Good morning, thank you all for coming. Today, the Subcommittee on the Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia meets to discuss the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) 2005 High-Risk Series.

I am pleased that Comptroller General David Walker and the Office of Management and Budget’s Deputy Director for Management Clay Johnson are with us today. They are both leaders in improving the management and efficiency of federal government operations.

Just yesterday, the Comptroller General testified before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs to discuss GAO’s comprehensive examination of the federal government’s structural base, including programs, policies, and long-term financial outlook. This review dovetails well with GAO’s work on the high-risk list and I commend Comptroller General Walker for initiating this report.

Fifteen years ago, GAO first issued its high-risk series to examine federal programs that are especially vulnerable to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. Over time, GAO expanded their biennial high-risk series to include areas in need of broad transformation in the hopes of improving the effectiveness, accountability, and sustainability of government programs and operations.

Each of the twenty-five programs listed in this year’s high-risk series impact the daily lives of citizens across the country. Many programs are dysfunctional and fail to deliver the intended services to the taxpayer. For example, last year, I chaired a field hearing in Cleveland to examine the Social Security Disability process, which has been on the high risk list since 2003. I was impressed with Social Security Commissioner Jo Anne Barnhart’s commitment to resolving this issue. However, based on the letters I receive from my constituents in Ohio, it appears that progress has been slow.

In other instances, high-risk programs are wasting billions of dollars that could be better used for higher priority programs or cutting the deficit. Needless to say, the high-risk series provides a roadmap for oversight and reform and it should be taken seriously by federal agencies, the administration and Congress.

For instance, in 2001, GAO designated Strategic Human Capital Management as high-risk. Senator Akaka and I are very familiar with the Comptroller General’s expertise on this issue and together we have dedicated time and energy in order to facilitate government-wide human capital improvements. In fact, during my tenure on this subcommittee, we have held sixteen hearings to examine the federal government’s human capital challenges. Furthermore, over the past two-years, seven human capital reform bills, in whole or in part, have become law. This significant accomplishment does not include the human capital reforms enacted specifically for the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.

Clearly, the interest of Congress and the GAO designation of human capital management coupled with the prominence of this issue in the President’s Management Agenda created a confluence of ideas and synergy, which led to the most dramatic civil service reform since 1978.

I believe strongly that this level of scrutiny should be focused on each of the high-risk areas. I would also suggest that the human capital oversight and legislative model could be replicated for other high-risk areas. Understanding that this committee cannot focus on each high-risk area, I will urge my colleagues on the authorizing and appropriations committees to examine ways to improve the performance of these programs and activities within their jurisdictions. In addition, this subcommittee will focus on a few additional high-risk areas during the next couple of years.

Looking more closely at this year’s report, we find that GAO designated four new high-risk areas. They are (1) Establishing Appropriate and Effective Information-Sharing Mechanisms to Improve Homeland Security; (2) DoD’s Approach to Business Transformation; (3) DoD’s Personnel Security Clearance Program; and (4) Management of Interagency Contracting.

While it is troubling when GAO adds new programs to the list, it does not mean that the high-risk designation lasts indefinitely. Fortunately, this year, GAO found sufficient progress to remove the high-risk designation for three specific programs, including the Student Financial Aid program; FAA Financial Management; and Forest Service’s Financial Management.

However, some programs simply cannot break free from their high-risk albatross. In fact, six high-risk areas in this report have been on the list for fifteen years. Clearly, this is not an anniversary worth celebrating. These programs are (1) DoD Supply Chain Management; (2) DoD Weapon System Acquisition; (3) DoE Contract Management; (4) NASA Contract Management; (5) the Medicare program and (6) Collection of Unpaid Taxes.

I am extremely interested in hearing from Mr. Walker why these programs have been on the list for so long, and even more importantly, learning from Mr. Johnson what steps the Administration is taking to improve them.

Effective Congressional oversight and a commitment from the Administration are imperative to enhance the performance of, and instill accountability in, the programs designated as high-risk. As Chairman of the Government Management Subcommittee, I want our witnesses to know that this is the first in a series of high-risk hearings that I will be chairing this Congress.

I thank our witnesses, Comptroller General David Walker and OMB Deputy Director for Management Clay Johnson. I look forward to an in-depth discussion about this year’s high-risk list.