Nominations of Brian D. Miller and Dana Wade, Senate hearing transcript (May 5, 2020), GovInfo CHRG-116shrg42247, PDF
Summary
This is the printed edition of S. Hrg. 116-318, the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs hearing of Tuesday, May 5, 2020 on two nominations: Brian D. Miller, of Virginia, to be Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery at the Department of the Treasury, and Dana Wade, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Chairman Mike Crapo noted that Title IV of the CARES Act provides $500 billion in emergency relief and that Section 4018 of the Act establishes the Special Inspector General. Senator Brown said the $500 billion and the $4 trillion the Federal Reserve will lend need a strong watchdog. The hearing print adds both nominees' prepared statements and biographical sketches and their answers to senators' written questions.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
S. HRG. 116–318
NOMINATIONS OF BRIAN D. MILLER AND
DANA WADE
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
NOMINATIONS OF:
BRIAN D. MILLER, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
PANDEMIC RECOVERY, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
DANA WADE, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
MAY 5, 2020
Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
(
Available at: https: //www.govinfo.gov /
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
42–247 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
MIKE CRAPO, Idaho, Chairman
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania JACK REED, Rhode Island
TIM SCOTT, South Carolina ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
BEN SASSE, Nebraska JON TESTER, Montana
TOM COTTON, Arkansas MARK R. WARNER, Virginia
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
THOM TILLIS, North Carolina CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
MARTHA MCSALLY, Arizona DOUG JONES, Alabama
JERRY MORAN, Kansas TINA SMITH, Minnesota
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona
GREGG RICHARD, Staff Director
LAURA SWANSON, Democratic Staff Director
CATHERINE FUCHS, Chief Counsel
BRANDON BEALL, Professional Staff Member
MATT JONES, Chief Counsel
ELISHA TUKU, Democratic Chief Counsel
COREY FRAYER, Democratic Professional Staff Member
MEGAN CHENEY, Democratic Professional Staff Member
CAMERON RICKER, Chief Clerk
SHELVIN SIMMONS, IT Director
CHARLES J. MOFFAT, Hearing Clerk
JIM CROWELL, Editor
(II)
C O N T E N T S
TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2020
Page
Opening statement of Chairman Crapo ................................................................. 1
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39
Opening statements, comments, or prepared statements of:
Senator Brown .................................................................................................. 3
Prepared statement ................................................................................... 40
NOMINEES
Brian D. Miller, of Virginia, to be Special Inspector General for Pandemic
Recovery, Department of the Treasury .............................................................. 7
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 42
Biographical sketch of nominee ....................................................................... 43
Responses to written questions of:
Senator Brown ........................................................................................... 58
Senator Reed .............................................................................................. 62
Senator Menendez ..................................................................................... 62
Senator Warren ......................................................................................... 63
Senator Van Hollen ................................................................................... 70
Senator Cortez Masto ................................................................................ 71
Senator Sinema ......................................................................................... 74
Dana Wade, of the District of Columbia, to be Assistant Secretary, Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development ......................................................... 7
Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50
Biographical sketch of nominee ....................................................................... 52
Responses to written questions of:
Senator Brown ........................................................................................... 75
Senator Menendez ..................................................................................... 86
Senator Tester ........................................................................................... 88
Senator Warren ......................................................................................... 91
Senator Van Hollen ................................................................................... 93
Senator Cortez Masto ................................................................................ 94
Senator Sinema ......................................................................................... 95
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUPPLIED FOR THE RECORD
Letter of regret from Senator Tom Cotton ............................................................ 96
Letters of support for nominee Brian D. Miller .................................................... 97
Letter of support for nominee Dana Wade ............................................................ 144
(III)
NOMINATIONS OF BRIAN D. MILLER AND
DANA WADE
TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2020
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met at 2:31 p.m., in room SD–106, Dirksen Sen-
ate Office Building, Hon. Mike Crapo, Chairman of the Committee,
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN MIKE CRAPO
Chairman CRAPO. This hearing will come to order.
Since this is our first hybrid hearing, a brief explanation of how
it will work will benefit Senators and the public.
The hearing room has been configured to maintain the rec-
ommended 6-foot social distancing between Senators, nominees,
and other individuals in the room necessary to operate the hearing,
which we have kept to a minimum.
A number of Senators have chosen to use secure video teleconfer-
ence technology, which will allow them to remotely participate.
For those joining by video conference, once you start speaking,
there will be a slight delay before you are displayed on the main
screen.
To minimize background noise, we ask Senators who are using
the video conference option to please click the mute button until it
is your turn to ask questions.
If there is a technology issue, we will move to the next Senator
until that issue is resolved.
I remind all Senators and the nominees that the 5-minute clock
still applies.
For Senators using the video option, you will notice a screen la-
beled ‘‘clock’’ that will show how much time is remaining.
At about 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the gavel to re-
mind Senators that their time has almost expired.
To simplify the speaking order, Senator Brown and I have agreed
to go by seniority for this first hybrid meeting.
Thank you to those of you who are here today, those appearing
before us, and those who are keeping the Capitol complex safe and
functioning while we honor our constitutional duty.
The coronavirus, or COVID–19, pandemic has challenged our
sense of normalcy, and it has tested every institution of daily life
we know.
The crisis has had a major impact on the physical and economic
health of our country, and a major response has been required.
(1)
2
Congress and the Administration have taken bold, dramatic
steps to limit the depth of economic shock the country is currently
experiencing and to provide conditions for a quick and robust eco-
nomic recovery once economic restrictions are lifted.
The CARES Act went into effect just over 1 month ago, putting
needed cash directly into the hands of American workers and fami-
lies, providing rapid relief to small businesses, helping to stabilize
our markets and the economy, and sending a massive new infusion
of resources to the front lines of the medical response.
Title IV of the CARES Act, which is under the Banking Commit-
tee’s jurisdiction, provides $500 billion in emergency relief in order
to provide liquidity to eligible businesses, States, municipalities,
and tribes related to losses incurred as a result of coronavirus.
Implementing this title is an important step to supporting the
flow of credit in the economy.
On April 9, 2020, the Federal Reserve Board and the Department
of Treasury announced new and expanded set of lending programs
to provide up to $2.3 trillion in loans.
The 13(3) Federal Reserve facility—well, actually all of them,
specifically the Main Street Lending Facility—are crucial compo-
nents of the strategy to support the economy and promote a U-
shaped recovery, which reinforces the need to have them up and
operating and being as broadly available for as many businesses as
possible.
Title IV includes robust oversight requirements to ensure the
statute is followed and to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery, or
SIGPR—another new Federal acronym—will oversee the reporting
and auditing requirements of the law, and it is critical that we
quickly confirm the nominee so that important work can begin.
This afternoon, we will consider the nominations of the Honor-
able Brian Miller, of Virginia, to be Special Inspector General for
Pandemic Recovery; and Mrs. Dana Wade, of the District of Colum-
bia, to be Assistant Secretary for Housing and Federal Housing
Commissioner at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban De-
velopment.
Welcome to both of you and congratulations on your nominations
to these important positions.
Section 4018 of the CARES Act establishes the Special Inspector
General for Pandemic Recovery.
The duty of the SIGPR is to ‘‘conduct, supervise, and coordinate
audits and investigations of the making, purchase, management,
and sale of loans, loan guarantees and other investments made by
the Secretary of the Treasury under any program established by
the Secretary under this Act, and the management by the Sec-
retary of any program established under this Act.’’
Mr. Miller is highly qualified for Special Inspector General, hav-
ing served as the Inspector General for the General Services Ad-
ministration for nearly a decade.
The Senate confirmed Mr. Miller for that position in 2005 via
voice vote, a position he held for nearly 10 years.
In that role, Mr. Miller led more than 300 auditors, special
agents, attorneys, and support staff in conducting nationwide au-
dits and investigations; and reported on fraud, waste, and abuse.
3
He has been outspoken on the need for Inspectors General to
have independence and access to information, and I am confident
that he will carry out the responsibilities and mission of this posi-
tion diligently, independently, and objectively.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in 2015, Mr. Mil-
ler noted, ‘‘ . . . in order to have effective oversight, an IG must
have independence to conduct an investigation, review, or audit.
This includes determining what information is needed. It is the
judgment of the IG conducting the investigation that matters, not
the judgment of the agency being investigated.’’
I encourage my colleagues to support Mr. Miller’s nomination so
that he can begin this vital oversight role.
Turning to Mrs. Dana Wade, Dana Wade is well prepared to take
over the reins at the Federal Housing Administration. She is famil-
iar to the task, having operated as Acting Federal Housing Com-
missioner and General Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of
Housing.
As Acting Commissioner, she directly managed FHA’s portfolio of
single-family, multifamily and health care insurance; Section 8
project-based rental assistance; the Office of Manufactured Hous-
ing; and over 2,400 personnel agencywide.
Mrs. Wade’s extensive record of housing policy experience also
includes service as Senior Adviser to Secretary Ben Carson, Deputy
Staff Director to this Committee and the Senate Appropriations
Committee, and as Associate Director at the Office of Management
and Budget, where she led all housing-related issues and super-
vised HUD, among other agencies.
Great leadership will be required at FHA during this unprece-
dented time of strain on both home ownership and rental markets.
In the wake of COVID–19, we have already seen over 10 percent
of FHA borrowers enter mortgage forbearance, FHA-insured health
care facilities feeling significant strain, and many FHA-assisted
landlords struggle to make ends meet while countless renters are
unsure where their next rent payment will come from.
In the months ahead, FHA will be on the front lines helping
many of these families get back on their feet and providing much-
needed liquidity throughout the housing finance system.
I am confident that Mrs. Wade will provide exactly the type of
leadership that is needed during this critical time, as Commis-
sioner Montgomery has done.
I encourage my colleagues to support Mrs. Wade’s nomination, as
well as to confirm Brian Montgomery as Deputy Secretary, so that
we can best position HUD to tackle the challenges ahead.
Congratulations again to each of you on your nominations, and
I thank you and your families for your willingness to serve.
