Connect with us

Politics

From Director Vought to A-11 update, OMB minimizing GAO’s role

Published

10 months ago

on

The Office of Management and Budget is making its feelings known about the Government Accountability Office publicly and in regulations.

Russ Vought, OMB’s director, said yesterday that GAO, like other independent agencies, doesn’t have a place in overseeing the executive branch.

“We are not big fans of GAO. They are a quasi-legislative independent entity. Again, something that shouldn’t exist,” Vought said during a speech at the National Conservatism Conference.

Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)

Prior to the speech, OMB also made its stance about GAO clear in its update to Circular A-11, where it specifically called out GAO’s role in oversight.

“Updates guidance regarding the role of GAO as a Legislative Branch agency, whose opinions are non-binding on the Executive Branch and streamlines references to GAO throughout the circular. Fiscal guidelines for the Executive Branch are set by OMB and the Office of Federal Financial Management,” OMB wrote in the changes section of A-11.

GAO pushed back against Vought’s comments at the conference.

“Clearly Russell Vought does not value transparency and accountability. GAO’s mission is to support Congress in carrying out its constitutional responsibilities,” said Gene Dodaro, comptroller general of the United States and head of GAO, in a statement. “During my tenure as Comptroller General alone, GAO’s work has saved taxpayers over $1.2 trillion and resulted in tens of thousands of improvements to how federal programs work.”

GAO has been more aggressively touting its impact on the government over the last several months, especially since some House lawmakers wanted to cut its budget by 50%.

GAO released two blog posts explaining its role and its non-partisan approach to oversight and recommendations. It also highlighted the real-dollar benefits of its efforts.

“In fiscal year 2024, GAO’s work yielded $67.5 billion in financial benefits, a return of about $76 for every dollar invested in GAO. Our average return on investment for the past 6 years is $123 to $1,” GAO wrote in its 2026 budget request.

The Senate restored GAO’s budget for 2026, approving an $812 million budget, which is on par with current spending levels.

New language in Circular A-11

GAO’s budget remains in flux as the House and Senate still need to come to agreement to pass a final bill.

“GAO is a national treasure. Its insights and recommendations, though sometimes hard to hear, are invaluable to improve the efficiency and impact of the federal government. Moreover, it seems to be among the few institutions giving the administration any pushback on its ambitious efforts to expand executive power,” said a former OMB official, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution. “In my experience, Congress has zealously guarded GAO’s independence. I don’t see that today, at least on the Republican side, and that’s unfortunate.”

Along with Vought’s comments, the administration’s cemented its disdain for GAO’s role in A-11.

OMB added language to the new version of the Circular specifically calling out GAO.

For example in the 2025 version, OMB wrote under section 10.11 “What are the responsibilities and functions of GAO”:

“GAO is a Legislative Branch Agency that serves as an investigative arm of the Congress. GAO examines the use of public funds, programs and activities, and provides analyses, options, recommendations, and other assistance to help the Congress make oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO opinions are not binding on the Executive Branch. Executive Branch agencies, instead, must adhere to the opinions of the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, and are expected to comply with guidance from the OMB in interpreting relevant fiscal laws and administering federal programs.”

In the 2024 version of A-11, OMB wrote in the same section:

“GAO is the investigative arm of the Congress. GAO helps the Congress meet its Constitutional responsibilities and helps improve the performance and accountability of the Federal Government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds, evaluates Federal programs and activities, and provides analyses, options, recommendations, and other assistance to help the Congress make effective oversight, policy, and funding decisions. In this context, GAO works to continuously improve the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of the Federal Government through financial audits, program reviews and evaluations, analyses, legal opinions, investigations, and other services. GAO’s activities are designed to ensure the Executive Branch’s accountability to the Congress under the Constitution and the Government’s accountability to the American people. GAO is dedicated to good government through its commitment to the core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.”

OMB also changed the requirements in the Anti-Deficiency Act section of A-11.

The 2025 version now says:

“Similarly, agencies should not seek decisions from GAO on appropriations and budgetary matters, either informally or pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3529. Rather, agencies should consult their general counsel on such matters, who should reach out to OMB’s Office of General Counsel as needed. In accordance with Executive Order 8248 and section 22, agencies should coordinate with OMB on any correspondence with GAO to ensure policy consistency.”

