Chuck Grassley: “Mr. Hamre's letters tell me that he may not understand this issue. He seems confused. It is confusion like this that…”

“Mr. Hamre's letters tell me that he may not understand this issue. He seems confused. It is confusion like this that dictates more fiscal discipline in this town, and that can only come from a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. His letter of January 29, I think, contains two contradictory statements. In one breath he says that payments and appropriations are in sync. In the next breath, he admits that payments and appropriations are out of sync. But then he goes on to say that the cost of getting them in sync would just be too high, that we cannot worry about whether payments are matched with a particular product or a particular invoice or appropriation account. He says, 'that would not be good business sense.' It would place an unfair burden on the contractors. Just think, when it comes to matching disbursements of money with an invoice, it might also place an unfair burden on contractors and government accountants. So just what is the thinking of the chief financial officer? Clearly, there is a problem in the Department of Defense's payment process. There is a major disconnect. On the one hand, we have a whole body of law governing the use of appropriations; on the other, we have payments for factory work that are supposed to be matched with corresponding appropriations. Unfortunately, the law and the payments just don't mesh. They can't be reconciled.”