Senator Brown.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SHERROD BROWN
Senator BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to say
thank you to staff, the Sergeant at Arms, the Architect of the Cap-
itol, the Office of the Attending Physician, the Recording Studio,
the Senate Rules Committee. This was a team effort working so
hard over the last couple of weeks to try to make these hearings
as safe as possible, including by using technology for Members to
4
join these hearings remotely. Member Senators in both parties,
maybe even a majority of the Committee, I believe, have decided
to join us that way. I want to thank the Capitol Police and all other
Senate staff and contractors who worked to make sure the Senate
continues to run.
I want to especially thank Chairman Crapo and his staff, thanks
to Laura and my office and Gregg, the Staff Director, and Cameron
for working together to coordinate this hearing and provide that re-
mote option for Senators to join. It is the right thing to do, that
we could all do what we think is best to keep ourselves and people
who work here safe.
I am concerned, however, Mr. Chairman, at the reckless decision
by Leader Mitch McConnell to open the Senate to session despite
ongoing emergency stay-at-home orders all over the country, in-
cluding in my State of Ohio, Governor DeWine, including in Wash-
ington, D.C., including Senator Van Hollen’s Maryland and Senator
Warner’s Virginia. Leader McConnell’s actions are forcing Capitol
complex workers, contract workers like the cleaning staff who just
cleaned this hearing room and will clean again when we are done,
and food service workers who just served the Republican Caucus
lunch to go—that they are here working is going against public
health authorities’ advice, and they put themselves at risk to come
to work. Most of those workers, unlike all of us who probably come
to the Capitol, either we walk from a nearby apartment or condo
or we come in cars, most of these workers come by bus and subway,
and they put themselves at risk, creating more anxiety for their
families. As I said, Senator McConnell’s decision was reckless and
unfair especially to those employees.
To compound that, the Republican Leader’s agenda this week
does not include assistance for the unemployed, anything that
helps people to stay in their homes. I appreciated Chairman
Crapo’s comments about how many people, how many renters are
living on the edge. There is no support in this week that we can
see from Senator McConnell, no attempts to support community
health services. These are issues the Senate should be taking on
right now.
Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the nominees and thank
them for their willingness to serve. This is probably not the con-
firmation hearing that each of you had hoped for. I want to thank
your families, who I assume are watching from home.
The Special Inspector General for Pandemic Response will over-
see the CARES Act lending and investment programs that were de-
signed to stabilize our economy and get help to communities and
workers and small businesses that are hurting so much during this
pandemic. This lending will be critical to restarting our economy to
begin the recovery.
The FHA Commissioner faces an affordable housing crisis made
even worse, of course, by this pandemic. The stability and future
of millions of families are on the line as Congress and the Adminis-
tration respond to this crisis. If confirmed, the two of you will serve
in positions that are crucial to implementing the policy responses
to the pandemic.
This Committee has oversight over the Treasury and Federal Re-
serve loan programs under CARES. That is why I fought for this
5
Office of the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Response. The
American people need a strong watchdog to make sure the $500
billion of taxpayer money provided under this act and the $4 tril-
lion that the Federal Reserve will lend, that it actually goes to sup-
port workers and communities and businesses. Because the act
grants the Treasury Secretary and the Fed broad discretion over
who gets these loans and on what terms, the Special Inspector
General will need to examine the loan terms, the transactions, the
lenders involved, and the eligibility of borrowers.
We have seen how the small business loans so far went to big
companies and important clients of Wall Street banks while com-
munity banks and credit unions—we all have them in our States—
and their customers on Main Street and in underserved commu-
nities waited and waited and waited. I think most of us have heard
the frustration from restaurants and barbershops and cafes and so
many other small businesses in our State that are facing impos-
sible decisions right now. They spend hours on the phone trying to
talk to someone about a loan. They have either been turned down
or cannot get answers while big, well-connected franchises go to the
front of the line. That is simply unacceptable. We cannot let the
same thing happen with these loans by Treasury and the Fed. The
problem with SBA loans should be a lesson to Congress as we con-
sider additional recovery measures and a lesson to the Special In-
spector General.
In addition to these concerns, President Trump has shown out-
right hostility toward anyone who tries to hold him accountable to
the American people whom he serves, special hostility toward In-
spectors General. I think that Mr. Miller realizes that. The Presi-
dent removed the Acting IG for the Defense Department who was
set to become Chairman of the Pandemic Response Accountability
Committee. He fired the Intelligence Committee IG last Friday.
Friday he replaced the Acting Health and Human Services IG. All
of these professionals simply were doing their jobs, and they ex-
posed misconduct in the Administration. That is what their jobs
are.
Looking at the last 20 years, we found only one IG candidate was
nominated while serving in the White House Counsel’s Office. An-
other nominee served in the White House Counsel’s Office under
an earlier Administration. Both of them resigned, one for politi-
cizing the office, the other for lack of independence. Not a great
track record when a President appoints a lawyer in his office in the
White House to be an Inspector General that oversees and exam-
ines White House behavior.
We passed the CARES Act to support our economy by helping
workers, mainstream businesses, State and local governments, and
nonprofits. We cannot tolerate businesses and their workers suf-
fering to protect the President, to protect his family, to protect his
allies because of corruption, misuse, and favoritism.
Mr. Miller, if you are confirmed, I expect you to follow the letter
and spirit of the law and to serve the American people, not Presi-
dent Trump. As Special Inspector General, you must be willing to
stand up to the Administration and any other bad actor and uphold
the goals of the law. Anything less is totally unacceptable.
6
While Mr. Miller is the only nominee before us today with ‘‘pan-
demic response’’ in his title, make no mistake: The FHA and the
Office of Housing will be on the front lines of our Nation’s response
as well. In good times, FHA provides access to affordable home
ownership for millions of families. When the economy slows, the
FHA is expected to step up to meet the needs of more households
and keep the mortgage market working, even as others in the mar-
ket retreat.
During the 2008 financial crisis, economists estimated that
FHA’s action helped prevent an additional 25-percent decline in
housing prices and the loss of an additional 3 million jobs. Quite
a responsibility and quite a performance. FHA’s decisions will de-
termine whether families can remain in their homes or whether
communities face a foreclosure crisis on top of a public health cri-
sis. They will help determine whether the burden of this downturn,
like the 2008 crisis, falls most heavily on communities of color and
exacerbates economic inequality or whether we will adopt policies
and do oversight to provide an equitable recovery that keeps afford-
able housing in the hands of homeowners and communities rather
than Wall Street investors.
Decisions at the Office of Housing, which Mrs. Wade would lead
if confirmed, will determine whether policies and funding are in
place to keep the lowest-income seniors, persons with disabilities,
people in HUD-financed health care facilities, keep them safe dur-
ing this pandemic.
Over the past 3 years, the Administration has tried to gut fund-
ing to housing and community development programs. They have
rolled back fair housing protections and other civil rights protec-
tions. They have undermined the safety of manufactured housing
residents. They have tried to make home ownership more expen-
sive and harder to attain. I hope the answers Mrs. Wade provides
today will make clear that she will fight alongside us to reverse
that trend.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thank you again for being the
first in the Senate to do a hearing like this. Thank you.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you, Senator Brown.
I will now administer the oath. Would each of our witnesses
stand and raise your right hands? Do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. MILLER. I do.
Mrs. WADE. I do.
Chairman CRAPO. And do you agree to appear and testify before
any duly constituted committee of the Senate?
Mr. MILLER. I do.
Mrs. WADE. I do.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you. You may sit down.
Your written statements will be made a part of the record in
their entirety. Usually at this point we give you each a chance to
introduce your family. We will thank them on your behalf since we
are keeping the number of people in the hearing room to a min-
imum. And, with that, I would like to invite you to proceed. Mr.
Miller, would you please begin?
7
STATEMENT OF BRIAN D. MILLER, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE SPE-
CIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR PANDEMIC RECOVERY, DE-
PARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the
Chairman and Ranking Member for having this hearing. I would
like to thank President Trump for nominating me. Most of all, I
want to thank my wife and family for their encouragement to con-
tinue public service, especially in such a demanding job. Thank
you.
I have been fortunate to have a long career in public service that
has prepared me well for this position. I have close to 30 years of
experience in the Federal Government—15 years in the Depart-
ment of Justice and nearly 10 years as the Senate-confirmed In-
spector General of the General Services Administration, serving
across both Republican and Democrat administrations. I have also
served as an independent corporate monitor and practiced law in
the areas of ethics and compliance, Government contracts, and in-
ternal investigations.
I am amazed and humbled by the letters of support that I re-
ceived in such a short time period during a time of a pandemic. I
am deeply grateful to those who signed from all varieties of polit-
ical stripes, from former officials in the Obama, Bush, and Clinton
administrations. I would like to thank them and I would like them
to know that I will always endeavor to be the man they describe
in their letters.
If confirmed, I will conduct every audit and investigation with
fairness and impartiality. I will be vigilant to protect the integrity
and independence of the Office of Special Inspector General. I
pledge to seek the truth in all matters that come before me and to
use my authority and resources to uncover fraud, waste, and abuse.
I stand ready to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair-
man.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Mrs. Wade.
STATEMENT OF DANA WADE, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Mrs. WADE. Thank you. Chairman Crapo, Ranking Member
Brown, and Members of this Committee, thank you for inviting me
here to testify today as the nominee for Federal Housing Commis-
sioner and Assistant Secretary for Housing at the Department of
Housing and Urban Development. I also want to thank President
Trump for the privilege of being nominated for this position.
It is truly an honor to be here after serving as a staff member
of this Committee and spending a good part of my career working
for Senator Shelby on both the Banking and Appropriations Com-
mittees. I am extremely grateful to him for such opportunities.
I am also very thankful for the love and support of my wonderful
family. I regret that both my husband, Chris, and my daughter,
Mary, as well as my niece, Ava, could be here not in person, only
in spirit, but I would, if I may, like to wish my daughter, Mary,
a happy birthday. She turns 6 years old tomorrow.
8
As I look around this hearing room, I see the Senate continuing
the people’s work but under very different circumstances. If con-
firmed, I will commit to doing everything I can as FHA Commis-
sioner to help the country emerge from the COVID–19 pandemic
healthier, stronger, and with a more prosperous economy.
