Search Results for: inspector general

WSB-TV: VA hospital paying record malpractice settlements

Read the full story: WSB-TV

 

“It’s not just harming the taxpayers, they’re harming public health,” said Daniel Epstein, from the D.C. based watchdog group “Cause of Action.” He called for an Inspector General’s audit when Channel 2 showed him VA malpractice costs soared to a 10-year high in 2012 to nearly $100 million.

 

The highest payout in 2012 went to Marine Vet Christopher Ellison. He was awarded a $17 million judgment. He had a stroke following a dental procedure. He is now paralyzed

 

“I think this sounds like a management problem. This sounds like a systemic problem at the agency,” said Epstein.

Washington Post: Senators call for resignation of embattled Homeland Security auditor

Read the full story here: Washington Post

The government watchdog group Cause of Action wrote to Obama in July asking him to fire Edwards. The organization applauded Wednesday’s bipartisan call for the inspector general’s resignation.

 

“The complete lack of transparency and accountability at [the Department of Homeland Security] must come to an end,” said Cause of Action director Dan Epstein. “We hope these concerns will be taken seriously and that steps are taken to remove Edwards from his position.”

 

Statement: Cause of Action on Deputy IG Charles Edwards stonewalling Congress

Cause of Action, a government accountability group which has investigated Department of Homeland Security Deputy Inspector General (IG) Charles Edwards, issued the following response to the letter sent by Chairman McCaskill and Ranking Member Johnson to IG Edwards regarding his delay in providing information related to the Senate’s investigation.

Executive Director Dan Epstein:

“The lack of transparency by and failure of IG Edwards to provide documents to Cause of Action pertaining to allegations of misconduct and abuse drove us to sue DHS for records. But now DHS has taken a new and alarming stance in their affront to transparency: denying both the public’s access to documents as well as stonewalling Congress. Edwards’ failure has now extended beyond a refusal to provide documents; six members of his staff are refusing to conduct interviews with congressional investigators. IG Edwards must be held accountable for his alleged misconduct and his deliberate and continued objection to the public’s right to know about it.”

 

Forbes: Dan Epstein: Obamacare’s Implementation Poses Grave, But Largely Unknown Risks For Beneficiaries

Obamacare’s Implementation Poses Grave, But Largely Unknown Risks For Beneficiaries

By Dan Epstein        September 30, 2013

Many of us are concerned and anxious because we don’t know what the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, will mean for our personal health care, our families and our pocketbooks as enrollment commences October 1.  The American people are likely unaware of the risks they face in disclosing their personal medical and financial information to strangers through the enrollment programs and have not been well informed of the potential for state entities to violate federal laws during the implementation of the ACA.

In an aggressive effort to recruit Americans into the ACA, the federal government has implemented “Navigator” and “Assister” programs.  These programs lack not just training and oversight, but also background checks, fingerprinting or other screening that should be required prior to obtaining Americans’ social security numbers, addresses, and personal medical information.  Recognizing these security concerns, thirteen Attorneys General wrote to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on August 14, 2013 warning that “…this is a privacy disaster waiting to happen.”  On September 18, 2013, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee issued a troubling report detailing how navigators and assisters not only threaten to harm consumer privacy and misuse consumer data but are also being carried out by individuals who have not been subject to background checks or other certifications.  Concerned about the potential liabilities associated with these navigator and assister programs, entities in Ohio, Florida, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah and West Virginia have already voluntarily returned federal navigator grant money.

But another area of concern that has not yet received much attention is the risk of waste, fraud and abuse of the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars states are receiving to run their exchanges or marketplaces.  For example, California has received $910 million; New York, $369 million; and Hawaii, $205 million.  And this is just the beginning.  Additional funds will likely be pumped into the system if the navigators and assisters are unable to meet their enrollment “quotas.”   Entities within states should be on high alert regarding their risk of violating laws as implementation of the ACA occurs.  For example, using any false writings or documents known to be materially fictitious, concealing a material fact, or making any fraudulent or fictitious statements to a government representative about the use of grant funds are violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1001.  Further, under OMB Circular A-87, state and local entities that receive federal funding are required to adequately document all costs associated with administering the grant funds. If a recipient falsely certifies that they are conforming to this regulation, or if they do not properly document federal grant funds that are being primarily utilized for state programs, they may be subject to liability under both the OMB Circular A-87 and the False Claims Act. An Inspector General found that the IRS largely failed to account for and report these costs associated with implementing ACA. If our federal agencies are failing at this oversight, it follows that states cannot be adequately equipped, aware, or prepared to conduct oversight over implementation of the ACA, setting these state exchanges up for failure.

