Written by Biloxi
That is a question that should be answered. To recap from yesterday, Inspector General for the Justice Dept., Glenn Fine released his final report on former OJJDP Administrator J. Robert Flores' investigation [Click here to read IG report].. Fine concluded that Flores violated the ethics rules in grant making. As you may recall, Flores steered 55% of $8.4 million dollars of grant money to organizations such as World Golf Foundation, Best Friends Foundation, and so on that had political and religious influences for the Bush Administration. And there is more:
The OIG investigation substantiated the allegation that Flores did not follow appropriate contracting procedures in the hiring of Rene Fonseca as a consultant for OJJDP.
We substantiated the allegation that Flores did not pay for a round of golf he played with an OJJDP grantee until over two years after playing the round. Federal regulations prohibit government employees from accepting from a prohibited source gifts in excess of $20. See Accepting Gifts, 5 CFR 2635.202-204.
And of course, according to ABC News last year, Fine was looking into Flores’ hiring of a Honduran ex-colonel Hector Rene Fonseca who ran for President in Honduras and whom Flores attended church, and was hired through a $450.00 per-day contract. Well, it was revealed yesterday by Fine is that Fonseca was making $281k a year which is a lot more than the $450 per day contract claim.
According to investigators, The department's public integrity section declined to pursue civil or criminal charges against Flores after ethics watchdogs forwarded their findings. Now that investigators won't pursue charges against charges, the question should Congress pursue purjury charges if Flores lied to Congress in his testmony last year? Let's examine:
In December 5, 2007, Flores testified to the Senate committee about the JJDPA [Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act]. Unfortunately, last year, Senator Patrick Leahy wrote a letter to then Attorney General Michael Mukasey on missing documents that were not given and one of the documents were Flores' missing answers to the Senate committee in the 2007 Senate hearing. The full text of Leahy’s letter to Mukasey is available here online.
That is a question that should be answered. To recap from yesterday, Inspector General for the Justice Dept., Glenn Fine released his final report on former OJJDP Administrator J. Robert Flores' investigation [Click here to read IG report].. Fine concluded that Flores violated the ethics rules in grant making. As you may recall, Flores steered 55% of $8.4 million dollars of grant money to organizations such as World Golf Foundation, Best Friends Foundation, and so on that had political and religious influences for the Bush Administration. And there is more:
The OIG investigation substantiated the allegation that Flores did not follow appropriate contracting procedures in the hiring of Rene Fonseca as a consultant for OJJDP.
We substantiated the allegation that Flores did not pay for a round of golf he played with an OJJDP grantee until over two years after playing the round. Federal regulations prohibit government employees from accepting from a prohibited source gifts in excess of $20. See Accepting Gifts, 5 CFR 2635.202-204.
And of course, according to ABC News last year, Fine was looking into Flores’ hiring of a Honduran ex-colonel Hector Rene Fonseca who ran for President in Honduras and whom Flores attended church, and was hired through a $450.00 per-day contract. Well, it was revealed yesterday by Fine is that Fonseca was making $281k a year which is a lot more than the $450 per day contract claim.
According to investigators, The department's public integrity section declined to pursue civil or criminal charges against Flores after ethics watchdogs forwarded their findings. Now that investigators won't pursue charges against charges, the question should Congress pursue purjury charges if Flores lied to Congress in his testmony last year? Let's examine:
In December 5, 2007, Flores testified to the Senate committee about the JJDPA [Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act]. Unfortunately, last year, Senator Patrick Leahy wrote a letter to then Attorney General Michael Mukasey on missing documents that were not given and one of the documents were Flores' missing answers to the Senate committee in the 2007 Senate hearing. The full text of Leahy’s letter to Mukasey is available here online.
In addition, Flores gave inconsistent answers in his testimony to the Oversight Committee hearing last year. Here is one example: the exchange between Rep. Diane Watson and Flores.
On page 46 of the Oversight and Reform Committee hearing
with Flores last year:
Rep. Diane Watson:
Rep. Diane Watson:
I am concerned that you say very little about
integrating minorities, disproportionate minority contact and
improving juvenile detention and the correction centers. Too
many of our youth, African American youth and Hispanic youth
in our city end up in lockups.
