[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 139 (Monday, September 19, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Page S5722]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTENT TO OBJECT
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I intend to object to proceeding to the
nomination of Norm Eisen to be Ambassador to the Czech Republic at the
Department of State for the following reasons.
I object to the proceeding to the nomination because of Mr. Eisen's
role in the firing of the inspector general of the Corporation for
National and Community Service, CNCS, and his lack of candor about that
matter when questioned by congressional investigators. The details of
Mr. Eisen's role in the firing and his misrepresentations about that
matter are detailed in the Joint Minority Staff Report of the House
Committee on Government Reform and the Senate Finance Committee, dated
November 20, 2009. I would also ask unanimous consent that a letter of
January 12, 2011, sent by myself and Congressman Issa to Mr. Bauer,
then counsel to the President, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Congress of the United States,
Washington, DC, January 12, 2011.
Hon. Robert F. Bauer,
Counsel to the President, The White House, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Bauer: We write to express our objection to the
President's use of a recess appointment to install Norman L.
Eisen as U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic. As you know,
we objected to Mr. Eisen's nomination on the grounds that he
attempted to constructively remove the Inspector General (IG)
of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS)
without the prior notice required by law and that he misled
Congressional investigators.
It is our concern that the President's decision to force
through such a nominee without the advice and consent of the
Senate signals a departure from his recent pledge to work
cooperatively with Congress.
The President announced Mr. Eisen's nomination on June 28,
2010. On September 27, 2010, Senator Grassley provided public
notice of his intention to object to the nomination. Senator
Grassley referred to ``Mr. Eisen's role in the firing of the
Inspector General of the Corporation for National and
Community Service and his lack of candor about that matter
when questioned by Congressional investigators.''
During that investigation, a bicameral group of
investigators learned Mr. Eisen personally delivered an
ultimatum to former CNCS IG Gerald Walpin demanding that he
resign or be terminated within one hour. At the time he
delivered the ultimatum, no notice had been provided to
Congress as is legally required by the Inspector General
Reform Act (IG Act). As you know, the IG Act requires the
President to communicate in writing the reasons for removal
of an IG to Congress not later than 30 days prior to taking
action.
During an interview on June 17, 2009, Mr. Eisen refused to
answer at least 12 direct questions. He did, however, assert
on that date that the CNCS Board of Directors unanimously
supported the removal of IG Walpin. He also asserted that the
White House conducted ``an extensive review'' in response to
concerns raised by the Board about 10 Walpin's fitness
following a May 20, 2009 CNCS Board meeting. According to Mr.
Eisen, his ``extensive review'' substantiated the Board's
concerns and informed the decision to remove IG Walpin.
Our investigation found that, contrary to Mr. Eisen's
assertions, the Board had not unanimously expressed a desire
to have Mr. Walpin removed prior to the decision. Moreover,
we could find no evidence that Mr. Eisen's ``extensive
review'' consisted of anything more than simply asking the
CNCS General Counsel to document the Chairman of the Board's
concerns about Mr. Walpin. Mr. Eisen did not interview the
CNCS Directors. He did not provide Mr. Walpin or anyone else
in the Office of Inspector General an opportunity to be
heard. He took action based on incomplete information
provided only by individuals who had adversarial
relationships with the IG.
Mr. Eisen has had several opportunities to address our
concerns and has yet to do so. He failed to be forthcoming
and responsive during his initial meeting with our staff on
June 17, 2009. He again demonstrated a lack of candor in
response to Questions for the Record following his nomination
hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July
22, 2010.
In the interest of allowing Mr. Eisen to address our
concerns, we scheduled a meeting with our staff for December
16, 2010 at 11:30 A.M. At approximately 11:15 A.M., the White
House postponed the meeting until 2:15 P.M. At approximately
2:00 P.M., the meeting was canceled by the White House Office
of Legislative Affairs without further explanation. By
calling off a face-to-face meeting in favor of a recess
appointment, the White House sent the message that the
President is not interested in hearing the concerns of
Republican Members of Congress.
In short, Mr. Eisen took action on behalf of the President
that ran afoul of the IG Act and subsequently misled
Congressional investigators in lieu of conducting a fair,
thorough, and responsible investigation. Senate confirmation,
under the advice and consent clause, is one of the strongest
checks on executive power. Recess appointments are
meantatofill vacancies that arise during a long recess, not
to bypass the confirmation process. We are troubled by the
Administration's circumvention of that process, especially in
this instance. The vacancy arose on January 20, 2009, and yet
the President waited eighteen months before making an
appointment. Given that there had already been considerable
public controversy over Mr. Eisen's actions in this matter at
the time of his appointment, issues with his confirmation
should have been easily anticipated. For these reasons, we
believe that a recess appointment of Mr. Eisen to serve as a
United States Ambassador is particularly inappropriate.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter. We
look forward to working with the White House toward our
mutual goal of identifying and deploying qualified
individuals of the highest integrity to serve American
interests abroad.
Sincerely,
Darrell Issa,
Chairman, U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform.
Charles E. Grassley,
United States Senator.
____________________