In the 2024 version, OMB told agencies:

“Under the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers, a legal opinion by a Legislative Branch agency cannot bind the Executive Branch. Nevertheless, if the Government Accountability Office (GAO) finds an agency has committed an ADA violation, the agency must report such violation to the President, the Congress and the Comptroller General in accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 1341 or § 1517(b). The report to the President must contain an explanation as to why the violation was not discovered and previously reported by the agency. If GAO finds that an agency has committed an ADA violation and the agency, in consultation with OMB, does not agree with GAO that a violation has occurred, the agency must still report, and provide a report to the President, the Congress, and the Comptroller General that explains the agency’s position.”

An email to OMB seeking comments on Vought’s speech and A-11 additions was not returned.

Oversight and transparency would be harmed

Chris Mihm, a former managing director for strategic issues at GAO and now an adjunct professor of public administration and international affairs at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University, said that while there always has been inevitable and worthwhile institutional tensions between OMB and GAO given the respective roles and responsibilities, it was never direct or personal.

“We always respected each other and the objectivity and integrity of the work, even in those cases where we strongly disagreed,” Mihm said in an email to Federal News Network. “Cutting back on GAO would undermine congressional decision making while also hampering Executive Branch operations. The problem now, of course, is GAO is part of a larger story about the unified executive and an across-the-board rejection of independent oversight and transparency. The impoundment issue is another part of that.”

Mihm is referring to GAO’s oversight of OMB’s potential or real violations of the Impoundment Control Act. The audit agency initiated 39 investigations over whether the Trump administration violated the 1974 law.

So far, GAO has found several violations by the White House.

In his speech, Vought said the administration has “dusted off the notion of impoundment.”

“The notion you can spend less than the Congressional appropriation. That is important. That, in and of itself, will make it that we have budgets again that are not ignored. The President’s budget started to be ignored in the 1970s when impoundment largely went away,” Vought said. “Notice it was not called the Impoundment Prevention Act. It was called the Impoundment Control Act. Even then, Congress knew it didn’t have the right to take this power away from the president. We’ve been very clear that yes, we will look opportunities for Congress to vote on rescissions and DOGE cuts.”

Mihm said the continued debate over the power of the purse will be something to continue to watch.

“Individual members of Congress have spoken out but, as on many other issues these days, Congress as an institution seems all too willing to cede its constitutional and historical authority and prerogatives,” he said. “By the way, this is why the selection of the next Comptroller General is so vitally important.”

Dodaro’s 15-year term comes to an end in December. The Comptroller General is nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The post From Director Vought to A-11 update, OMB minimizing GAO’s role first appeared on Federal News Network.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

PAYBACK TIME: US Department of War Planning Retribution for Failing Allies, Including Suspending Spain From the Alliance and ‘Reviewing’ UK’s Claims to the Falkland Islands

Published

2 months ago

on

April 25, 2026

By

A digital artwork featuring two men engaged in discussion, with a prominent image of Donald Trump in the background, creating a dramatic political atmosphere.A digital artwork featuring two men engaged in discussion, with a prominent image of Donald Trump in the background, creating a dramatic political atmosphere.Failing allies, leftist-Globalists Sanchez (Spain) and Starmer (UK) are about to taste retribution from Trump – Wiki Commons

Failing allies under pressure.

As we have been reporting here on TGP, US President Donald J. Trump is hardly the man to forgive and forget a slight or a betrayal.

And it’s been reported that Trump and his team have compiled a ‘naughty list’ of failing allies, and that some for of payback was expected against these countries.

And today, it arises that the Pentagon is exploring ways to punish NATO countries that failed to support the US during the Iran conflict – including drastic measures like suspending Spain from the alliance.

This was first reported by Reuters, but was picked up by a multitude of outlets, primarily in the UK, where there is widespread concern over the planned US ‘review’ of the British claim to the Falkland Islands.

Daily Mail reported:

“The policy options are detailed in an email expressing frustration at some allies’ perceived reluctance or refusal to grant Washington access, basing and overflight (ABO) rights for the Iran war. The email stated that ABO is ‘just the absolute baseline for NATO,’ according to the official, who added that the options were circulating at high levels in the Pentagon.

The memo also includes an option to consider reassessing US diplomatic support for longstanding European ‘imperial possessions,’ such as the Falkland Islands near Argentina.”

Needless to say, the response by the Euro-Globalists was immediate.

On the one hand, NATO states there is no provision to oust Spain, while the UK reaffirms its sovereignty over the South American Islands.