Never has it been more clear than today that HUD and FHA
play critical roles in our Nation’s safety net. Secretary Carson and
the dedicated staff at HUD are working tirelessly to minimize the
impact of COVID–19 to homeowners, renters, and vulnerable popu-
lations that HUD serves each and every day. We are grateful for
the hard work and bipartisan commitment of this Committee and
Congress in passing legislation that safeguards American families,
communities, and the economy from this terrible virus.
I joined public service in the midst of a different crisis—the fi-
nancial crisis of 2008—during which I gained valuable experience
that I believe will serve me well if confirmed. I learned that during
times like these, it is important to make sure assistance quickly
reaches those in need and that we maximize the effectiveness of
every Federal dollar. I have been a staff committee member of the
Budget, Banking, and Appropriations Committees, as well as an
Associate Director at the Office of Management and Budget. I have
also been the acting head of FHA and HUD’s Office of Housing
where I implemented reforms that better managed risk, built up
capital, and provided greater transparency to the public.
If confirmed, my priorities for FHA and the Office of Housing
would be as follows:
First, given this unprecedented situation and global pandemic,
protecting current FHA homeowners and renters. Many FHA
homeowners, I know I do not have to tell this Committee, are low-
to-moderate income, first-time and minority borrowers, and most of
these HUD-assisted homeowners and renters are experiencing
COVID-related hardships through no fault of their own.
Second, I would ensure that FHA has the necessary staffing and
other resources, as well as continuing the IT modernization effort,
which together will allow FHA to perform its important counter-
cyclical role to support the housing market.
Third, I will vigilantly monitor risk to taxpayers of losses stem-
ming from COVID–19, and I will protect FHA’s capital reserve to
the maximum extent possible.
I believe that FHA has a duty to support the Nation’s housing
markets and homeowners facing economic hardship. While the
virus will pass and the economy will eventually regain its previous
strength, the road to recovery will require our sustained effort.
If confirmed, I will do all that I can to run a strong and sustain-
able FHA, one that serves homeowners, renters, and taxpayers
well. I am committed to working with this Committee and with
Congress, and I look forward to answering your questions today.
Thank you.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you, Mrs. Wade.
I will begin my questioning with you, Mr. Miller. As you have
heard and I am sure you were aware before you even arrived here
today, one of the big criticisms of you is that you will not be inde-
pendent because you come from the White House or had service in
the White House. As you know, independence of SIGPR is critical
9
to the oversight of activities under Title IV in the CARES Act. Can
you talk about the importance of SIGPR maintaining its independ-
ence, how you have demonstrated your independence in the past,
and how you expect to conduct your actions, if confirmed to this po-
sition?
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question. I think
independence is vital for the effective operation of any Inspector
General, and I have said that for not just now but for many years.
I served for 10 years as Inspector General of the General Services
Administration, and at every point I had to fight for independence
to perform audits and investigations objectively, fairly, and inde-
pendently. And I met with resistance throughout my tenure as In-
spector General. I conducted investigations of major contractors,
much to the chagrin of people in leadership positions at the GSA,
and I dare say in Congress, and I received criticism for that. Ulti-
mately, I was proven right. The audits were correct and accurate,
and we provided effective oversight and leadership.
I believe that my tenure as Inspector General at GSA also helped
GSA to become a better agency. I think the hardworking men and
women of my office at that time provided a great service. I think
that oversight is essential for the effective operation of all pro-
grams, and especially now with the pandemic recovery. It is vital
that this money goes to the small businesses and hardworking
Americans that need the money right now, and we cannot afford
to have it diverted to fraud, waste, and abuse and diverted to the
pockets of those that would scheme to defraud the Government and
take that money out of their pockets. So it is vital to have an inde-
pendent, effective Inspector General.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Mrs. Wade, in the months ahead, the FHA will be on the front
lines helping many families, providing much-needed liquidity
throughout the housing finance system. As a former Acting Com-
missioner, you understand FHA’s important role to consumers, tax-
payers, our housing finance system, and health care financing. We
are involved in the ongoing efforts with HUD, FHFA, and others
to implement the CARES Act provisions related to housing, specifi-
cally forbearance relief for homeowners impacted by COVID–19, as
well as restrictions on foreclosures and evictions.
Will you work with us to implement these provisions and ensure
that the options available when exiting forbearance are clear for
consumers to understand and straightforward for servicers of FHA
mortgages to administer?
Mrs. WADE. Yes, Senator, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very
much for the question. We are obviously facing an unprecedented
health crisis, and it is incredibly important to protect homeowners
and renters who, through no fault of their own, are experiencing
COVID-related hardships. It can also be a confusing time for home-
owners and assisted renters, and I think it is important to provide
as much clarity as possible and as much certainty from FHA as
possible in fulfilling its countercyclical duty.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you. Then last, for you, Mrs. Wade,
also, many of our hospitals, health care facilities, and senior living
facilities at the front lines of the battle against COVID–19 are fi-
nanced in part through FHA’s Section 232 or 242 programs. Can
10
you speak quickly, in about 45 seconds, to FHA’s role in the health
care economy and some of the challenges they face?
Mrs. WADE. Yes, again, Mr. Chairman, that is a great question.
That is a very important part of FHA’s portfolio. No health care fa-
cility that FHA serves should be concerned with anything except
serving those who are COVID–19 patients in need and protecting
the health and safety of their employees. I believe now in FHA’s
health care portfolio it is a time that we need to provide maximum
flexibility, and to that end I know FHA has already taken action
to allow these health care facilities to access things like their re-
serves. And, in addition, it is important to work each and every day
with the operators of these facilities in order to sustain their mis-
sion and make sure that they have—and FHA is a mortgage in-
surer—make sure that they can appropriately finance operations
during this time.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Senator Brown.
Senator BROWN. You said it is your daughter’s sixth birthday?
My granddaughter just celebrated. Unfortunately, we had to do it
from afar, of course, because it was just last month.
For about a year, Mrs. Wade, you were responsible for overseeing
HUD and other Federal agencies for OMB. That is correct, right?
Mrs. WADE. Yes, Senator, that is correct.
Senator BROWN. Under your leadership, OMB reviewed and ap-
proved two rules that would undermine the Fair Housing Act, a
rule that HUD’s own analysis said would cost the Federal Govern-
ment more money, displace more than 50,000 children, and a rule
that would compromise the religious freedom of people seeking
shelter. Given that track record, I just do not see how we can trust
you to ensure that FHA and HUD’s rental assistance programs are
providing an equitable recovery for families.
Now, Mr. Miller, I would like to shift to you. First of all, thank
you for your service as a prosecutor and IG and how you outlined
your work in the past. But 2 years ago, you wrote an article criti-
cizing Congress for telling Inspectors General to investigate the
Trump administration. Four months later, President Trump gave
you a job in the Counsel’s Office at the White House. Now the Sen-
ate considers an appointment to an office that will be responsible
for, among other things, investigating the Trump administration,
exactly what you criticized. And even if it did not have concerns
about your independence, I would still have concerns about how
this Administration treats IGs that simply do their job.
Here is a recent example from Friday. The President, after un-
fairly smearing her, removed Christi Grimm, the Acting HHS IG
who had identified shortages, very real shortages in testing equip-
ment and PPE.
Mr. Miller, you can establish your independence right now in
front of this hearing. Can you tell this Committee that it was
wrong for the President of the United States to remove Ms. Grimm
for doing her job and holding the Administration accountable?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, first of all, I would like to say that I wrote
an article defending the independence of Inspectors General. I am
always concerned that Inspectors General remain independent
from any influence, whether it be from the Executive branch or the
11
legislative branch. And so I do not think that you are fairly charac-
terizing my article. And I feel very strongly that IGs should be
independent and should report the facts as they see them, as they
find them, and not to bend them to any influence whatsoever. And
so it is the duty——
Senator BROWN. Well, I appreciate your response. Was it wrong
to remove—we only have 5 minutes. So what is wrong for Ms.
Grimm—for the President to remove Ms. Grimm for doing her job?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am not here to assess those sorts of ac-
tion. I am here to tell you about my background, my qualifications
for this position. I believe that I have demonstrated independence.
Senator BROWN. Well, we all—I understand that. I understand
that, Mr. Miller, but there is a skepticism when it is not general
practice that the President of the United States nominates some-
body for a job this important as Inspector General who came out
of the White House, and I think you have a bar you need to get
over to demonstrate your independence. I was hoping this would be
a way to do it.
Let me ask you another question. Mr. Miller, will you view your
job expansively to the fullest extent provided by law so that you do
not just go after little companies or the ‘‘easy cases’’ but, rather,
look at all misconduct, even when the evidence of wrongdoing could
either upset individuals in the Administration or their preferred
narrative?
Mr. MILLER. Absolutely, Senator.
Senator BROWN. OK. I appreciate that. The potential for conflict,
the concern among Members of Congress about your independence
should be obvious. So it is so important that you look at this job
expansively.
Last question. The CARES Act gives the Treasury Secretary con-
trol of $500 billion of taxpayer monies for loans and investments.
The Federal Reserve, as you note, will lend trillions on top of that.
Do you agree that the Special IG for Pandemic Response has the
responsibility to look at how all of those funds are distributed,
whether by Treasury or the Federal Reserve?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, as the act says, the Special IG has respon-
sibility for the programs administered by the Secretary of Treas-
ury. I will do that faithfully, fairly, and impartially, independently.
Senator BROWN. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Senator Shelby.
Senator SHELBY. Thank you, Chairman Crapo.
Mrs. Wade, welcome back to the Committee. You spent a lot of
time here working as a very important member of the Banking
staff, and then you worked on the Appropriations staff, and then
you went on to greater things, and you have been nominated to a
very serious and very important position. You have the education—
an undergraduate degree from Georgetown in economics and an
MBA from Wharton. You have got the experience. I am here to
support you.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent that my written
statement in support of this nominee be made part of the record.
Chairman CRAPO. Without objection.