Cause of Action (CoA) is concerned about the potential for waste, fraud and abuse of these funds given to state entities.  This is why we have sent liability alert letters to more than 35 Governors thus far, and the District of Columbia, alerting them to the risks involved with the unintended misuse and waste of the ACA grant funds.  Given the hundreds of millions of federal taxpayer dollars at stake, taxpayers should hold their elected representatives accountable for how their money is being spent.

The grim reality is that the Affordable Care Act is deceptively complex and non-transparent.  Americans need to be cautious about enrolling in Obamacare (i.e., providing personal, medical and financial information to unchecked strangers), and mindful of the potential for misuse of taxpayer funds given the myriad, untested liability pitfalls and the vast sums of taxpayer money at stake.  At a minimum, the American people deserve to have our elected representatives and federal government provide proper oversight of the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

 

Dan Epstein is the executive director of Cause of Action, a non-profit, nonpartisan government accountability organization.

 

Washington Post cites our GreenTech Report

GreenTech fits pattern of investment that has made big profits for Terry McAuliffe

By  and , Published: September 21

The pitches to potential investors in a new electric-car company have been unabashed about its promise: It will enjoy “billions” in government subsidies and tax credits, will rise to a dominant position in the U.S. electric-car industry and, perhaps most critically, has a politically connected founder with the savvy to make it all happen.

That founder, Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe (D), is listed in a recent confidential memorandum to prospective investors as GreenTech Automotive’s “chairman emeritus.” The 70-page document includes photographs and references to McAuliffe’s close ties to former president Bill Clinton. It recounts his political pedigree in detail, from serving as finance director for Jimmy Carter’s 1980 presidential reelection campaign to breaking fundraising records for the Democratic Party and chairing Hillary Rodham Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

A section dedicated to GreenTech’s public relations efforts cites only one specific initiative: McAuliffe’s past promotion of electric vehicles on “national television news programs.”

Dated March 12, the previously undisclosed prospectus, provided to The Washington Post by the nonprofit watchdog group Cause of Action, notes that McAuliffe is “currently the largest individual shareholder” of GreenTech.

The prospectus, along with other documents reviewed by The Post, shows how GreenTech fits into a pattern of investments in which McAuliffe has used government programs, political connections and access to wealthy investors of both parties in pursuit of big profits for himself.

That formula has made McAuliffe a millionaire many times over, paving the way for a long list of business ventures, including his law firm, from which he resigned in the 1990s after profiting — along with his partners — from fees paid by domestic and foreign clients seeking results from the federal government.

A review of McAuliffe’s business history shows him often coming out ahead personally, even if some investments fail or become embroiled in controversy.

One high-profile example involved Global Crossing, a telecommunications firm whose demise in the 1990s cost investors billions of dollars. McAuliffe was working as a consultant to Global Crossing founder Gary Winnick, a prolific political donor, and became an investor in the company. McAuliffe sold some of his Global Crossing shares before the stock price plummeted and made an estimated $8 million before the company went sour.

Few of McAuliffe’s investments have been as ambitious as GreenTech, which the Democrat pointed to when he launched his candidacy as evidence of his entrepreneurial skill.

But in April, McAuliffe sought to distance himself from GreenTech. He issued a surprise statement saying that he had resigned as chairman that previous December — an announcement that came amid growing questions about GreenTech’s ambitious promises and its conduct in soliciting investors through a special visa program.

Nevertheless, the company’s confidential March memo implies to investors that he would remain involved. Were McAuliffe to win his race for governor, the memo says, he would “resign all positions with [GreenTech] and appoint a representative to vote his shares.”

McAuliffe’s campaign declined to make him available for an interview. Spokesman Josh Schwerin said in an e-mail that the memo “appears to have been written long after Terry resigned and he never saw or approved of this document. Terry left the company in early December and since then has had no official role and no responsibilities. Any suggestion to the contrary is simply not correct.”

GreenTech, in an e-mailed statement, said that McAuliffe was “no longer involved in the day-to-day operations of the company” and that his emeritus title “recognizes his previous contributions to the board’s efforts.” The firm declined to comment on the 70-page “Private Placement Memorandum,”saying that securities counsel advised that it “may not comment directly” on the memo “as these are communications with prospective investors that contain confidential nonpublic information about the company.”

Since the time McAuliffe says he resigned as chairman, GreenTech has become the focus of scrutiny in Washington.

The Securities and Exchange Commission launched an investigation this year looking in part at the firm’s claims to potential investors interested in using the visa program, known as EB-5. The SEC has subpoenaed documents from GreenTech and a sister company, Gulf Coast Funds Management, which is led by Anthony Rodham, brother of Hillary Clinton. Both firms have said they are cooperating.

It is not known precisely what the SEC is investigating. But agency investigators have examined possible fraud among other participants in the visa program, in which foreign investors pay at least $500,000 to companies to gain access to permanent U.S. residency for themselves and their families.

