Senator questions OMB's efforts to shutter federal websites

A senator dissatisfied with the Obama administration’s metrics on its progress to shutter federal websites as part of a wider anti-waste campaign is getting an explanation as to why the numbers don’t always tell the whole picture.

In a June 7 letter to the Congressional Research Service, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) asked for a review of the White House’s progress on the Campaign to Cut Waste initiative. The effort expands on an executive order that calls on the administration to slash government waste, including reducing the number of federal websites with 50 percent within a year

A year following the campaign kickoff, that goal is far from being accomplished, Coburn said in his letter. The White House’s own numbers at the time of the campaign launch indicated there were 1,758 websites within the dot-gov domain. Twelve months later, CRS’ status update showed a decrease of roughly 300 websites, “at least 579 short of reaching their goal of cutting the number of websites in half,” Coburn said.

In a response to Coburn, the CRS summarized the Office of Management and Budget's accomplishments with the anti-waste campaign but said the analysis was based on publicly available information on the Internet and therefore does not necessarily contain all the information and events that had occurred.

For example, the executive order directs the vice president to convene regularly with the OMB head to discuss improvements made under the anti-waste campaign. However, a website that lists those meetings may not always include all instances they occurred, CRS explained.

CRS also noted many documents once available to the general public are now password protected by OMB’s “MAX” system, which only executive branch employees can access. 

Additionally, tracking the adoption of administrative efforts may prove difficult if there are no statutory requirements for certain types of transparency or reporting, CRS added. The anti-waste effort itself isn’t a statue, CRS said, but “rather, it could be characterized as an administrative effort that follows from more general duties and responsibilities under law and the use of available discretion by the president, [OMB] and agencies.”

About the Author

Camille Tuutti is a former FCW staff writer who covered federal oversight and the workforce.

Rising Stars

Meet 21 early-career leaders who are doing great things in federal IT.

Featured

  • SEC Chairman Jay Clayton

    SEC owns up to 2016 breach

    A key database of financial information was breached in 2016, possibly in support of insider trading, said the Securities and Exchange Commission.

  • Image from Shutterstock.com

    DOD looks to get aggressive about cloud adoption

    Defense leaders and Congress are looking to encourage more aggressive cloud policies and prod reluctant agencies to embrace experimentation and risk-taking.

  • Shutterstock / Pictofigo

    The next big thing in IT procurement

    Steve Kelman talks to the agencies that have embraced tech demos in their acquisition efforts -- and urges others in government to give it a try.

  • broken lock

    DHS bans Kaspersky from federal systems

    The Department of Homeland Security banned the Russian cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab’s products from federal agencies in a new binding operational directive.

  • man planning layoffs

    USDA looks to cut CIOs as part of reorg

    The Department of Agriculture is looking to cut down on the number of agency CIOs in the name of efficiency and better communication across mission areas.

  • What's next for agency cyber efforts?

    Ninety days after the Trump administration's executive order, FCW sat down with agency cyber leaders to discuss what’s changing.

Reader comments

Thu, Jul 5, 2012 Disgusted Taxpayer Any Town, USA

The worst part are the government websites (and TV ads!!!) which are intended to "sell" taxpayers on expensive, unnecessary, over-reaching, and highly unpopular government policies and programs. The very last thing we should be funding is a brainwashing campaign by the government to try to convince us that a specific program is actually beneficial to us when we already know otherwise (e.g., Obamacare) or to spread masters-of-the-obvious messages (e.g., let's move).

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group