12
Senator SHELBY. I believe that wherever you go, but especially
over at HUD like this, to be the Deputy Director of Housing there,
you carry a lot of experience, you carry a lot of good judgment, and
they can use you over there, and you can serve the American peo-
ple well. You have in the past, and I predict you will in the future.
I believe you will be confirmed. I believe that I am here to say that
I support you without any reservation. I know you. I have worked
with you. Most of the Members of the Committee worked with you.
We have a lot of respect for you and godspeed.
We will need to vote on her as soon as we can, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you, Senator Shelby.
Senator Reed.
Senator REED. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will just
wait a moment to ensure I can be heard.
Chairman CRAPO. We can see you.
Senator REED. Mr. Miller, I want to follow up on the questions
that Senator Brown presented, because the independence of the In-
spector General is absolutely critical, and the behaviors we have
seen in the White House and also in other areas suggest that there
is a disregard for the independence of the Inspector General. And
while you were there, particularly in the context of the impeach-
ment proceedings, the General Counsel’s office completely dis-
missed any requests for cooperation by the Congress in the con-
stitutional duty we had.
You yourself wrote a letter to the GAO General Counsel stating
that the White House does not plan to respond separately to your
letter—i.e., take a hike. That does not signal the kind of independ-
ence—in fact, it suggests that you will be beholden to the White
House and not critical of the White House. Would you like to re-
spond?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I will be independent. I will be—I will fol-
low the facts wherever they lead. If they are critical of the Admin-
istration, I will say so. I will have no hesitancy to do so. I think
you have unfairly characterized the letter. In many ways, I am just
answering the mail.
Senator REED. Well, we hope as Inspector General you just won’t
be answering the mail, and that is the point I think we want to
make very, very explicitly.
Let me turn to another issue, a more technical issue with respect
to the CARES Act. Title IV of the CARES Act authorizes the Sec-
retary of the Treasury to require warrants in some of the lending
programs under Title IV. In many respects, it echoes some of the
work I did in the Troubled Asset Relief Program in 2008 where we
did, in fact, have warrants and after the fact realized about $10 bil-
lion for the taxpayers of the United States by executing those war-
rants.
If confirmed, can you explain how you will evaluate whether the
warrants are then properly executed on behalf of taxpayers? There
are ways to write warrants so that the maximum potential is not
realized in terms of strike price, and in terms of other things. Can
you give us some indication of what you will do?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am going to have to study that issue
more carefully, but I will tell you that I as Inspector General want
13
to analyze all of the ramifications of these programs. If someone is
gaming the system, taking advantage of the system, or even self-
dealing, I would like to know that and report on that. So I will ana-
lyze those transactions very carefully, obtain information about
them, and if necessary, subpoena the information if I cannot get it
otherwise.
Senator REED. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Wade, we are all familiar with your extensive experience
both in housing and also in budgetary policy. I think Senator
Shelby made that quite clear in his remarks. In the last several
years, the President, in fact, in the fiscal year 2020 budget and the
2021 budget, he sent up a budget that would zero out the Public
Housing Capital Fund, the Community Development Block Grant,
and zero dollars for the HOME program. If we had followed that
advice, where would we be today in terms of the crisis we are fac-
ing in housing?
Mrs. WADE. Senator, thank you for the question. This Adminis-
tration has provided unprecedented support to populations who
need it, vulnerable populations, American families, I think as many
have alluded to, through the CARES Act assistance. It is incredibly
important to continue to focus and do everything that we can to
keep those HUD-assisted homeowners and renters in their homes,
to provide, again, maximum flexibility to provide tools to enable
them to stay in their home and enable FHA to mitigate risk.
I believe that this is an evolving situation. You know, I think we
are all ready to use whatever tools at our disposal in order to help
people, in order to help borrowers, in order to help renters, and I
look forward to working with Congress on those objectives.
Senator REED. Just a final point, though. My estimation would
be had we zeroed out those programs, the situation we see today
in which we are trying to stabilize housing for so many people
would have been much, much worse. And I hope that going for-
ward, not just in terms of the special appropriations bills like the
CARES Act but in the routine budgets, you will advocate for strong
funding for all these programs.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. Senator Toomey.
Senator TOOMEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And
thank you to our witnesses today. Thanks for your willingness to
serve. I appreciate that. Both of you bring a wealth of experience
to your respective roles, and I am pleased with that fact.
Mr. Miller, let me start with you. First of all, I appreciated our
conversation earlier where we discussed your role should you be
confirmed, but I would like to go back to this issue. Several of my
colleagues now have questioned your willingness to be independent
of the Administration, and it seems to me that there is some his-
tory here that may be worth a little bit of elaboration. You made
a passing reference to it, but in a prior role, when you were the
IG at the GSA—under a Republican administration, I believe— you
conducted what seems like a very thorough and ended up in a way
being, I suppose, antagonistic in the sense that there was wrong-
doing, and you pursued it. So could you tell us a little bit about
that? Because I think a person’s history speaks louder than any-
thing else.
14
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Senator, for the question. There were a
number of instances where I investigated individuals and compa-
nies and met with resistance at every turn. At one point I had to
investigate the Administrator herself, a Bush appointee, as I was.
And we very aggressively investigated her and found that she
steered a contract to a friend for $20,000 a month, and it ended up
in hearings. She ended up calling me a ‘‘terrorist,’’ and I had just
come off from the U.S. Attorney’s Office where I prosecuted terror-
ists, including Moussaoui. I participated in that prosecution. And
so she publicly called me a ‘‘terrorist.’’ She wrote memoranda to re-
gional administrators asking them to help her fight the IG—me.
And various Members of Congress called on the President to fire
me. Later on, the President did ask for her resignation.
There were a number of other incidents as well that came up
that I had to investigate, and it was very difficult to do so. I had
to fight for the office’s effectiveness through maintaining an inde-
pendent hiring process. At one point there was a freeze put on my
ability to hire anyone. There were budget cuts. There were all sorts
of ways to try and hinder the independence and effectiveness of the
Inspector General.
But I worked through it all. I insisted on being independent and
never compromising the facts over the truth. And I made those re-
ports public. Later on I investigated a conference—that was all
during the Bush administration. During the Obama administration
I investigated a conference in Las Vegas, and during that inves-
tigation I had political appointees asking me to stop that investiga-
tion, asking me not to publish a report. I had political appointees
call me up and say, ‘‘Why do you really have to make this public?
Can’t you just give it to us privately and never let anyone know?’’
And, of course, I did not follow that advice. I was not moved by the
pressure. I just went ahead, reported the facts, and you all know
about it.
But I do think that the agency itself is much better as a result,
and I think that every program and operation is better as a result
of oversight.
I would add that after I had left and was trying to start a law
practice, Michael Horowitz, the IG at the Department of Justice,
had some difficulty having access to information, and there was a
hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Michael called me
and talked to me about it and asked me to come and testify. I did
testify at that hearing, and I am grateful to the Chairman for
quoting part of my testimony at that hearing.
Senator TOOMEY. Thank you. And if I could ask one last question
of Mr. Miller. As one of the two Senate designees to the Congres-
sional Oversight Commission, we might have some similar respon-
sibilities, and so I wonder if you could just share with us your
thoughts on the differences between our respective responsibilities,
that of the Commission, versus the Inspector General, how that
might be delineated. And I know that this is going to be a work
in progress, but just any thoughts you have on that.
Mr. MILLER. Yes. Thank you, Senator, and I look forward—if the
Senate confirms me, I hope that we get to work together on that.
I would like to work very cooperatively with the Commission and
with the Accountability Committee of IGs, the so-called PRAC, and
15
with GAO and the various IGs themselves. I think that delineating
the responsibilities so that there is not overlap would be important.
We do not want to waste precious Federal resources, so we want
to make sure we know what each other is doing and how we can
complement each other rather than work against each other or du-
plicate each other’s actions.
So all that would be very important in that respect. I do not
want to presume my confirmation, but I did take the opportunity
to contact Michael Horowitz and the Vice Chair of the PRAC, Gene
Dodaro at GAO, SBA IG, the new Executive Director of the PRAC
to see how we can work together and delineate our roles and kind
of deconflict where there may be differences, because I do not think
it serves anyone to duplicate each other’s efforts. I think it would
be vital to share information, and I am trying to—I would like to
have the opportunity to work on an information-sharing program
in IT so that there is real-time access to information.
Senator TOOMEY. Thank you.
Chairman CRAPO. Senator Menendez.
Senator MENENDEZ. I want to take a minute to reflect on the
enormity of the situation before us. If we have learned anything
from this crisis, if we have learned anything about how staying at
home can flatten the curve and keep our families and our commu-
nities safe, it is that housing is health care. Americans should not
have to fear being thrown out on the street if they miss their next
rent or mortgage payment. And when the protections in the
CARES Act run out, we could be facing a foreclosure crisis even
greater than the one we faced during the Great Recession.
We can stop that if we want to. All it takes is for this Committee
to marshal the resources of the Federal Government, and we can
make sure that every American has a safe and healthy place to call
home.
In that vein, Mrs. Wade, we saw during the Great Recession how
FHA stepped into the market when private lenders were unable or
unwilling to do so. If confirmed, will you commit to making sure
FHA plays a strong countercyclical role in the mortgage market to
help finance a home for American families now that private lenders
may be less willing to do so?
Mrs. WADE. Yes, Senator, and, first of all, I would like to thank
you for commenting on the gravity of the situation. I believe that
this is integral, providing and performing countercyclical support is
integral to FHA’s mission. It is incredibly important that FHA stay
open for business and do everything that it can to promote market
stability during this time.
Senator MENENDEZ. What specific actions would you be looking,
if confirmed, to take in the next 6 months to further that aim?
Mrs. WADE. Yes, that is a great question, and I think, you know,
again, maintaining FHA’s operation and doing things that will
allow consumers to continue to access credit such as IT moderniza-
tion, which is really streamline the process for obtaining credit,
other organizational goals in order to help FHA to operate on a
daily basis. I think implementing the CARES Act and future assist-
ance packages will also be incredibly important for FHA, and I
know, if confirmed, I will do everything I can to expeditiously get
16
any CARES Act support or additional support to those who need
it the most.