The program requires that the investments create jobs. But critics say the program is loosely regulated, allowing U.S. companies to profit from foreign payments and fees sometimes with little job creation to show for it. In the meantime, these critics say, investors gain entry to the United States, even if they have little direct involvement in the fate of the companies they have ostensibly invested in.

GreenTech has also become a focal point in an increasingly vitriolic dispute within the Department of Homeland Security, where several career employees have raised concerns about favoritism shown to the firm and about whether there has been sufficient scrutiny of foreign nationals whose investments in GreenTech have entitled them to special immigrant visas.

The courtship of Chinese investors by McAuliffe and his partners has already proved fruitful — dozens of investors have contributed tens of millions of dollars to the effort. The March prospectus says that the company has received about $46 million from EB-5 investors, with a goal of $60 million.

The investments have led to little in the way of making cars. In Tunica County, Miss., where a mostly vacant lot sits where GreenTech plans to build a plant, local officials remain hopeful but a bit nervous.

“At this point, it sounds like they’re selling visas,” said state Rep. Gene Alday (R), whose district includes Tunica County.

Special treatment alleged

In Washington, GreenTech’s aggressive pursuit of the special investor visas has prompted complaints by career immigration service staffers who say top managers have given the firm and other politically connected applicants special treatment.

The complaints about Department of Homeland Security managers, now under investigation by the department’s inspector general, have stalled the nomination of the immigration agency’s top official for the No. 2 post at DHS.

Department officials and GreenTech have denied that the company received any favorable treatment. McAuliffe and his partners have complained of repeated delays by the government in approving visa applications, which they said put the project at risk of losing much-needed capital.

But eight career employees of the division have requested “protected status” as whistleblowers so they can make their “preferential treatment” case to members of Congress. Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) have reviewed the employee complaints and say they are concerned. Many of the whistleblowers cite alleged favors provided to McAuliffe’s company — among others — to support their claim.

“It’s not often that so many whistleblowers come forward on the same subject, with similar concerns,” Grassley said Friday. “It shows that this isn’t just one person who has a gripe with their boss, but rather fundamental concerns by several career civil servants about political favors and national security.”

Some whistleblowers claimed that top managers ignored or waved off warnings that some GreenTech investors from China merited extra scrutiny before being granted immigrant visas.

Whistleblowers who talked with Senate staff in the past two weeks said their concerns about GreenTech visas were heightened late last year when they learned that some company officials had previously been affiliated with a Chinese firm that had been the subject of a classified government inquiry about national security risks. Ties with the previous firm were severed before McAuliffe joined the newly formed company as a co-founder.

A DHS official familiar with the matter rejected the employee claims, saying staff concerns were heeded. Holds were placed on several GreenTech applicants and were removed “only after further checks were made in coordination with other law enforcement agencies,” said the official, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the matter.

Self-described entrepreneur

McAuliffe, 56, has long described himself as an entrepreneur, pegging his start to a driveway-sealing business he launched as a precocious 14-year-old in Syracuse, N.Y.

In the 1980s, McAuliffe was the chairman of a small financial institution, the Federal City Bank of Washington, which made loans to several top Democratic Party leaders. It was cited by regulators in the early 1990s for unsound banking practices and then merged with another bank.

After Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992, federal investigators examined a $375,000 fee paid to McAuliffe in case his services were needed to help secure a lease of office space from the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. Ultimately, the payment was deemed improper. McAuliffe was not accused of any wrongdoing, but the leasing company — Prudential Insurance — was required to pay a fine.

In the 1990s, McAuliffe launched what might be his most lucrative and substantive business, American Heritage Homes, with Carl H. Lindner Jr., who headed Chiquita Brands International. During this period, the Clinton administration initiated a favorable policy on a complex banana tariff issue, and Lindner, a longtime GOP donor, stepped up his donations to Democrats, staying overnight as Clinton’s guest in the Lincoln Bedroom.

In 1999, the Labor Department reviewed a real estate venture involving McAuliffe that used money from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers’ pension fund. The department sued the union, saying the deal was a bad investment for its members. Union officials said the deal ultimately provided profits to the labor group. McAuliffe, who had invested only $100,made millions.

McAuliffe has not disclosed his net worth. His campaign referred to the Virginia financial disclosure form that he was required to submit as a candidate, but the form is vague. He lists, for instance, 25 assets worth a minimum of $250,000 each.

Predictions of jobs

McAuliffe joined GreenTech soon after his failed 2009 bid for Virginia governor.

At the start, company documents predicted the firm would have 25,000 employees in the United States capable of producing 1 million electric cars in 2015-17.

In speeches in Virginia and elsewhere, McAuliffe has offered varying predictions of the jobs that would be created by his company. Several times in 2012, he told reporters that 900 U.S. jobs would be created by the year’s end by GreenTech, which is based in McLean. The firm has produced few, if any, cars, and a statement from the company says it employs “more than 80 full time employees.”

