Government Accountability Office

Government Accountability Office
U.S. Government · Public domain · source
Name	Government Accountability Office
Formed	1921
Predecessor	General Accounting Office
Jurisdiction	United States federal government
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Chief1 name	Comptroller General
Parent department	Legislative Branch

Contents

Government Accountability Office The Government Accountability Office is an independent agency of the United States Congress that provides auditing, evaluation, and investigative services to support legislative oversight of federal programs and expenditures. Created to assist congressional committees and members, it delivers reports, testimony, and legal opinions that inform debates in the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and their committees such as the House Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. GAO products influence decision-making in federal departments like the Department of Defense, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Homeland Security and affect programs enacted under statutes such as the Social Security Act and the Hyperion Act.

History

The agency traces its origins to the General Accounting Office established by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 during the presidency of Warren G. Harding to improve fiscal accountability after World War I and the Treaty of Versailles reparations debates. Throughout the Great Depression and World War II, GAO conducted audits relevant to the United States Treasury Department and wartime procurement involving contractors like DuPont and General Motors. During the Cold War, GAO expanded oversight of defense programs tied to the Department of Defense and events such as the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Reforms in the late 20th century, including responses to scandals linked to agencies like the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, culminated in a 2004 name change and mission refinement under leadership connected to congressional reforms after the Watergate scandal.

GAO is led by the Comptroller General of the United States, appointed through a process involving the United States Congress and serving a fixed term; notable Comptrollers have interacted with leaders such as John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. The office is organized into mission teams and offices that focus on sectors including national security, healthcare, tax policy, and technology, paralleling oversight domains of committees like the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee. Senior executives collaborate with legal counsel experienced in statutes such as the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and regulatory frameworks overseen by agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission. GAO’s regional and field offices interface with local entities including the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and state agencies in capitals such as Sacramento and Austin.

GAO conducts financial audits, performance evaluations, legal opinions, and program reviews that serve members of Congress, committees, and subcommittees including the Joint Committee on Taxation. Its work covers federal spending in programs administered by entities such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Social Security Administration, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. GAO issues recommendations affecting legislation like the Affordable Care Act and oversight tied to international agreements such as the North Atlantic Treaty. It also supports investigations into procurement by contractors like Lockheed Martin and Boeing and compliance with statutes including the Freedom of Information Act adjudicated in courts like the United States Supreme Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

GAO employs audit standards aligned with frameworks from the Government Auditing Standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board and uses methodologies similar to evaluations by the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget. Investigations draw on subpoena authority in coordination with committees such as the House Committee on Appropriations and may examine transactions involving entities like the Export-Import Bank of the United States or law enforcement actions tied to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. GAO auditors analyze financial statements prepared under guidance from the Financial Accounting Standards Board and consult legal precedents from cases such as United States v. Nixon when issuing legal opinions. The process culminates in reports, briefings to the Congressional Research Service and testimony before hearings convened by panels including the Senate Finance Committee.

GAO reports have influenced policy decisions on defense procurement, healthcare reimbursement, and disaster response after events such as Hurricane Katrina and the September 11 attacks. Its recommendations have led to statutory changes involving the Federal Aviation Administration and regulatory adjustments enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Education. GAO’s high-profile reviews have shaped oversight of financial crises involving institutions like Lehman Brothers and regulatory reforms under leaders such as Barack Obama and George W. Bush. Congressional adoption of GAO recommendations has affected budget resolutions in the Congressional Budget Office and appropriations enacted by the United States Congress.

GAO has faced criticism over perceived bias from members of Congress aligned with parties led by figures such as Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell when audits intersect with politically sensitive programs like tax policy administered by the Internal Revenue Service. Debates have arisen over GAO’s role in intelligence oversight tied to agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency and classified programs reviewed under statutes such as the National Security Act of 1947. Critics including think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and the Brookings Institution have argued about methodological choices compared to reports from the Rand Corporation and the Urban Institute. Legal challenges in federal courts, including filings in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, have contested GAO reports involving contractors like Microsoft and Amazon (company), prompting discussions about transparency, independence, and accountability.