Trump Adds New Agency Watchdogs Despite Worries of Independence

The confirmation this week of five Trump-nominated watchdogs has revived concerns about whether enough oversight is taking place inside federal agencies.

Without inspectors general acting independently of the president’s influence, good-government watchers fear the Defense Department, for example, won’t look into whether the $2 billion “Golden Dome” missile defense shield contract was improperly awarded to SpaceX—principally owned by former Special Government Employee Elon Musk—or whether Qatar’s gift of a jet to the US Air Force poses espionage risks.

In both cases, the Defense Department Office of Inspector General said its policy is not to confirm nor deny the status or timeline of ongoing investigations.

“There is a prevailing climate of eroding the safeguards that people have long taken for granted,” said Will Fletcher, president of the Association of Inspectors General. “IGs are only supposed to call balls and strikes and follow the facts wherever they lead.”

Congressional Democrats voiced their worries throughout the confirmation process of the nominees, saying President Donald Trump’s picks appeared to prioritize loyalty to the administration over their independence.

For example, Thomas Bell, Trump’s pick to be IG at the US Department of Health and Human Services, said in his October confirmation hearing that he planned to launch investigations “to support the initiatives” of Trump and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) pushed back with concerns that “traditionally we don’t see opening statements for an IG that is saying, ‘I’m excited to be a cheerleader for the administration. I’m going to be there cheering them all, every step of the way.’”

Democrats also grilled IG nominees John Walk at the US Department of Agriculture and Anthony D’Esposito at the Department of Labor about their alleged fealty to Trump.

Bell, Walk, and D’Esposito were confirmed by the Senate Thursday, along with Platte Moring at the Defense Department and William Kirk at the Small Business Administration.

New Priorities

Inspectors general for 18 federal agencies were removed in January, with Trump citing “changing priorities.” Eight challenged their dismissals, arguing they had been let go without cause. A federal judge ruled in September the firings were illegal, but didn’t order them reinstated.

Now, there are fears Trump is steaming ahead with replacements that will focus on his priorities, rather than the typically independent work of the offices.

At some agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, no nominees have been announced, stoking concerns the White House will staff those offices with acting IGs indefinitely—something Trump did for various federal positions in his first term.

The perceived laxity with IG roles is especially ironic because the Trump administration has made government efficiency such a top priority, said Jon Golinger, democracy advocate at the progressive advocacy group Public Citizen.

“IGs are the quintessential way to scrutinize government contracts that are of concern, or regulatory policy decisions that seem off the mark, and calling them out and potentially saving taxpayers millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars,” Golinger said.

The nominations of alleged allies, along with earlier mass firings, may have a chilling effect on career staff worried “they can be removed as easily as the IGs were if they do their job in a way the administration doesn’t like,” said Kedric Payne, senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit group that focuses mostly on elections.

Long List of Targets

The list of potential investigation targets is long.

Faith Williams, a director at the Project on Government Oversight who tracks federal IGs, cited as examples purported mistakenly canceled contracts due to AI errors at the US Department of Veterans Affairs, a $569 million no-bid contract allegedly awarded by the US Army Corps of Engineers for the Southern border wall, and a data breach at the Social Security Administration that exposed citizens’ personal information, possibly linked to the Department of Government Efficiency.

Senate Democratic staffers told Bloomberg Law they secured an informal commitment from the VA OIG to start an investigation. But they also said they’re concerned IG Cheryl Mason, a Trump nominee confirmed in July, might try to stop it.

The office said it doesn’t confirm or deny ongoing investigations. The Army Corps’ OIG didn’t respond to an interview request. The SSA’s OIG said it’s “currently reviewing issues” related to DOGE, but declined to confirm or deny the existence of any law enforcement investigations.

Joseph Schmitz, a former DOD IG under President George W. Bush, said it’s too soon to judge Trump’s nominees.

“I’ve seen people that on paper might appear to be partisan, and I’ve seen people that on paper might appear to be nonpartisan,” said Schmitz, now distinguished constitutional fellow at The Oversight Project, an offshoot of the Heritage Foundation.

Eyeing Solutions

Some IGs under Trump have taken a more active role. The OIGs at the departments of Education and Treasury said they would look into allegations of DOGE-related violations, and the EPA’s acting watchdog has kept up a busy slate of audits and investigations.

Government oversight specialists say most solutions would have to come from Congress—which, at times, has shown interest in the issue. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced a bill in 2020 that would make it harder for the president to fire an IG.

In January, before the Trump firings, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) launched a bipartisan IG caucus that seeks to ensure independence.

On Dec. 17, the government oversight group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility filed a federal lawsuit in Maryland seeking to stop the White House’s effort to defund the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. CIGIE is an independent federal office that coordinates and supports inspectors general.

A bold solution would be to move IGs out of the agencies and into Congress, Golinger suggested.

“There’s a tension when a person is trying to be independent but is under the same roof as the people they’re investigating,” Golinger said.