Issa calls for federal program sunset commission

A group of independent, nongovernmental experts should be appointed to review every federal program and make recommendations on which ones should be consolidated or eliminated, according to a new policy proposal a top House Republican floated this week.

In an op-ed published Wednesday in Investor's Business Daily, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., proposed creating a federal program sunset commission.

The bipartisan group, composed of outside experts, would be tasked with reviewing the performance of every government program. The commission then would make recommendations to Congress about programs that could be improved, or that deserved to be cut altogether because of poor results. The reviews, Issa said, would be conducted objectively without regard to political constituencies.

"While many of us will continue to disagree with the president's faith in the wisdom of controlling ever more of the American people's resources from Washington, we can at least agree that taxpayers should get the biggest possible bang for their bucks," the lawmaker wrote. "Through the establishment of a nonpartisan, independent commission to evaluate federal programs and eliminate failing and redundant programs, we can begin the long road back to efficient, effective government and fiscal sanity."

Within one year of review, a program determined to be failing would be automatically abolished unless reauthorized by Congress, said Issa, who serves as the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

"Failing federal programs must end, and to achieve this goal Washington needs to change the fundamental incentives facing politicians and special interest groups," he wrote. "While a sunset commission would certainly leave Congress free to reauthorize wasteful programs, it would force the debate into the public square and compel politicians to justify wasteful spending on programs that the independent commission has said are not working."

The commission likely would be created through legislation, said Issa spokesman Frederick Hill.

The Office of Management and Budget did not respond to a request for comment about Issa's plan.

The congressman, who could take over as chairman of the powerful Oversight and Government Reform Committee if Republicans win back the House of Representatives next month, offered relatively few details about how the commission would be structured, or who would appoint its members.

But, one clue about how the commission could work can be found in a failed amendment to the 2009 Government Efficiency, Effectiveness and Performance Improvement Act, which would have created a sunset commission for federal programs.

The amendment, introduced by Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill. and supported by Issa, called for a commission of 12 members, including six appointed by the leaders in the House and six by the Senate. Schock's measure, however, called for the commission to be filled with sitting lawmakers while Issa prefers independent experts.

Schock's proposal garnered the support of Republicans and a few Democrats, but was not included in the final bill that passed the House last year. "Going forward, Rep. Issa is interested in examining this and other ideas for creating a sunset commission to end failing federal programs," Hill said.

The administration has embarked on its own effort to trim the fat in government programs. In February, President Obama proposed terminating or reducing 120 federal programs as part of his fiscal 2011 budget request, for a savings of more than $20 billion.

The budget proposal, which has yet to be enacted, also includes a new initiative to evaluate the performance of certain federal programs. It allocates about $100 million to 17 agencies that submitted proposals for program reviews that address actionable questions, or for enhancing existing assessments.

Agencies that submitted proposals must demonstrate that their fiscal 2011 funding priorities are based on credible empirical evidence, or a plan to collect that evidence. Those agencies also must identify any impediments to rigorous program evaluations.

Proposals that generate results backed up by strong, measurable evidence will receive the most funding in future budgets, the administration said. Additional resources will be allocated for programs with less supportive evidence on the condition they are rigorously evaluated.