I want you to explain to me why you haven't set as a
priority and you have--well, I say you didn't share that with
your staff. You just came up with this set, as I understand.
So how do you explain veering off and putting your own targets in place rather than the criteria of DOJ?
Mr. FLORES. Ma'am, Congresswoman, I would first say a
couple things. Gangs are an incredibly high priority for the
Department and for my office. In Los Angeles, we have had a
long-term relationship with the mayor's office since my
tenure to really focus on gangs. In fact, it has been so
successful it was the model that was recommended by Connie
Rice for the mayor's office to adopt. The last that I know
is that the mayor's office is in the process of funding, to
the tune of $150 million, more or less, the in essence
replication- -
Rep. Diane WATSON. Can I just interrupt you? I am looking at
the list, and I am sure you have that list, and it says
disproportionate minority contact and improved juvenile
detention and correction centers. I made reference to it
when I opened. I don't see it on your list of priorities. I
don't know what you put in place. You said you worked with
the mayor. Is that the mayor of Los Angeles?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, ma'am.
Rep. Diane WATSON. Okay. Well, I don't see it reflected in
your priorities. I am looking at, on the other side of this
paper, your priorities. I think you have the same list that
I have. So can you explain why there is not an emphasis, or
are you referring to something that was already there? These
are different priorities.
This testimony is really crucial to look at because Youth Today exposed a couple of weeks ago news of OJJDP's buried suicide study during the Flores years. Now, under Flores' leadership, a report on Disproportionate Minority Contact was buried. Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) refers to the disproportionate number of minority youth who come into contact with the juvenile justice system.
Also, Shay C Bilchik, former OJJDP Administrator and now Research professor director of the Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University Public Policy Institute, had pointed out a need for a transparent process in the grant decision making in the OJJDP. In Youth Today, Mr. Bilchik said, "If you are going to have credibility with your field, they need to know that you have this peer review process, this independent input on the quality of the applications." He went on to say that "as for decisions made by staff, directors need to be sure they 'are transparent, and that you are establishing those criteria and documenting' your reasons for awarding and not awarding grants." Mr. Bilchik’s statement on the peer review process very much differs from Mr. Flores’ testimony to the Oversight Committee. Mr. Flores said: “I believe that peer review only evaluates the competence of the organization to do the work-not whether the work should be done or whether a grant should be awarded. The peer review process cannot be used to determine the value of one grant against another because the panels do not see all of the applications, are unaware of what else may be proposed, and what other programs of a similar nature have already been or may be funded. Simply put, the peer reviewers lack the information necessary to make such judgments.”
“To be clear, there is no prohibition against using internal peer review and in the case of the National Programs Solicitation, my career Deputy Administrator for Programs recommended it in light of tight deadlines and the ability of career staff to carry it out. I agreed with the recommendation and directed that they proceed. Peer review helps to inform the process and is not a substitute for the process. As set forth in the solicitation, peer review scores were meant to be advisory only.”
All eyes should be on current Attorney General Eric Holder since the investigators won't pursue charges into Flores. In Holder's confirmation for Attorney General, Holder was asked questions to answer in writing by the Senate committee. Here is a nugget:
Question 6 from Sen. Feingold:
Holder: If confirmed, I hope to restore the Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to its former role as a leader in advancing these and other innovations. I also plan to give priority to juvenile justice and delinquency prevention issues in a number of ways: First, I will work with the President to identify a strong leader for OJJDP Administrator.
integrating minorities, disproportionate minority contact and
improving juvenile detention and the correction centers. Too
many of our youth, African American youth and Hispanic youth
in our city end up in lockups.
I want you to explain to me why you haven't set as a
priority and you have--well, I say you didn't share that with
your staff. You just came up with this set, as I understand.
So how do you explain veering off and putting your own targets in place rather than the criteria of DOJ?
