possible-- so as not to create a worldwide panic. Failing that, everyone in power is hoping that the general public will simply ignore this topic as too esoteric and far-fetched. And they may well be correct.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
se72748
06:27 PM on 08/11/2011
Ok .I'm not positive about anything in afghanistan,except that we could stay there for a hundred years and the day we leave the one remaining afghani will declare victory.Somehow it seems so fruitless.And of course ;if a dem is pres.when we withdraw in a hundred years,the republicans will feign outrage and accuse him or her of cutting and running.
I don't know..............Maybe someday, there will be a president and congress who care more about americans and less about their careers.................maybe someday.
photo
RedStateHostage
Prevent Truth Decay, Turn Off Faux Noise
06:21 PM on 08/11/2011
Reconstruction of Afghanistan? How about reconstruction of our roads, bridges, water and sewer systems. How about JOBS in the US of A?
Get out of that hell hole and the sooner the better!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Marcospinelli
an old liberal Democrat, a 'New Deal'-Democrat
06:09 PM on 08/11/2011
For all the good Herb Richardson did.  He was put there to do more of this:

Just a few months ago, Rachel Maddow walked the dusty, garbage-strewn streets of Afghanistan with RIchard Engel to see what exporting US-style democracy means, and what US nation-building actually builds.

Watch this to see where are our tax dollars going, and learn how we are not "nation-building", not making us safer, and not helping the Afghans or building their nation at all (or a democracy). Learn how this has all been just a huge rip-off of the American people:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR5BHnN__5M
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NanJac
05:47 PM on 08/11/2011
Why should we be reconstructing, they still want us there. Besides the money is not going to rebuild..........I am sure it is going to support the President and his family.......they like to live the good life. Besides Amrica needs rebuilding from the storms we have had.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
se72748
06:30 PM on 08/11/2011
The money always goes to the rich and powerful leaders and the people we are supposedly helping seldom see any help at all.We buy the friendship of the leaders and he pacify's the masses toward us.And that my friends is the deal.
05:37 PM on 08/11/2011
Reconstruction, where? This has to be out of the Twight Zone. Our country has been flooded upon, blown apart by tornadoes, and the people are jobless, and Obama is talking about reconstruction over "there"? The American people have had it with "foreign aid", and it's time to take care of our own.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ivyteainn
04:07 PM on 08/11/2011
What a waste of the taxpayer's money. I guess it justifies the huge expenditures to maintain the CIA and the Pentagon. No wonder we have a massive deficit
02:50 PM on 08/11/2011
bin Laden is in hell laughing at us.
photo
intolleft
ObamaTAX...getting you shovel ready
02:39 PM on 08/11/2011
We're still waiting for the White House position to be filled.
photo
vixter72
Think for yourself
02:58 PM on 08/11/2011
F&F
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Patrick Fogarty
02:25 PM on 08/11/2011
Re-construction is the wrong word for what is needed in Afganisan. Re- construction means repair or replacement of pre-existing structure or organization .
But in Afganistan there is practically nothing to be rebuilt , but there is plenty to be built; if it could be done . To build an Afganistan that could sustain itself would take total cooperation from the Afgan people . And how likely is that ?
With a corrupt government and a loosely connected collection of tribes and tribal states with rivals within thier own groups ; conscientious cooperation and construction of something that might resemble a productive , coordinated functional society would be unlikely .
02:17 PM on 08/11/2011
They really don't need to fill that 'watchdog' position. They can just throw all the money off a mountain over there, it will do the same thing.
How can we say Afghanistan has no leadership, when we have none ourselves?
Just Sayin.....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
se72748
06:33 PM on 08/11/2011
I sincerely hope you are including the house and senate in that lack of leadership comment.
photo
consultingpbh
75th Ranger Regiment '66-'73
02:14 PM on 08/11/2011
Forget Afghanistan we are leaderless here in the US by the words of our president.
Senator Obama 2006
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
Yes we do Mr. President
See Trailer # 4 Wall St gov. "Inside Job" narrated by Matt Damon
http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810157411/video/21504672
"Sua Sponte"
75th Regiment
Company O
3rd Brigade
82nd Airborne
02:14 PM on 08/11/2011
If the Russians could not conquer them using all of their dirty tricks and tortures, what makes any one in this country think we can do it and better yet make sure it is done according to our standards. Just get out, let them do their thing as they wish, we got Bin Laden, there is no reason for us to be there, get out, now
02:35 PM on 08/11/2011
The administration and past administrations for a while have been so arrogant as to think they can do what the Russians or anybody else can't. They think they are all powerful and have money to throw at every problem, plus they have the military at their command. It goes to their head.
photo
checkmoot
We have met the enemy and he is us.
08:26 PM on 08/11/2011
The Soviets went in to support a government that was in place, but facing a Taliban insurgency. We armed the Taliban and helped them overthrow a secular central government..We should have been helping the Soviets.