Senator MENENDEZ. We will be looking forward to that upon your
confirmation.
Mr. Miller, would you agree that independence is among the
most important qualities for an Inspector General? Yes or no.
Mr. MILLER. I do, sir. Yes, Senator.
Senator MENENDEZ. If the President or someone from the White
House calls you to discuss the recovery, would you take the call?
Yes or no.
Mr. MILLER. If someone from the press, did you say?
Senator MENENDEZ. No. I said the President or someone from the
White House calls you to discuss the recovery, would you take that
call?
Mr. MILLER. I do not think that I will receive such a call, but
it depends on what the call is about. I will not be pressured to not
perform an audit or an investigation. But it is hard to say if I do
not know what the call is about.
Senator MENENDEZ. Let me try to refine it. If Secretary Mnuchin
wants to explain why certain companies received assistance under
the CARES Act, do you think it is appropriate to take his call?
Mr. MILLER. Well, I think it is appropriate to know why he is
making such determinations, and if he wants to explain it himself,
I would think that my office would like to listen. Whether I sit in
on that meeting or not is something I would have to decide on, but
certainly we want to know why they are administering programs
in the way that they are.
Senator MENENDEZ. I think there is a difference when you are
generating those questions to them than when they are trying to
weigh in as to why they have acted the way they have in ways that
may or may not be within the law’s context.
Let me ask you this: You were in the White House Counsel’s Of-
fice when the President decided to terminate Intelligence Commu-
nity Inspector General Atkinson. Is that correct?
Mr. MILLER. Yes.
Senator MENENDEZ. Did you play any role in that decision?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I cannot get into specifics about what goes
on in the White House Counsel’s Office. I do appreciate——
Senator MENENDEZ. I simply asked if you played a role. I did not
ask you what role you played.
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I read about the firing of Mr. Atkinson in
the newspaper.
Senator MENENDEZ. OK. That does not answer my question. Let
me ask you this: President Trump said of Inspector General Atkin-
son, ‘‘The man is a disgrace to IGs. He is a total disgrace.’’
Do you agree with that statement?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, there are a number of reasons why I do not
want to get involved in that question. First of all, I do not know
all the facts. I do not know what went on. I do not know what the
thinking was. And, second, a lot of that is protected by White
House confidentiality. As a lawyer, I have ethical obligations that
bind all lawyers. And when Justice Kagan was before the Senate
for confirmation, she limited her comments about her time in the
17
White House Counsel’s Office and her time in the Clinton Domestic
Policy Council in the White House.
Senator MENENDEZ. My time has expired, but I just want to say
I did not ask you what you specifically did, if you did something.
I asked you whether you were involved. I did not ask you about
any confidentiality when I asked the question about the way that
the President classified Inspector Atkinson. And I think that inde-
pendence of Inspectors General, as you have stated, is incredibly
important. And so trying to judge how you view those actions inde-
pendently of whether you participated or not is very telling.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Next we will go to Senator Rounds.
Senator ROUNDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to begin with Mr. Miller. Earlier in testimony here
you did not get an opportunity to respond to the Ranking Member’s
suggestion that there was an inappropriate activity while you were
at OMB. I would like to give you an opportunity right now to re-
spond and maybe share with the rest of the Committee about your
activities and perhaps a defense of what the Ranking Member sug-
gested was inappropriate activity.
Mr. MILLER. Senator, thank you. I am assuming that you are re-
ferring to his comments——
Senator ROUNDS. I apologize. That was for Mrs. Wade, not for
Mr. Miller. Excuse me.
Mrs. WADE. Yes, Senator, thank you very much for the question,
and I appreciate the opportunity to be able to respond.
You know, I want to say, first of all, housing discrimination is
intolerable, and if confirmed, I will do everything I can to enforce
the Nation’s fair housing laws. That is my commitment. In addi-
tion, you know, related to my role at OMB, I led a resource man-
agement organization, and to that end it was our job and it was
my job to make sure that taxpayer money was spent efficiently and
economically. It is a very important oversight role in the Govern-
ment. I am very proud of the work that I did at OMB. So I thank
you for the opportunity to respond.
Senator ROUNDS. Thank you.
Mr. Miller, I do appreciate your conversations with me earlier.
I wish it was in person, but naturally we have been doing a lot of
these conversations long distance. And so I appreciated the com-
ments earlier today that we had.
I am just curious. I think it is really important that not only are
you in a position to talk about what might be of a criminal nature
that occur, but also in terms of making sure the programs run as
efficiently as possible and that they accomplish the goals that Con-
gress set out for them in the first place. Part of that is getting im-
mediate feedback. Members of Congress get that feedback in a lot
of cases, and I think while Senator Menendez was talking about
whether or not you would take a phone call from the White House,
I am just curious. Would you take a phone call from a Member of
the Senate who was looking at ways of making things better or at
least asking questions as to whether or not certain parts of the pro-
gram were being operated the way they were supposed to? Would
you take that type of a phone call from a Member of the Senate?
18
And what would you do to make it easy so that we can participate
in our oversight activities as quickly as possible?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, this is such an important program and it
is so important that this money gets to the right people that I
think we should be willing to look at how we can improve it in real
time. The Congress has an opportunity to clarify the act and clarify
how this is done. And if we find out that things are not working
well in a particular area, I think the Senate should be willing to
change it so that it can work better. And knowing where it is work-
ing and where it is not working in real time is vital.
And so in that respect, I would welcome a call from a Senator,
and it does make sense that I could talk to the Secretary as well
as other Treasury officials to know what they are doing, what is
working, what is not working. They could very well say, ‘‘Look, we
cannot make this program work,’’ and that can be part of my report
to the Congress.
Senator ROUNDS. Earlier we had discussed there should be ways
in which Members of perhaps the House or the Senate—because we
are talking with folks every single day about how these are work-
ing. Is there a way that you could establish or a procedure you
could establish to make it so that when Members of this Committee
or other committees want to get in touch with you, that it is seam-
less in nature, easier to make sure that we are getting information
to you and that you are recognizing the fact that we are contacting
you and responding back? Is there a process that you would be in-
terested in seeing pursued to make it easy for information that we
get to get passed down to your team?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, thank you for the question. I do believe it
is vital to share information, and I could see my office performing
the function of a clearinghouse, or the so-called PRAC, the Account-
ability Committee of IGs, could perform the function of a clearing-
house. So much of what we have to do will rely on data analytics
and IT systems. And to the extent that we are putting those in
place, I can see the benefits of having a system where we can hear
from the Congress in real time as well and perform a clearinghouse
function so that we know the information that is coming in to all
of us is getting to the right places.
Senator ROUNDS. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Senator Tester.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you,
Senator Crapo, and Senator Brown for doing this meeting and
doing it the way you are doing it. I appreciate it.
Mr. Miller, I had a chance to visit with you last week. I told you
that I was going to ask you questions you could not answer last
week, and that was, How many employees do you need to do this
job? And do you have the resources to do that? What is your an-
swer?
Mr. MILLER. I have the background and ability to do this job and
to do it independently. I have some resources. The act gives me
some resources. If I ever lack resources, I will be coming back to
this Committee to let you know.
19
Senator TESTER. OK. So you do not exactly know how many peo-
ple—or you do not have any idea how many people you are going
to need to do this job?
Mr. MILLER. Well, I think initially I will start with between prob-
ably 75 to 100. It will be hard to staff up quickly because I have
to build it from scratch and get hiring authority, go through the GS
system, and so starting up will take a lot of time. But I think that
to do the job effectively, I think I will need to start with somewhere
between 50 and 100, more like 75 to 100.
Senator TESTER. All right. Thanks, Brian. This $2 trillion pack-
age, this is the biggest package anybody has ever voted on, I think,
on this Committee. Will you commit to reporting to Congress im-
mediately if Treasury is not following the transparency require-
ments in the CARES Act that require Treasury to disclose loan re-
cipients?
Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir, I am required under the IG Act to report
serious problems to the Committee.
Senator TESTER. ‘‘Yes’’ is good. The CARES Act, the law, requires
you to notify Congress if you request information from agencies
and it is not provided to you. Do you promise to follow that provi-
sion of the law closely?
Mr. MILLER. I do.
Senator TESTER. Good. Inspectors General serve a critical role in
Government, regardless of whether that person in the White House
is a Democrat or a Republican. Do you promise to let Congress
know if you are being pressured in your position by political ap-
pointees or others to not pursue certain investigations or reviews?
Mr. MILLER. I will. And as I said, the IG Act requires that IGs
report serious problems to Congress. I will also report if Members
of Congress exert that pressure.
Senator TESTER. OK. That is good.
In a signing statement for the CARES Act, President Trump ar-
gued that his Administration has control over reports from SIGPR
to Congress and that SIGPR cannot report to Congress without his
permission. How do you interpret the Presidential supervision de-
scribed in the President’s statement accompanying the CARES Act?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am trying to avoid stepping in between
battles between the Executive branch and the legislative branch. I
will tell you——
Senator TESTER. OK, so let me make——
Mr. MILLER. ——that I will follow the law. Section 4 of the IG
Act requires me to report serious problems and to make reports to
Congress. I will do that.
Senator TESTER. So if the President says that you cannot report
this information to Congress, you will not only report that to Con-
gress, but you will tell us that the President tried to stop you from
reporting it?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, if the President himself does that, I would
think that would be a serious issue, yes.
Senator TESTER. You know how this works. You were in the
White House. You know how this works. If the President does it
or has one of his minions do it with direct connection back to the
President, I think it is important that you give this information to
us.
20
Mr. MILLER. I will report any undue influence on me from what-
ever source.
Senator TESTER. Perfect. So I am going to tell you, from my per-
spective right now—and this is from my perspective. I have been
stonewalled every step of the way trying to get information from
this Administration on where this money is going. Every single
step of the way. So your position is critically important if we are
going to have any level of oversight.
In your White House service, did you have any involvement, dis-
cussions, or awareness in the removal of Glenn Fine?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, as I said before, I cannot respond to ques-
tions——
Senator TESTER. Brian, Brian. A pretty simple question. Did you
have any involvement, discussions, or awareness in the removal of
Glenn Fine? Yes or no is good enough for me.