The documents obtained by The Post show that GreenTech’s success depends on government help.

A 2009 prospectus said that billions of dollars in subsidies could potentially be granted by Mississippi to support the plant. The current prospectus estimates the combined value of its local and state government aid in Mississippi to be $25 million. So far, the numbers are much smaller. The state lent GreenTech $3 million under the condition that the firm create 350 jobs by December 2014, according to Mississippi Development Authority spokesman Jeff Rent. Tunica County, using a separate $2 million loan from the state, purchased the land where the company has said it will build the factory.

In an e-mailed statement to The Post, the company said that “market and financial conditions and other current events have led GTA to reexamine our original target market and, therefore, our initial projected capacity needs.”

GreenTech’s struggles have become fodder for Republicans and their allies, who have spent months scouring McAuliffe’s business record. Cause of Action, which provided the confidential investor memo to The Post, received more than $900,000 two years ago from the libertarian-leaning Franklin Center, whose Watchdog.org Web site has been sued by GreenTech for defamation.

McAuliffe put his bipartisan political muscle on display during a star-studded event at the GreenTech site in Mississippi last year with former governor Haley Barbour and Bill Clinton. The event showcased models of the “MyCar,” the golf-cart-like 40-mph vehicles that would be the signature product of GreenTech.

Barbour, in an interview, said he had no regrets. “We felt that if they invested $60 million of hard cash, we’d be willing to take a couple-million-dollar risk,” he said.

Barbour, a McAuliffe friend who left office in 2012 after two terms, said McAuliffe’s role was not a factor in the state’s decision to provide help. “It doesn’t disqualify you to know the governor, but you’ve still got to meet the same standards” as any firm appealing for state development aid, he said.

The confidential 2013 memo to potential investors explained in some detail how McAuliffe’s run for governor would affect his role in the firm.

“Until the election, Mr. McAuliffe will dedicate his full time to the election campaign but will remain as a shareholder of GTA’s Parent,” it says. “If Mr. McAuliffe becomes Governor of Virginia, federal and state law requires that he resign all positions with GTA and appoint a representative to vote his shares of GTA’s Parent.

“On January 7, 2013, the board of directors of GTA assigned to Mr. McAuliffe as Chairman of the Company the duties and responsibilities appropriate for a Chairman Emeritus during the course of his gubernatorial campaign,” the memo added. Describing that job, it says: “The Chairman Emeritus of the Company will have such duties and responsibilities as designated by the Board of Directors from time to time.”

Alice Crites contributed to this report.

Statement: Court Finds Appointment of NLRB’s Lafe Solomon Invalid

In November of 2011, Cause of Action requested an investigation into Mr. Lafe Solomon, the then-acting general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board. Cause of Action has highlighted the conflict of interest concerning Lafe Solomon’s actions in the Boeing case, as well as his engagement in ex-parte communications with a member of the NLRB.   In a June 26, 2013 editorial, Cause of Action explained that “the NLRB’s chief enforcer of unfair labor practices – was himself a recess appointment.”

Dan Epstein, executive director of Cause of Action, offered this response to recent ruling that confirmed that Lafe Solomon’s appointment was invalid:

“U.S. District Judge Benjamin H. Settle’s decision on August 13 that ruled that National Labor Relations Board acting general counsel Lafe Solomon’s appointment was invalid recognizes what the NLRB has failed to acknowledge: that former acting general counsel Lafe Solomon’s authority was questionable and came at an extreme cost to America’s job creators, like Boeing and Wal-Mart.

Worse, because the NLRB’s General Counsel lacks an Inspector General, this decision provides accountability in ways that the Executive Branch and Congress had failed to do.”

Cause of Action Sues TIGTA over Release of Taxpayer Info

Cause of Action filed a lawsuit against the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) for potentially violating the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

TIGTA told Cause of Action in March of this year, in response to a FOIA request, that it could “neither confirm nor deny the existence of records” of communication between the White House and IRS concerning taxpayer information, particularly interactions that were not made pursuant to 6103(g) of the tax code, which authorizes the President to request any individual’s tax return information from the IRS.

Yet, the media reported that TIGTA sent a letter to Senator Charles Grassley July 3, 2013, acknowledging eight instances involving potential unauthorized access or disclosure of tax records belonging to political donors or candidates since 2006.

By revealing to Senator Grassley the existence of these communications, TIGTA has potentially violated FOIA with Cause of Action, therefore we are filing a lawsuit against TIGTA in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

ECF No. 1_Complaint

ECF No. 1-1_Exhibits 1-10 to Complaint

ECF No. 1-2_Civil Cover Sheet

ECF No. 1-3_Summons