[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 62 (Wednesday, May 18, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 18, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

                                 ______


                         HON. JOSEPH M. McDADE

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 17, 1994

  Mr. McDADE. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the District of 
Columbia Performance Accountability Act, in an effort to address a 
major, underlying problem facing the government of the District of 
Columbia. That problem is the lack of accountability to the citizens of 
the District for the efficiency and effectiveness of the District's 
departments, agencies, and programs.
  This lack of accountability--by programs generally, and by program 
managers specifically--is a fundamental cause of the ongoing litany of 
waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement by the District government to 
which we have been treated. The governmental scandals of which we read 
seemingly daily must be only the most egregious examples of what a 
reasonable person would conclude is a more widespread problem--systemic 
mismanagement throughout the District's government.
  Last year similar concerns about the lack of accountability in the 
Federal government led Congress to enact the Government Performance and 
Results Act, legislation I was pleased to cosponsor. This new law 
requires all Federal agencies to develop annual performance plans, with 
measurable goals for all programs, and to publish annual performance 
reports, showing what results were actually achieved.
  The legislation I am introducing today imposes a similar 
accountability requirement on the District government. Efficiency and 
effectiveness goals would have to be set for significant activity of 
every program, measuring both the quantity and quality of government 
service. Every year Congress would get a report on the past year's 
program performance, and a plan showing those goals for the coming 
year.
  To that I have added two additional requirements. First, next to each 
program goal shall be listed the name and position of the manager most 
directly responsible for achieving the goal and that person's immediate 
superior. This is called personal accountability, something that seems 
to be missing from the managerial ranks of D.C. government. And second, 
my legislation ties achievement of minimum and higher level program 
goals directly into the District's pay and promotion system. Simply 
put, there will be real consequences suffered for bad management, 
before it rises to scandalous proportions, and only good management 
will be rewarded.
  For those of my colleagues who are concerned about protecting home 
rule for the District of Columbia, I would just point out that the 
greatest threat to home rule is the continued drumbeat of mismanagement 
arising from that government. It is the District's own demonstrated 
unwillingness, despite years of widespread managerial misfeasance, to 
instill serious personal and programmatic accountability in its affairs 
that has caused this threat to occur. I would urge the friends of the 
District and anyone who is concerned about the problems of our Nation's 
Capital, to join me in supporting this long-overdue reform.

                          ____________________