Mr. MILLER. OK. Senator, my ability to respond to questions
about what goes on in the White House Counsel’s Office or the
White House may be limited by my ethical obligation, ethical obli-
gations that bind all lawyers. And I will follow——
Senator TESTER. I will tell you——
Mr. MILLER. ——Justice Kagan’s example of limiting comments
about her service in the White House Counsel’s Office.
Senator TESTER. We are in a different situation here, Brian. First
of all, this is $2.2 trillion of taxpayer money. Second of all, I have
watched the President remove Atkinson, a question that Senator
Menendez talked to you about. I have watched him remove Rick
Bright when he challenged hydroxychloroquine. I have watched
him remove Colonel Vindaman and his brother when he testified
under oath on impeachment, and it did not happen. I have watched
him remove Glenn Fine.
The question is—you worked as White House Counsel. The fact
is I have no doubt that if you go against the President, he is going
to remove you because he has done it time and time and time
again.
The question is: Were you aware of the Glenn Fine situation or
the Atkinson situation? Did you have any input on it? Because,
quite frankly, that makes you part of the problem in the White
House.
Mr. MILLER. Senator, again, I will be independent. If the Presi-
dent removes me, he removes me. If I am unable to do my job, I
will resign. But I will do my job faithfully and independently. But
I will not comment on White House Counsel’s operations following
the example of Justice Kagan and many others who have come
from White House Counsel’s Office and gone to appointed positions,
independent positions, as judges and even in other positions.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Brian, for your willingness to serve.
You, too, Mrs. Wade. Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Senator.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. Senator Kennedy.
Senator KENNEDY. Congratulations to you both.
Mr. Miller, you were appointed Inspector General of GSA in
2005. Is that right?
Mr. MILLER. That is correct, Senator.
21
Senator KENNEDY. And who appointed you?
Mr. MILLER. President Bush.
Senator KENNEDY. And how long did you serve?
Mr. MILLER. Nearly 10 years, through much of the Obama ad-
ministration.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. And I believe you said you at one point
had to investigate the Administrator of GSA?
Mr. MILLER. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. Who appointed the Administrator of GSA that
you investigated?
Mr. MILLER. President Bush.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. And what were the conclusions of your
investigation of the Administrator appointed by President Bush?
Mr. MILLER. That she steered a contract to a friend in violation
of procurement law, and we also made a referral of a Hatch Act
violation to the Special Counsel, who made a conclusion that she
did violate the Hatch Act.
Senator KENNEDY. And you wrote a report on that, did you?
Mr. MILLER. We wrote a report on the steering of a contract to
a friend. The Special Counsel wrote a report on the Hatch Act vio-
lation.
Senator KENNEDY. Was the Administrator happy with your re-
port?
Mr. MILLER. She was livid.
Senator KENNEDY. Did she complain to the White House?
Mr. MILLER. She did.
Senator KENNEDY. Did anybody criticize you for writing that re-
port?
Mr. MILLER. Many people.
Senator KENNEDY. Give me some examples.
Mr. MILLER. Representative Mica called for the President to fire
me, Representative Davis also, and criticized me at a hearing and
publicly. Probably still does. Those come to mind. Certainly the Ad-
ministrator herself, certainly many other people, and some people
in the Administration still criticize me for that.
Senator KENNEDY. In the Bush administration?
Mr. MILLER. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. Did you change your report?
Mr. MILLER. Not at all.
Senator KENNEDY. Did you change your conclusion?
Mr. MILLER. Not at all.
Senator KENNEDY. So you just stood firm?
Mr. MILLER. I stood firm.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. Did that make you feel comfortable? Was
it a pleasant experience?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, no, it was not. But that goes with the terri-
tory of being an Inspector General. You are never comfortable, but
you have to do the right thing. At the end of the day, you have to
be comfortable with your own conscience. And it does not matter
what anybody else thinks or what even this August body thinks.
Senator KENNEDY. So you were appointed by President Bush.
The Administrator of GSA was appointed by President Bush.
Mr. MILLER. Yes.
22
Senator KENNEDY. You as Inspector General of GSA investigated.
You were appointed by President Bush. You as Inspector General
of GSA investigated the Administrator, head of your agency ap-
pointed by President Bush, and you wrote her up.
Mr. MILLER. I did.
Senator KENNEDY. And some people in the White House did not
like that. Some people in Congress did not like that.
Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. But you did not change your report?
Mr. MILLER. Not at all.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. Now, I have looked through your back-
ground, Mr. Miller. I have looked you up on the Internet. I have
googled you. I have read your resume. I have heard all the allega-
tions—maybe ‘‘allegations’’ is too strong a word—the innuendo or
the suggestions that you will be a puppet of the President. I do not
understand the basis for that. I have looked everywhere. Is there
anyplace in your background as an Assistant U.S. Attorney or the
Inspector General for a decade at GSA where you have backed
down because you have been told to back down?
Mr. MILLER. No, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. When you were an Assistant U.S. Attorney,
did you ever back off of a case because somebody with political in-
fluence told you to?
Mr. MILLER. No, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. I mean, is there anything in your history—I
cannot find it. Is there anything in your history that would indicate
that you are willing to sacrifice your principles if somebody in polit-
ical power tells you to?
Mr. MILLER. No. And, Senator, one of the letters is from some of
my special agents when I was Inspector General. It talks about
how I let them continue an investigation when there were some
people in the office that thought it should be shut down. And, ulti-
mately, they proved the case and got a conviction.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. Thank you.
Mrs. Wade, I think you are swell. I do not have any questions.
I am with you. I think you are going to do a great job.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Senator Warner.
[No response.]
Chairman CRAPO. Senator Warren. Elizabeth, Elizabeth Warren?
Senator KENNEDY. There she is.
Chairman CRAPO. Go ahead, Senator Warren. You are on, Sen-
ator Warren. Are either Senator Warner or Senator Warren——
Senator KENNEDY. I saw Senator Warren.
Chairman CRAPO. Senator Warren I believe is trying to get her
microphone to work.
Well, apparently, we are having some troubles there, so we will
come back to Senator Warren, but we will move at this moment to
Senator Van Hollen.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you
hear me OK?
Chairman CRAPO. We can hear you.
23
Senator VAN HOLLEN. Excellent. Well, I want to congratulate
both the witnesses on your nominations. Ms. Wade, I will be sub-
mitting some questions for the record with respect to your nomina-
tion.
Mr. Miller, you were, of course, nominated to be the Special In-
spector General for the Pandemic Recovery, and as many have
pointed out, that requires independence. It also requires a deter-
mination to conduct rigorous investigations that get to the truth,
to get to the facts that uncover any wrongdoing. So I want to ask
you about your role in responding to the investigation conducted by
the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office into the Admin-
istration’s withholding of vitally needed security assistance to
Ukraine.
I asked GAO to conduct that inquiry, and GAO ultimately con-
cluded that the Administration’s withholding of that security as-
sistance was illegal under the Impoundment Control Act. The GAO
also raised major concerns about the Executive branch
stonewalling their inquiry, saying in their report that the blocking
of the investigation rose to the level, and I quote, of ‘‘constitutional
significance.’’
You personally participated in that stonewalling as the White
House lawyer who signed a letter to GAO stating that the White
House would not provide a substantive reply. I must say I was a
little stunned when Senator Reed asked you about that letter and
you dismissed it as ‘‘just answering the mail.’’
If you are confirmed as the Inspector General here and you wrote
to an agency with information about one of the issues you were in-
vestigating and they refused to respond, would that be acceptable
to you?
Mr. MILLER. No, sir. I was answering the mail for GAO. I wanted
to make sure they received an answer. I respect GAO and wanted
to make sure that their inquiries were responded to. And so I
stepped in and made sure that they got a response, and the letter
does say that the General Counsel of OMB responded to their ques-
tions.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. Well, I have the letter you signed dated
December 20, 2019, here responding to Mr. Armstrong, General
Counsel at GAO. The last sentence of that letter is, ‘‘The White
House does not plan to respond separately to your letter,’’ and you
cite an OMB letter. Can you tell us today under oath that the
White House did not have in its own possession information that
was responsive to the GAO inquiry?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, there are two reasons why I cannot re-
spond to that. I cannot talk about confidentiality in the White
House. Second, I am not familiar with those issues. I am familiar
with the fact that the previous sentence of the letter says the Gen-
eral Counsel of OMB responded to the questions of GAO, and in-
stead of having separate responses from Chief of Staff Mulvaney
and White House Counsel Cipollone, the White House was relying
on the General Counsel of OMB, the Budget Office, to respond to
that particular issue.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. Right, but the letter was seeking docu-
ments and other factual information. So is it your testimony today
under oath that the OMB letter and their response met all the re-
24
quirements that you would consider necessary to be fully truthful
and honest in their response?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am simply saying that I sent the letter
to make sure GAO had the response of the appropriate officials in
the White House. Regarding the General Counsel’s——
Senator VAN HOLLEN. I understand, but——
Mr. MILLER. ——letter, you should ask the General Counsel of
OMB.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Miller, I understand that. The last
sentence says, ‘‘The White House does not plan to respond sepa-
rately to your letter.’’ So I am asking you whether your testimony
is that the White House did not have any additional information
that was responsive to the GAO inquiry. As I understand your
statement today, you either do not know or will not say. Is that
correct?
Mr. MILLER. Sir, it is probably both. But I think this is an exam-
ple of no good deed goes unpunished. I have respect for GAO. I
wanted to make sure the letter was responded to, and the letter
did get responded to, and they could stop inquiring, and they had
an answer to their inquiries.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. But, Mr. Miller, with all respect, what
your letter says—you are saying it was great that you responded,
but the last sentence says you do not plan to respond separately.
So my final question is: If you were confirmed in this position and
you are an Inspector General and an agency gave you the response
that you got from the White House that you signed, would you find
that stonewalling acceptable?
Mr. MILLER. First of all, Senator, I think I am over time. With
the Chairman’s indulgence, I would like to continue.
Chairman CRAPO. Briefly, please.