Read more:

NATO and the Bar Fight: A Bar Tab Europe Expects America To Pay Forever

The post PAYBACK TIME: US Department of War Planning Retribution for Failing Allies, Including Suspending Spain From the Alliance and ‘Reviewing’ UK’s Claims to the Falkland Islands appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

AXIS OF ECONOMIC LOSERS: Japan and Germany’s Socialist “Stakeholder” Takeover Turned Economic Superpowers Into Stagnant Ghost Towns – And the Left Wants This Poison for America

Published

2 months ago

on

April 25, 2026

By

Image depicting tattered flags of Germany and Japan with the text "The Axis of Losers," symbolizing the Axis Powers of World War II.Image depicting tattered flags of Germany and Japan with the text "The Axis of Losers," symbolizing the Axis Powers of World War II.Japan and Germany are dying from the same disease: socialism.

Back in the late 1980s and early ’90s, the so-called “experts,” the mainstream media, and every smug Ivy League economist couldn’t stop drooling over Japan. “Japan as Number One!” they screamed. Books flew off the shelves. Newsweek and Time covers warned of an “economic Pearl Harbor.”

Paul Harvey wailed about Japan buying up America with our own money. Paul Kennedy’s bestseller The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers basically coronated the Land of the Rising Sun as the next global hegemon.

The keiretsu system, the MITI bureaucrats, the lifetime employment model — it was all supposed to be the future. America was finished. The Japanese were going to own us.

Fast-forward to 2025-2026. Japan is a cautionary tale on life support. GDP per capita (PPP) hovers around a pathetic $55,000–$56,000 — crushed by America’s nearly $94,000. After taxes and cost of living? It’s even worse. The “Lost Decades” aren’t a glitch — they’re the feature. Zombie companies, endless stagnation, and a demographic death spiral made infinitely worse by policies that treat businesses like government welfare offices rather than wealth-creation machines.

The mainstream press will blame everything except the real culprit: the deliberate socialization of the corporation.

Keiretsu

In Japan, it’s the infamous keiretsu system — giant corporate clans glued together by cross-shareholdings and a house bank that plays mommy to every failing division. Lifetime employment. Seniority-based pay and promotions instead of merit. Company unions that treat every layoff like a war crime. The goal isn’t profit — heaven forbid — it’s “harmony” and keeping everyone employed forever. Result? Total paralysis. You can’t fire the dead weight. You can’t reallocate capital to what actually works. You can’t innovate like a maniac because revolution is “disruptive.”

When the 1990s bubble popped, they didn’t clean house — they dragged toxic debt around like a ball and chain for decades.

And don’t look now, but Germany — once the envy of Europe — is right there with them in the loser’s club. Years of zero or outright negative growth. Factories shuttering. The proud German export machine is coughing up blood. The vaunted “Rhine model” has turned into a slow-motion industrial suicide.

Mitbestimmung

Because Germany took the socialization even further with the notorious Mitbestimmung — “co-determination.” In big companies, workers and union reps literally occupy half the seats on the supervisory board. They get veto power over layoffs, plant closings, relocations, and major restructurings. It’s not capitalism anymore — it’s corporate communism with better engineering. The boardroom isn’t deciding how to crush competitors and reward shareholders; it’s negotiating how to protect today’s insiders at the expense of tomorrow’s growth.

Add in the deranged Energiewende — the green energy fantasy that tripled electricity costs — and you have the perfect storm. German industry is literally powering down while the rest of the world races ahead.

BMW/Tesla

Want proof? Look at BMW versus Tesla. BMW sells about 2.5 million vehicles a year. Tesla sells around 1.5 million. BMW’s market cap? A measly ~$55 billion. Tesla’s? Over twenty times higher. One company is run by visionaries who embrace the future and reward risk-takers. The other is run like a German labor ministry with a side hustle in cars.

This is what happens when you let “stakeholders” — code for unions, bureaucrats, and professional grievance-mongers — hijack the boardroom. The enterprise stops being a profit machine that lifts everyone through growth and becomes a social-work project designed to protect yesterday’s workers at the expense of tomorrow’s entrepreneurs, young people, and innovators.

It’s the exact same philosophy the American left has been trying to smuggle into U.S. boardrooms for years: ESG scores, “stakeholder capitalism,” DEI mandates, union power grabs, and the constant war on shareholders. They call it compassionate. It’s actually economic castration. Joseph Schumpeter’s “creative destruction” — the engine of real progress — gets sacrificed on the altar of Karl Marx’s class warfare dressed up in a suit and tie.

