House panel says OMB not meeting management mission

Lawmakers shined a spotlight on the Office of Management and Budget Friday, questioning whether the agency lives up to its mission.

Rep. Stephen Horn, R-Calif., chairman of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology, held his annual hearing on OMB to focus attention on the agency's management function.

"I hope to learn whether the 'M' in OMB stands for management or mirage," Horn quipped.

OMB Director Jacob J. Lew didn't deny that his agency is hard-pressed to balance its numerous missions, putting in a plug for increased funding in 2001.

Nonetheless, Lew defended OMB's management capabilities, pointing out that under its direction, agencies have been making measured progress in a number of areas, including financial audits, debt control and procurement reform. He also said federal managers have "changed the way they think" since the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act forced agencies to focus on results.

Lew highlighted the government's successful rollover to the new millennium as an example of OMB's ability to manage huge governmentwide challenges. By contrast, Horn used Y2K as an example of OMB's lack of management savvy, saying the agency should have begun tackling the problem years before it became a crisis.

Jim Turner, D-Texas, the ranking minority member of the subcommittee, argued OMB should take a more active role in the information technology arena. Turner said the executive branch should use the same approach for overall IT management as it did for the Y2K problem-that is, appoint a leader to coordinate governmentwide efforts.

Lew hesitated to support the idea, saying IT efforts should be coordinated on an ongoing basis, unlike the one-shot Y2K effort. Separating IT oversight from OMB would be ineffective, he said, because OMB's control of federal purse strings automatically gives it an important role in IT management.

The subcommittee also addressed the perennial debate over separating the "M" in OMB from the rest of the agency by creating an Office of Federal Management. Here's how this year's witnesses weighed in on the issue:

• Dwight Ink, president emeritus, Institute of Public Administration:
  Yes. "I believe that the needs of the president and the executive branch require a management leadership capacity that cannot be provided by the OMB."
• James C. Miller III, former OMB director and counselor at Citizens for a Sound Economy:
  No. "To get management results you often need the budget folks to pull strings."
• Herbert N. Jasper, fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration:
  Yes. "I'll not take the time to discuss how OMB has fallen short in GPRA implementation because I want to focus on what it has not done at all."
• David Walker, Comptroller General:
  Maybe. "Regardless of where the responsibility for central management leadership is located, integration with budgeting is absolutely critical for progress in government performance and management."