Mr. MILLER. You know, as far as the letter goes, the General
Counsel of the Office of Budget was answering a budget question.
And I was simply pointing out, look, you have the response. And
I am not really sure what your question is getting at, Senator.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. OK. Well, Mr. Chairman, I thank you. It
was not just asking for OMB’s response. The reason they also
wrote to the White House was to get any documents and relevant
information that the White House may have had with respect to
their inquiry. You essentially gave them a nonresponse. You said,
‘‘Talk to the other agency.’’ My question has been: As an IG, would
that be acceptable to you conducting investigations?
Chairman CRAPO. Well, we need to move on.
Senator VAN HOLLEN. I have to conclude from your answers that
it would not be.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CRAPO. We are going to go back now and see if Sen-
ator Warren is available. Senator Warren.
Senator WARREN. Thank you. So we are in the middle of a public
health pandemic crisis that has already killed more than 60,000
people, and half a step behind this health crisis is an economic cri-
sis that threatens the security of tens of millions of people across
this country. The CARES Act created a $500 billion slush fund for
giant corporations, and if confirmed as the Special Inspector Gen-
eral, it will be Mr. Miller’s job to conduct the oversight of this
25
money and to make sure that it is spent to benefit workers and
families, not shareholders and corporate executives.
So, Mr. Miller, let us just start with the basics. You would be
given broad authority under the CARES Act to investigate all of
the money that Treasury hands out in the coronavirus response, all
of the funds distributed by taxpayer-backed lending through the
Federal Reserve, and what the companies do with the loans and
grants. Is that correct?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I will follow the law and make sure that
I do an investigation of those programs.
Senator WARREN. These are the easy questions. Again, can we
just do yes, that is right?
Mr. MILLER. Could you repeat the question, please?
Senator WARREN. I am just citing what the law says. It will——
Mr. MILLER. I will follow the law, whatever it says.
Senator WARREN. All right. And the law gives you the same au-
thority as all Inspectors General under the Inspector General
Act——
Mr. MILLER. Yes.
Senator WARREN. ——to conduct investigations for the ‘‘purpose
of promoting economy and efficiency’’ or ‘‘preventing and detecting
fraud and abuse in Government programs.’’ Is that right?
Mr. MILLER. That is correct.
Senator WARREN. OK. So the law gives you the authority and it
gives you the tools to investigate the people who are handing out
the money and who get the money. So now I just want to ask how
you plan to use your authority, and I want to get specific on this.
I want to ask about how you will investigate how the money is
used.
For example, if a giant corporation gets bailouts financed by tax-
payer dollars from CARES and then lays off or furloughs a bunch
of its workers, I think we agreed when we spoke yesterday that
this would constitute potential waste or abuse of taxpayer bailout
funds. Would you investigate in such a case?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am not going to answer hypotheticals, but
I will tell you that I would investigate any misuse of the monies,
and the money needs to go to where——
Senator WARREN. I need a general idea, though, of what might
constitute an abuse in your mind. That is how we evaluate whether
or not you are going to be an Inspector General who is going to be
looking out for taxpayer funds. So you said yesterday when you
and I spoke privately that you thought that that would constitute
a potential waste or abuse of taxpayer bailout funds, and I just
want to know: If that is the case, would you investigate?
Mr. MILLER. I will investigate any situation that I consider an
abuse of taxpayer funds.
Senator WARREN. Do you consider a case where a giant corpora-
tion gets bailouts financed by taxpayer dollars from CARES and
then lays off a bunch of its workers as at least a potential waste
or abuse that you would have to investigate and find out more?
Mr. MILLER. Yes, Senator.
Senator WARREN. Good, good. So let us do another one we talked
about. If a giant corporation lobbies Congress or the White House
26
and then gets a bailout financed by taxpayers, is that a potential
situation for fraud or abuse that you would investigate?
Mr. MILLER. Well, Senator, I am not comfortable answering
hypotheticals, but certainly if——
Senator WARREN. I am not comfortable with a person——
Mr. MILLER. ——a company is——
Senator WARREN. ——who will not tell me what he would inves-
tigate——
Mr. MILLER. The purpose——
Senator WARREN. I am not asking for the name of a particular
company. I am just asking, in general is that the kind of thing that
would trigger your saying an investigation is appropriate? When
we spoke yesterday in private, you said you thought it was, and I
just want this in public, on the record, when you are under oath.
Mr. MILLER. Right, I just want to be careful about hypotheticals,
Senator. Certainly situations where companies are spending the
money for profits and laying off workers seems to be a situation
that I would want to investigate.
Senator WARREN. Good. And how about when companies are lob-
bying Congress or the White House, either one? You said you want
to look at both. How about that? Is that a potential circumstance
you would want to investigate?
Mr. MILLER. Again, Senator, I am not comfortable with the whole
hypothetical——
Senator WARREN. But you were comfortable in private yesterday.
In fact, when I asked about the White House, you said you wanted
to include Congress in that as well, a company that lobbied both.
I do not understand why you will not say the same thing in public
right now.
Mr. MILLER. You know, Senator, I am going to investigate any
area that I think is an abuse of these monies because——
Senator WARREN. And what I am trying to ask is do you think
lobbying and then getting money is a potential for abuse that you
would investigate.
Mr. MILLER. It is possible, Senator.
Senator WARREN. It is possible, and so if it is possible, would you
investigate?
Mr. MILLER. And I would investigate it if it were lobbying the
Congress or the White House.
Senator WARREN. Good. That is all I wanted. And then a third
one, and that is, even if the Treasury Department does not put any
restrictions in the loan documents or ask for information about how
the money will be used or restrict corporate lobbying or avoid po-
tential conflicts of interest, will you request that information from
companies that receive loans under this program?
Mr. MILLER. I will investigate all potential conflicts of interest,
and if I do not have the information through the Department of
Treasury, I will request and then subpoena the information if I do
not get it.
Senator WARREN. Good. And will you make that information pub-
lic so that taxpayers can see what is going on?
Mr. MILLER. My goal is to make all information public and to in-
form the taxpayer. The only possible exception, Senator, would be
if it was part of a criminal referral to the Department of Justice.
27
Senator WARREN. Good. I am very glad to hear that because I be-
lieve that transparency is important.
Look, I think that the CARES Act should have slapped ironclad
rules on companies getting a bailout, but the Republicans refused.
Now the primary tool that we have to stop corporations from using
this bailout to enrich themselves is rigorous oversight.
Mr. Miller, your time working as one of President Trump’s im-
peachment defense attorneys should have disqualified you from
being nominated to oversee the President’s management of one of
the largest corporate bailouts in American history. The demands on
you will be particularly intense because this President has already
fired multiple Inspectors General because he could not tolerate any
criticism, and he has already said that he will muzzle you. You
will, however, have the chance to defend your independence and
your integrity by your actions if you stick to the commitments that
you have made here and you are an aggressive watchdog, and I am
prepared to work with you on it. Thank you, Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Senator. I would like to work with you
even if you do not vote for my confirmation, as you indicated yes-
terday.
Chairman CRAPO. We will now move to Senator Tillis.
Senator TILLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Miller, Ms. Wade,
thank you for being there. I regret it is under these difficult cir-
cumstances.
Mr. Miller, in response to some of Senator Toomey’s questions
and Senator Kennedy’s questions, I feel like we have got two dif-
ferent Millers before the Committee. On the one hand, we have
people questioning your independence, particularly under the
weight and the pressure of an Administration, but you again inves-
tigated someone who was appointed by President Bush; you your-
self were appointed by President Bush. That investigation did not
change one bit regardless of the pressure you got from Capitol Hill
and I would suspect others. And what was the ultimate disposition
of the person in the GSA—what was the ultimate disposition of
that person’s position?
Mr. MILLER. She was asked to resign, Senator.
Senator TILLIS. OK. And earlier Ranking Member Brown charac-
terized one of your writings as something that seemed to question
your commitment to independence. In your response to him, you
said it was a mischaracterization of what you wrote. Would you
mind going back over that for me very briefly? And then I have a
question for Ms. Wade as well.
Mr. MILLER. Well, my concern was that Inspectors General are
independent of both the Executive branch and the congressional
branch. And my concern with the article was that Inspectors Gen-
eral need to understand that they are also independent of undue
pressure from the Congress, and that is the gist of the entire arti-
cle. In fact, I say in the article that it is fundamental for an Inspec-
tor General to be independent.
Senator TILLIS. So just to sum it up, you investigated someone
who was put forth by President Bush, you were put forth by Presi-
dent Bush; you continued in spite of pressure you were getting
from Capitol Hill and others, did not change one word of your re-
port, and it ultimately resulted in the removal of that person from
28
a position. That sounds like a pretty good case history on independ-
ence to me, but I guess others may have a different view.
Operationally, do you think that the 5-year period is going to be
sufficient time to audit this program?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am going to do my best to work myself
out of a job. You know, I believe that we need effective oversight.
I do know that there are a lot of oversight instruments, organiza-
tions that will be providing oversight. If we can do this within 5
years, I would like to do that. But it is too early to tell exactly
whether 5 years is the right amount of time.
Senator TILLIS. Well, thank you, Mr. Miller. I have confidence
that you will go about this job in a very independent way and you
will hold anybody accountable who tries to veer you off of what you
think is right.
Just one last question for you, and then if time permits, Ms.
Wade. Is there such a thing as good fraud and bad fraud?
Mr. MILLER. I would think that any fraud is bad.
Senator TILLIS. I think fraud is fraud, and so what I expect—and
I appreciated the time that you spent on the phone with me yester-
day. And I asked you if you were committed to taking a look at all
the benefactors of the programs that come under the CARES Act,
and you look through the simple lens of was any of the monies, the
taxpayer dollars, that were sent out in good faith to help us recover
during this virus response inappropriately allocated to somebody
because of fraud. I want you to go after the big businesses, the
small businesses, and everybody in between if they have taken ad-
vantage of this program. I hope that we will not have members on
the other side of the aisle that will come up with this concept of
good fraud and justified fraud because, in my opinion, fraud is
fraud.
So I look forward to supporting your nomination, Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Senator.
