HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.crs/govdczh0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
%Fnw C~l rES .rh$e
December 9, 2020
Legislative Proposals Related to the Removal of Inspectors
General in the 116th Congress
The role of inspectors general (IGs) within the federal
government is an issue of perennial interest to Congress. In
particular, removal protections for IGs have drawn frequent
attention. Proposals to adjust the requirements and
procedures for IG removal received increased attention in
2020, especially after President Donald Trump removed
two Senate-confirmed IGs and replaced two acting IGs.
This In Focus describes the current removal procedure
under the Inspector General Act (IG Act; 5 U.S.C. Appx.)
and then briefly summarizes legislation introduced during
the 116th Congress that would change this procedure. While
policy experts and others have offered other proposals, this
In Focus does not discuss those proposals.
The removal procedure for presidentially appointed IGs is
found in Section 3(b) of the IG Act. The section reads
An Inspector General may be removed from office
by the President. If an Inspector General is removed
from office or is transferred to another position or
location within an establishment, the President shall
communicate in writing the reasons for any such
removal or transfer to both Houses of Congress, not
later than 30 days before the removal or transfer.
Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a personnel
action otherwise authorized by law, other than
transfer or removal.
For the inspectors general of designated federal entities
(DFEs), which are listed in Section 8G(2) of the IG Act, the
same notice rule applies, except that the head of the DFE,
rather than the President, appoints and removes the IG. For
DFEs headed by boards, committees, or commissions,
removal requires the written concurrence of two-thirds of
the members. The IG for the U.S. Postal Service may be
removed only with agreement of seven out of nine postal
governors and only for cause, which is not further
defined.
The 30-day notice requirement was established under the
Inspector General Reform Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-409).
Previously, the President (or head of a DFE) was required
to communicate the reasons for any [IG] removal to both
Houses of Congress but not to provide advance notice.
A more detailed discussion of the current removal
framework can be found in CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10476,
Presidential Removal ofIGs Under the Inspector General
Act, by Todd Garvey.
There have been at least nine distinct proposals in the 116th
Congress to alter the removal procedure for IGs. Where
substantially similar legislation was introduced on multiple
occasions, those bills are discussed together. Unless
otherwise stated, provisions apply to presidentially
appointed and DFE IGs governed by the IG Act.
666 an S.: 664)
This legislation would allow for removal of IGs only for
permanent incapacity, inefficiency, neglect of duty,
malfeasance, or conviction of a felony or conduct involving
moral turpitude. The current 30-day written notice
requirement is also retained by this legislation.
The bills would also establish seven-year terms for IGs.
(Currently IGs have no set terms under the IG Act.)
Individuals would be eligible to serve more than one term,
and presidentially appointed IGs could hold over in their
positions for up to one year or until a successor is
confirmed, whichever comes first.
('nsp rG r 0epes. Ac' ( :?S4)
This legislation would establish that IGs may be removed
only for the following reasons and with documentary
support: permanent incapacity, neglect of duty,
malfeasance, conviction of a felony or conduct involving
moral turpitude, knowing violation of a law or regulation,
gross mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of
authority, and inefficiency.
The legislation would explicitly require that the
documentation associated with the cause for removal be
included in the written notice provided to Congress.
20 20 (' 3994)
S. 3994 would amend the current 30-day notice provision to
require that the President or head of a DFE removing an IG
provide a substantive rationale, including detailed and
case-specific reasons for that action, including specific
information about any open or completed inquiry into the
IG that is related to the removal action.
The bill would allow for an IG to be placed on non-duty
status if written notice is provided to Congress 15 days in
advance at any time except when the President or DFE has
provided notice that an IG will be removed. The legislation
would allow for an IG to be placed on non-duty status with
concurrent (rather than advance) notice to Congress if it is
determined that the IG's continued presence in the
\\\\\
\ \N \ \I \M,\ \\ \ \ Q\\ \\\ \\\](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.crs/govdczh0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)