Mr. FLORES. Ma'am, Congresswoman, I would first say a
couple things. Gangs are an incredibly high priority for the
Department and for my office. In Los Angeles, we have had a
long-term relationship with the mayor's office since my
tenure to really focus on gangs. In fact, it has been so
successful it was the model that was recommended by Connie
Rice for the mayor's office to adopt. The last that I know
is that the mayor's office is in the process of funding, to
the tune of $150 million, more or less, the in essence
replication- -
Rep. Diane WATSON. Can I just interrupt you? I am looking at
the list, and I am sure you have that list, and it says
disproportionate minority contact and improved juvenile
detention and correction centers. I made reference to it
when I opened. I don't see it on your list of priorities. I
don't know what you put in place. You said you worked with
the mayor. Is that the mayor of Los Angeles?
Mr. FLORES. Yes, ma'am.
Rep. Diane WATSON. Okay. Well, I don't see it reflected in
your priorities. I am looking at, on the other side of this
paper, your priorities. I think you have the same list that
I have. So can you explain why there is not an emphasis, or
are you referring to something that was already there? These
are different priorities.
This testimony is really crucial to look at because Youth Today exposed a couple of weeks ago news of OJJDP's buried suicide study during the Flores years. Now, under Flores' leadership, a report on Disproportionate Minority Contact was buried. Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) refers to the disproportionate number of minority youth who come into contact with the juvenile justice system.
Also, Shay C Bilchik, former OJJDP Administrator and now Research professor director of the Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University Public Policy Institute, had pointed out a need for a transparent process in the grant decision making in the OJJDP. In Youth Today, Mr. Bilchik said, "If you are going to have credibility with your field, they need to know that you have this peer review process, this independent input on the quality of the applications." He went on to say that "as for decisions made by staff, directors need to be sure they 'are transparent, and that you are establishing those criteria and documenting' your reasons for awarding and not awarding grants." Mr. Bilchik’s statement on the peer review process very much differs from Mr. Flores’ testimony to the Oversight Committee. Mr. Flores said: “I believe that peer review only evaluates the competence of the organization to do the work-not whether the work should be done or whether a grant should be awarded. The peer review process cannot be used to determine the value of one grant against another because the panels do not see all of the applications, are unaware of what else may be proposed, and what other programs of a similar nature have already been or may be funded. Simply put, the peer reviewers lack the information necessary to make such judgments.”
“To be clear, there is no prohibition against using internal peer review and in the case of the National Programs Solicitation, my career Deputy Administrator for Programs recommended it in light of tight deadlines and the ability of career staff to carry it out. I agreed with the recommendation and directed that they proceed. Peer review helps to inform the process and is not a substitute for the process. As set forth in the solicitation, peer review scores were meant to be advisory only.”
All eyes should be on current Attorney General Eric Holder since the investigators won't pursue charges into Flores. In Holder's confirmation for Attorney General, Holder was asked questions to answer in writing by the Senate committee. Here is a nugget:
Question 6 from Sen. Feingold:
Holder: If confirmed, I hope to restore the Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to its former role as a leader in advancing these and other innovations. I also plan to give priority to juvenile justice and delinquency prevention issues in a number of ways: First, I will work with the President to identify a strong leader for OJJDP Administrator.
Second, I will work with the new Administrator to reinvigorate the important work of OJJDP, especially in the area of delinquency.
Third, I will ensure that OJJDP’s professional staff is given senior leadership support within the Department.
Fourth, the Department will reach out to constituent organizations to elicit their views on what we can and should be doing.
Finally, we will make it a priority to work with Congress on reauthorization of the JJDPA Act.
Two questions should be asked:
1. Is Holder going to hold Flores accountable? And will he hold his promise to his answer to Sen. Feingold and hire a strong leader to fill the position of the OJJDP Administator?
2. Is the Oversight Committee going to look into possible perjury in Flores' testimony?
If nothing is done, rest assured the Bar Association should look into Inspector General's report findings of Flores' violation of the ethics rules of grant making and suspend his license.
Finally, we will make it a priority to work with Congress on reauthorization of the JJDPA Act.
Two questions should be asked:
1. Is Holder going to hold Flores accountable? And will he hold his promise to his answer to Sen. Feingold and hire a strong leader to fill the position of the OJJDP Administator?
2. Is the Oversight Committee going to look into possible perjury in Flores' testimony?
If nothing is done, rest assured the Bar Association should look into Inspector General's report findings of Flores' violation of the ethics rules of grant making and suspend his license.
No comments:
Post a Comment