Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Government watchdogs over-emphasize waste but under-stress mission accomplishment, think tank says

Those involved with oversight of the executive branch should do more than simply investigate waste, fraud and abuse, one of the most prominent "good government" think tanks has concluded.

In a report released Tuesday, the Bipartisan Policy Center examined how executive branch agencies review their own operations and how Congress puts fresh eyes on the bureaucracy, analyzed the effectiveness of current practices, and offered recommendations to improve processes.


The report was produced by a collection of former federal officials assembled last fall to offer recommendations on improving the practices of both internal and external oversight.

The report is a follow-up from a study last year hailing the success of the inspector general's pursuit of uncovering abuse and fraud. The new report concludes that while such investigations are a necessary part of executive branch oversight, government watchdogs should also seek to broaden their focus to account for the performance of the agencies.

"While the compliance aspect of these investigative activities has surely been beneficial, the fact remains that most of the government is spending too much time complying with reporting requirements and not enough time accomplishing their missions," the new report concludes. "By shifting the emphasis of oversight to improved performance rather than compliance for compliance's sake, there may be meaningful program improvements that benefit both the federal government and the public."

The report's recommendations include bodies that provide external oversight increasing their focus on an agency's performance goals and more collaboration among both internal and external oversight bodies, in general.

"Effective oversight is multidimensional and entails more than just a compliance component," said Dan Blair, a senior counselor at BPC and former deputy director of the Office of Personnel Management. "It requires a framework that evaluates risk and assesses agency and program performance."


Read More

Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections
US Capitol
US Capitol

Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections

In the run-up to the midterms, President Trump continues to call for nationalizing congressional elections. He has sought to initiate the process through executive orders, such as one proposing to set “a ballot receipt deadline of Election Day for all methods of voting.” The words and spirit of the United States Constitution—the bedrock textualism and originalism of conservative constitutional interpretation—say he can’t nationalize elections.

Unlike some consequential constitutional questions, it’s not a close call.

Keep ReadingShow less
Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

Smoke billows after overnight airstrikes on oil depots on March 8, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

What Is The War Powers Resolution of 1973?

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 is a law enacted by Congress that limits the U.S. president’s ability to wage or escalate military operations overseas. Passed on November 7, 1973 amid the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution reasserts Congress’ constitutional power “to declare war” and “to raise and support Armies.” A key provision of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to submit a report to Congress within 48 hours of military deployment in the absence of an official declaration of war by Congress detailing:

  • The circumstances requiring U.S. forces;
  • The constitutional or legislative justification for the president’s actions;
  • The estimated duration of U.S. involvement in the hostilities.

If Congress does not formally declare war or enact special authorization for continuation of the U.S’ involvement in a conflict within 60 days of the report’s submission, the president must withdraw U.S. troops from the hostilities. If Congress does declare war, the president is instructed under the War Powers Resolution to report to Congress periodically on the status of the hostilities no less than once every 6 months.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors holding signs, including one that says "let the people vote."

Attendees hold signs advocating for voting rights and against the SAVE America Act at a rally to outside the U.S. Capitol on March 18, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Heather Diehl

SAVE America Act Debate Begins; Mullin for DHS Hearing

Both chambers of Congress are in session this week and next. The House will probably function about like it has been - lots of votes (often by voice) on uncontroversial bills; many fewer votes on Republican priority bills. Lots of hearings this week and a few legislator updates.

Committee Meetings

Both chambers have a busy week with 64 total committee meetings scheduled.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who Decides Whether America Goes to War?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Who Decides Whether America Goes to War?

Because taking our country into war has the potential, if not the likelihood, even in modernwarfare, of costing the bodies and lives of American soldiers as well as disrupting the economy, this is an important question.

The Constitution is the guide to answering this question. The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power.

Keep ReadingShow less