
Demoting the Education Department's watchdog is a spark in a five-alarm fire
President Trump, who removed 17 inspectors general (including me) at the beginning of his term, continued his attack earlier this month by demoting the acting inspector general of the Department of Education — simply because she was doing her job.
That job is especially important right now, in light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the Trump administration can proceed with dismantling the Education Department.
When agencies engage in major muscle movements like the expected shuttering of the Department of Education, inspectors general can add real value through fair, objective and independent oversight. Therefore, changing the acting inspector general under the circumstances is a major issue.
Here's the backstory. In March, the secretary of Education announced that the Department of Education would be reducing its workforce by 50 percent, and the president issued an executive order weeks later directing the secretary to begin the process of shuttering the agency entirely.
In April, the Department of Education's acting inspector general announced that her office was initiating a series of reviews to examine the effect of the Trump administration's overhaul of the department on its programs.
She described the goal of the reviews as 'identify[ing] the cumulative effect of staffing reductions in relation to the department's statutory responsibilities, along with any actions it should consider, to help ensure productive and efficient operations following its workforce changes.'
The Office of Inspector General is the internal watchdog in federal agencies, empowered to examine the effectiveness of their agency's programs. So, this review is squarely within the office's jurisdiction; it is exactly the entity that should conduct such an assessment.
Over the ensuing few weeks, however, the department apparently pushed back on the Office of the Inspector General, using standard agency tactics to sabotage oversight — namely, dragging its feet and improperly denying access to information and witnesses.
After weeks of this pushback, the acting inspector general notified Congress of the Education Department's delay tactics and unfounded refusals to provide critical information.
On June 5, President Trump told Congress of his plans to demote the acting inspector general and install a new one. Earlier this month, he did just that.
This should worry every American.
When a president changes or removes inspectors general for asking difficult questions and conducting oversight that might lead to uncomfortable findings, they no longer are taxpayers' watchdogs. They transform into presidential lapdogs.
Inspectors general must be independent to provide fair and objective analysis of their agency's operations. They are the taxpayers' representatives inside federal agencies, providing crucial transparency and information to the administration, Congress and ultimately, the American people about how the agency is doing.
That necessarily includes reviewing controversial issues, like in this case, the shuttering of the Department of Education. It also includes occasionally ruffling feathers with agency leadership, many of whom bristle at independent oversight assessing their office's performance.
Inspectors general are a unique and very positive feature of the American federal system.
As the chair of the Council of Inspectors General, I hosted delegations from numerous foreign countries to discuss the system and how it adds value for the American people. These delegations marveled at America's inspector general system and passionately inquired how they could implement such a robust accountability mechanism in their countries.
A perfect example of inspector general effectiveness is 'Operation Gold Rush,' the largest health care fraud bust in U.S. history led by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. After a two-year investigation, 19 people were charged with multiple crimes related to an alleged $10.6 billion Medicare fraud scheme.
The demotion of an acting Department of Education inspector general under these circumstances eviscerates the entire inspector general construct. It is wholly inappropriate for her position to be changed for doing her job as required under the Inspector General Act and as Americans have come to expect.
This has nothing to do with how someone views the specific issues of the Department of Education and whether it should be closed.
As an inspector general appointed by President Trump who dedicated my career to fighting waste, fraud and abuse and protecting taxpayers' dollars, I can certainly appreciate the impulse to cut government bloat and inefficiency. The Department of Education is not immune to such problems.
To the contrary, the problem with this removal is that it is clearly retaliation for conducting legitimate oversight. It will not only impact the oversight at the Department of Education; it will likely undermine the entire inspector general community.
Could you blame an inspector general for thinking twice about initiating a sensitive evaluation or investigation when they know the president could fire them simply for doing their jobs? Could you blame them for hesitating to investigate a senior Trump appointee when they have the proverbial sword of Damocles hanging over their heads?
This chilling effect should be a cause for concern nationwide. Regardless of whether someone agrees or disagrees with President Trump, all of us should want oversight that is without fear or favor — namely, fair, objective and independent oversight that helps the federal government perform better.
Inspectors general must be allowed to do their jobs, including asking hard questions, examining sensitive initiatives and pushing back on agencies' obfuscations. Anything less should raise major alarm bells for the American people.