America’s model is raw, unapologetic, and brutally effective: The company exists to make money for its owners. Management executes or gets fired. You restructure, you pivot, you kill failing divisions without crying about “humanity.” It looks ugly to the European and Japanese salon socialists. It also creates the iPhones, the SpaceX rockets, the shale revolution, and the stock market that funds retirements for millions.

The Axis of Losers

Japan and Germany didn’t fail because of demographics or one bad energy policy. They failed because they turned their greatest companies into paralyzed extensions of the welfare state. The “Axis of Losers” chose preservation over progress — and they’re paying for it in lost decades and lost futures.

America still has a choice. We can reject this European-Japanese corporate socialism, tell the unions and the stakeholder grifters to pound sand, and keep rewarding the risk-takers and wealth-creators who actually build the future.

Or we can follow the Axis of Losers straight into the economic graveyard. The choice should be obvious — but the radical left never learns. They just rebrand failure as “equity” and keep selling the same poison. Don’t let them.

The post AXIS OF ECONOMIC LOSERS: Japan and Germany’s Socialist “Stakeholder” Takeover Turned Economic Superpowers Into Stagnant Ghost Towns – And the Left Wants This Poison for America appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

WATCH: Mother of Feral NYC Teen Who Body-Slammed and Stomped 15-Year-Old Girl’s Head DEFENDS Violent Son, Claims Victim ‘Bullied’ Him After She Refused to Give Him Her Phone Number

Published

2 months ago

on

April 25, 2026

By

Woman speaking to the media in a hallway while a man is seen attacking another person on the street in a separate scene.

Woman speaking to the media in a hallway while a man is seen attacking another person on the street in a separate scene.

A horrifying video from New York has sparked nationwide outrage after a 14-year-old boy was caught on camera brutally body-slamming a 15-year-old girl to the concrete and then stomping on her head, all because she refused to give him her phone number.

Now, the boy’s mother is publicly defending her son, claiming the victim was “bullying” him and that his savage and animalistic attack was somehow justified because he is a “humble” Christian.

The shocking attack occurred around 3:30 p.m. on Monday at the corner of East 107th Street and Third Avenue in East Harlem, just after school let out.

The 15-year-old girl, a ninth-grade student-athlete at East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School heading to squash practice, was confronted by the 14-year-old masked suspect, who had reportedly been harassing her for weeks.

In the disturbing footage, the girl is seen trying to walk away and yelling, “Get the f–k away from me.”

The boy follows her, grabs her from behind, lifts her off the ground, slams her to the pavement, and then stomps directly on her head.

His friends can be heard laughing and egging him on as the girl lies motionless on the ground.

WATCH (VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED):

The girl suffered a concussion and was rushed to Harlem Hospital.

The 14-year-old suspect was arrested on Wednesday and appeared in Manhattan Family Court, where he was ordered held in custody by the Division of Youth and Family Justice.

Because both parties are minors, his name has not been publicly released.

In an interview captured outside the courthouse, the boy’s mother, Selma Allen, issued a wild defense of her violent son.

WATCH:

Allen claimed the 15-year-old girl had been bullying him in school, sending messages, and even pushing him down, and that this somehow justified the vicious attack.

“She was being a bully to him, that’s it,” Allen told reporters.

“He’s been complaining about her. I bring it to the principal’s attention but he don’t address it. The way my son is being bullied, he doesn’t want to go to school.”

She claimed her son is a “quiet” boy who “doesn’t provoke nobody,” and described him as a “humble Christian.”

“He don’t provoke nobody. But if you provoke him, he will lash out.”

Allen insisted her son had proof on WhatsApp and Instagram and repeatedly shifted blame onto the victim while downplaying the savage stomp on the girl’s head.

None of the reporters asked the obvious question: if the girl was truly bullying him, why was he aggressively demanding her phone number and following her?

The victim’s mother, Lucinda Arroyo, spoke out Thursday in an interview with the New York Post. She said her daughter had been dealing with weeks of harassment from the boy and said it was a “miracle” her daughter survived.

“She’s very upset that her whole life has been completely flipped upside down right now,” Arroyo said. “She’s known him as someone who’s bad news for a while.”

“This is not even bullying, this is outright assault — and he could have killed her,” she asserted.

Her daughter was left with a concussion, bleeding, a potential brain injury, crushing headaches and a twisted neck, and will require ongoing physical therapy.

The post WATCH: Mother of Feral NYC Teen Who Body-Slammed and Stomped 15-Year-Old Girl’s Head DEFENDS Violent Son, Claims Victim ‘Bullied’ Him After She Refused to Give Him Her Phone Number appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Trending