Mark Lee Greenblatt is a former inspector general of the U.S. Department of the Interior and chair of the Council of Inspectors General, as well as the author of ' Valor: Unsung Heroes from Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Home Front.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Los Angeles Times
13 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Hong Kong police offer rewards for tips leading to the arrest of 19 overseas activists
HONG KONG — Hong Kong police announced rewards for information leading to the arrest of 19 overseas-based activists for their roles in what they called a subversive organization abroad, accusing them of violating a national security law imposed by Beijing. Police said in a statement Friday that the group, Hong Kong Parliament, aimed to promote self-determination and establish a 'Hong Kong constitution,' alleging it was using illegal means to overthrow and undermine China's fundamental system or usurp the institutions in power in Hong Kong or Beijing. At the request of the police, the city's court issued arrest warrants for activists Elmer Yuen, Johnny Fok, Tony Choi, Victor Ho, Keung Ka-wai and 14 others. They are alleged to have organized or participated in an election abroad for the Hong Kong Parliament, as well as setting up or becoming members of the group. According to a Facebook statement by the group on June 30, its election drew some 15,700 valid votes through mobile app and online voting systems. It said the candidates and elected members came from various regions, including Taiwan, Thailand, Australia, the U.S., Canada and Britain. While the group calls itself Hong Kong Parliament, its electoral organizing committee was founded in Canada and its influence is limited. Police already offered 1 million Hong Kong dollars, or about $127,400, for information leading to the arrest of Yuen, Ho, Fok and Choi when previous arrest warrants were issued against them. For the other 15, rewards of 200,000 Hong Kong dollars were offered, and residents were urged to provide information about the case or the people. 'The investigation is still ongoing. If necessary, police will offer bounties to hunt down more suspects in the case,' police said. They also called on the wanted activists to stop their activities, saying that they hoped they 'will take this opportunity to return to Hong Kong and turn themselves in, rather than making more mistakes.' Yuen said in a Facebook Live broadcast that the election was not quite successful in drawing active participation, and that the police campaign would help the group rally support for the resistance movement. 'It helps us with a lot of advertising,' Yuen said. During the live chat with Yuen, Sasha Gong, another activist targeted by the bounties, accused Hong Kong of becoming a police state. She said she is a U.S. citizen and would report her case to the American authorities and lawmakers. Over the last two years, Hong Kong authorities have issued arrest warrants for various activists based overseas, including former pro-democracy lawmakers Nathan Law and Ted Hui. Authorities also canceled the passports of some of them under a recent security law introduced to the city last year. The moves against overseas-based activists have drawn criticism from foreign governments, especially given the former British colony was promised that its Western-style civil liberties and semi-autonomy would be kept intact for at least 50 years when it returned to Chinese rule in 1997. U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said in a joint statement that the warrants and bounties on people living in Britain are 'another example of transnational repression,' and that the act encourages reckless behavior on U.K. soil. In March, the United States sanctioned six Chinese and Hong Kong officials who it alleged were involved in 'transnational repression' and acts that threaten to further erode the city's autonomy. Beijing and Hong Kong contend that the national security laws were necessary for the city's stability. Hong Kong police have maintained that the Beijing-imposed law applies to permanent residents in Hong Kong who violate it abroad. In retaliation for the U.S. move, China in April said it would sanction American officials, lawmakers and leaders of nongovernmental organizations who it says have 'performed poorly' on Hong Kong issues. Leung writes for the Associated Press.

Los Angeles Times
13 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit against Chicago ‘sanctuary' laws
CHICAGO — A judge in Illinois dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit Friday that sought to disrupt limits Chicago imposes on cooperation between federal immigration agents and local police. The lawsuit, filed in February, alleged that so-called sanctuary laws in the nation's third-largest city 'thwart' federal efforts to enforce immigration laws. It argued that local laws run counter to federal laws by restricting 'local governments from sharing immigration information with federal law enforcement officials' and preventing immigration agents from identifying 'individuals who may be subject to removal.' Judge Lindsay Jenkins of the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants' motion for dismissal. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said that he was pleased with the decision and that the city is safer when police focus on the needs of Chicagoans. 'This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The City cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration's reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,' he said in a statement. Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, welcomed the ruling, saying in a social media post, 'Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.' The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security and did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment. The administration has filed a series of lawsuits targeting state or city policies it sees as interfering with immigration enforcement, including those in Los Angeles, New York City, Denver and Rochester, N.Y. It sued four New Jersey cities in May. Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades and has beefed up its laws several times, including during President Trump's first term in 2017. That same year, then-Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed more statewide sanctuary protections into law, putting him at odds with his party. There is no official definition for sanctuary policies or sanctuary cities. The terms generally describe limits on local cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE enforces U.S. immigration laws nationwide but sometimes seeks state and local help.


USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
Ghislaine Maxwell lawyer says he hopes President Trump pardons her
Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyer said July 25 that he is hoping that President Donald Trump pardons the former British socialite for sex trafficking crimes she was convicted of in connection with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. David Markus spoke to reporters after his client's second day of interviews with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in Tallahassee, Florida, near where Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence for trafficking a minor to Epstein for sexual abuse. Asked about Trump's comments earlier in the day about a potential pardon, Markus told reporters, "We haven't spoken to the president or anybody about a pardon just yet.' More: How Trump and 'terrific guy' Jeffrey Epstein's party boy friendship ended badly But, Markus said, 'The president this morning said he had the power to do so. We hope he exercises that power in the right and just way." When Trump was asked earlier Friday if he has considered pardoning Maxwell, he said no. "I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about," Trump told reporters. "I certainly can't talk about pardons now." More: Trump says he hasn't considered pardoning Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell Maxwell was Epstein's girlfriend for years and has been accused of recruiting minors for him to have sex with. Her lengthy relationship with Epstein and alleged role in his efforts to sexually target minor girls raises the question of whether Maxwell knows of others who could have been involved in a sex-trafficking ring with Epstein. Epstein committed suicide in prison in 2019 while awaiting his own federal trial on related sex trafficking charges, leaving Maxwell as potentially the best remaining source for uncovering secrets about people who may have colluded with him. Maxwell maintains her innocence and is appealing her 2021 sex-trafficking conviction. Markus did not return calls and messages seeking comment on whether he has formally asked the Trump administration for a pardon for Maxwell. 'DOJ will hear what she has to say' Maxwell's meetings with Blanche, the No. 2 official in the Justice Department, came amid calls from the public and a bipartisan group of lawmakers for DOJ to release more information it has in its possession about Epstein's clients. The public outcry was prompted by announcements by the Justice Department and FBI earlier this month that they won't be releasing their Epstein-related files, despite promising to do so. Pressure has mounted since then for the administration to reconsider, including from members of Trump's own base who were bitterly disappointed by the announcement. That was especially the case after the Wall Street Journal disclosed that Attorney General Pam Bondi notified Trump in May that his name had appeared 'multiple times' in the files. Trump has since denied being told that by Bondi. Trump has also denied a Journal report that he wrote a birthday message to Epstein that included a drawing of a naked woman and he has sued the newspaper for defamation. The fact that Blanche was previously Trump's personal defense lawyer has also ratcheted up concerns about his − and the Department of Justice's − motivations in wanting to talk to Maxwell. Blanche said he wanted to meet with Maxwell to find out what more she can say about her dealings with Epstein. In a July 22 social media post, Blanche said that if 'Ghislaine Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say.' Rep. Dan Goldman, D-New York, however, suggested that Blanche's effort was to protect Trump 'by tacitly floating a pardon for Maxwell in return for information that politically benefits President Trump.' Maxwell is also reportedly set to meet on Aug 11. with congressional lawmakers after the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed her on July 23. 'I'll give you a list' of others who partied with Epstein: Trump Trump has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein but attended parties with him during the 1990s and repeatedly flew on his private jet. Trump later distanced himself from the well-connected financier and said he banned him from his Mar-a-Lago club and residence in Palm Beach, Fla. On July 25, as he was preparing to fly to Scotland, Trump told reporters that they should focus instead on other political leaders and hedge fund managers who spent more time with Epstein. "I'll give you a list," Trump said. 'Don't talk about Trump' On his arrival in Scotland, Trump again was asked about Maxwell, and said, 'I really have nothing to say about it.' 'She is being talked to by a very smart man, by a very good man, Todd Blanche, and I don't know anything about the conversation. I haven't really been following it,' Trump told reporters. He said 'a lot of people are asking me about pardons' and that, 'Todd will come back with whatever he's got. You're making a very big thing over something that's not a big thing.' 'If you're going to talk about that, talk about Clinton,' Trump said, in reference to former President Bill Clinton, who has been linked to Epstein but has denied wrongdoing. 'Talk about all of his friends,' Trump said of Epstein. 'Talk about the hedge fund guys that were with him all the time. Don't talk about Trump.' Contributing: Aysha Bagchi; Bart Jansen, USA TODAY