Senator TILLIS. Ms. Wade, we have had some time to digest the
CARES Act. There are clearly things that we need to do to adjust
it. We effectively did by appropriating the additional more than
$300 billion to the Paycheck Protection Program. But within your
lanes, can you think of anything that we should be thinking about
moving forward as we make potential changes, expansions, refine-
ments, maybe changing deadlines or timeframes? Can you think of
anything off the top of your head that would be within your lanes
once you are confirmed?
Mrs. WADE. Yes, Senator, that is a great question, and I appre-
ciate your work here. As you alluded to, the CARES Act has al-
ready provided tremendous support to housing markets and to bor-
rowers. First of all, as you know, it has provided up to a year of
forbearance for borrowers. It has provided an eviction and a fore-
closure moratorium.
I think, you know, this is an evolving situation. It is one that we
are continuing to monitor on a day-to-day basis and in real time,
and we will use a data-driven approach to provide any additional
assistance and any flexibility. But I think, you know, when it
comes to what should we think of as sort of the next phase, HUD
always appreciates assistance in providing flexibility across offices
in order to get this aid and other aid, any future assistance that
29
Congress is considering, out as quickly as possible. So I would be
happy to work with you on that objective.
Senator TILLIS. And I can think of the forbearance issue and
other things we are going to have to take a look at, so I look for-
ward to getting your input. Congratulations and happy birthday to
your little girl tomorrow.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman CRAPO. Next is Senator Warner.
Senator WARNER. [Inaudible] ——questions that have been
asked. I have been in an Intelligence Committee classified brief for
the last couple hours.
I want to start with Mr. Miller on that subject. I think some of
my colleagues may have asked the question about Michael Atkin-
son, but since this was something I was intimately involved with—
and I hope I am not looking as yellow to the rest of my colleagues
as I look on this screen to me. This is not a case of full-on jaundice
yet.
Chairman CRAPO. We will work on that.
Senator WARNER. Right now this looks pretty god-awful.
But, Mr. Miller, you know, having been very, very familiar with
Michael Atkinson and his actions in regard to reporting and trying
to protect the whistleblower that led to the issue around the Presi-
dent’s engagement with the Ukrainian President, and you having
been involved as an IG and then White House Counsel, based on
any personal knowledge you may have or anything that you have
seen in the record, is there any indication to you that Michael At-
kinson was not performing his duties appropriately as Inspector
General for the intelligence community?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, Mr. Atkinson was in an IG position, but it
was a specialized IG position, and it is governed by statutes gov-
erning national intelligence. I am just not familiar with the facts
or the law in that situation, so I am reluctant to give an opinion
where I do not have all the facts.
Senator WARNER. No, it is nothing that—you are a former IG for
a decade. You were in the White House Counsel’s Office. Was there
anything even based upon secondary—secondhand knowledge that
was any kind of evidence that Michael Atkinson was inappropri-
ately performing his duties as Inspector General for the IC?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I do not have all the facts.
Senator WARNER. If you accept—my premise was unfortunately
Mr. Atkinson was fired for doing his job, and regardless of the
President’s legal authority, what kind of effect does the President
even with legal authority—what kind of chilling effect or other ef-
fect does it have on the Inspector General community if the Presi-
dent is simply firing people because the results of their activities
lead to substantive results that he does not like, whether, obvi-
ously, in the case of the whistleblower’s complaint in the case of
Ukraine or the more recent dismissal of the Inspectors General
over at HHS in terms of doing their work on an independent inves-
tigation, what kind of effect does the President’s actions have on
your previous community’s IGs?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, my experience as an IG is that an IG al-
ways faces the possibility that they may be fired. They serve at the
pleasure of the President, and they may be fired for whatever rea-
30
sons as long as the President states them in writing to both Houses
of Congress. And so you just have to do your job and let the con-
sequences be what they may be. But you should never be afraid of
stating the truth, and if you have to be fired, you are fired. But
you always have to be prepared at least to walk away from your
job. That goes with the territory of being an Inspector General.
Senator WARNER. So you have no concerns from kind of a stand-
point of the Inspector General community, and, clearly, you would
be taking on a position here that it appears the President, one,
does not like IGs; two, does not like oversight generally; and, three,
we are talking about an area where there is huge distributions of
funds. You know, I understand you are trying to get through a
nomination process here, but it just seems to me that this record
of firing IGs based upon the substantive results of their work dif-
fering from the President’s positions would be something that
would cause some consternation.
I see my time is about up, but I would like to also submit, Mr.
Chairman, some questions for the record for Ms. Wade in terms of
how we are going to deal with the forbearance issues going forward
and the possible need of a liquidity facility that I think the Fed is
interested in to make sure that we do not have more major disrup-
tions in the housing market.
Thank you for the time.
Chairman CRAPO. And you will be able to submit questions at
the end. I will put the date on that. They would be due by May
7th. I will repeat that at the end of the hearing.
Senator Cotton has also given me a letter. He was at that Intel-
ligence Committee hearing as well and has been unable to get to
this hearing. He, too, looks forward to submitting some questions
and does also want to have a conversation with you in person, Mr.
Miller, and so you could expect to have that conversation.
Our next Senator will be Senator Cortez Masto.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Good afternoon, everyone. I want to con-
gratulate both Mr. Miller and Mrs. Wade on your nominations, and
thank you for taking the time to speak with me over the phone.
Mrs. Wade, let me start with you. We had this conversation
when I talked with you on the phone, but as you know, in Nevada
we were so hard hit by the financial crisis, and during that time
I saw where lenders who took people’s homes, they took them in
foreclosure, and there was, unfortunately, a forging of documents
and lying to customers. And in September of 2017, HUD’s Office
of Inspector General issued a report entitled, ‘‘HUD did not have
adequate controls to ensure that servicers properly engaged in loss
mitigation.’’
Now fast forward to where we are today. Last week, the HUD
Office of Inspector General published another report on its review
of 30 FHA servicers’ websites, and the report found that the
servicers’ websites provided incomplete, inconsistent data and un-
clear guidance to borrowers related to their forbearance options
under the CARES Act. Servicers should obviously not be providing
this type of misinformation. It is conduct that I worked so hard as
Attorney General, so many of us did, to correct and prevent, and
we are seeing it again.
31
So my question to you is: How do you ensure that servicers pro-
vide clear and fair guidance on forbearance to homeowners and
prevent this type of bad conduct from occurring during this crisis?
Mrs. WADE. Senator, I appreciate the question. This is a very im-
portant issue to me, and I want to start by saying, you know, first
of all, fraud at any level should never be tolerated, and I think we
learned a lot of lessons following the financial crisis.
To your point specifically about ensuring that servicers are com-
municating the right policies to homeowners, that is also a priority.
You know, again, this can be a confusing time; it is an uncertain
time. And if confirmed, I would do whatever I could do to ensure
that there was as much clarity there as possible. In particular, I
know currently HUD is working with the CFPB, with the FHFA,
to provide a single source for information to borrowers. You know,
I think this is something we have to monitor vigilantly. We want
to make sure that these programs are working as they are de-
signed. And as you mentioned, servicers are required to provide
forbearance as well as loss mitigation, and they are required to fol-
low certain policies of FHA.
So, you know, again, if confirmed, this is something that I plan
to take a look at and keep a close eye on.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Well, thank you, and I am already hear-
ing anecdotally some stories from homeowners about what
servicers are telling them.
Let me ask you this: Are you also willing to take a look at the
oversight of servicers by appropriate sampling and review of com-
panies and talking with borrowers? I am hopeful that you are en-
gaged at that level. That is the only way we are going to stop any
type of bad conduct by servicers.
Mrs. WADE. Well, Senator, I will take a look at any data that is
presented to me, and as you know, FHA has a lot of enforcement
tools available. I believe in strong and clear enforcement. It is an-
other important objective. And so, again——
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Can I ask you this? And I do not mean
to cut you off, but I only have so much time. So there should be
a complaint process. You should be able to access this information
readily, and that is what I am looking for. So I am hopeful that,
working with you, we can ensure that we are addressing this issue.
I think we all know all fraud is bad. I do not care what side of the
aisle we sit on. All fraud is bad, and we want to stop it. And so
we need to make sure that we are accessing the information to help
us identify it, so then enforcement action can be taken. So I hope
that we are able to do so.
Let me jump to Mr. Miller real quick. Mr. Miller, there is no
doubt in my mind that you have got extensive experience as IG,
and I am very impressed by your background and your resume.
But let me just say this—and you can tell from all of the conversa-
tions that my colleagues are asking you, there is a concern with
this Administration and a lack of independence. It is not that the
President is somehow not saying this overtly and he is covertly hid-
ing behind the scenes and talking about how he is not going to be
held accountable. He is actually saying in public—in fact, instead
of respecting the CARES Act and longstanding precedents sup-
porting the independence of Inspectors General, which you have
32
been for so many years, the President said, ‘‘I will be the over-
sight.’’ I mean, he is very clear about it, and that is why you are
getting these questions.
So let me just ask you very quickly: If the White House or an
agency asks you to withhold information, would you notify Con-
gress immediately of this request?
Mr. MILLER. Yes, Senator.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. If the White House wanted Treasury to
show preference in the CARES Act funding to States for political
gain, would you consider that a violation and report it immediately
to Congress?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I did not hear all of your question. I am
sorry.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. If the White House wanted Treasury to
show preference in the CARES Act funding to States for political
gain, would you consider that a violation and——
Mr. MILLER. I would consider that a violation, Senator.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. If the White House wanted Treasury to
obtain information on corporate political donations prior to Treas-
ury allocating CARES Act financing, would you consider that a vio-
lation and report it immediately to Congress?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I need more facts, but that does sound like
it could be.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Do you plan to gain Presidential ap-
proval before investigating contracts, issuing reports, or commu-
nicating with Congress?
Mr. MILLER. No, Senator.
Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. Listen, most of the questions
have been asked, but these are serious times, and this is such an
important issue with respect to the act, and making sure we are
doing right by so many people across this country, there are so
many, and too many people are still suffering, and we are looking
for people to stand up and do the right thing here. And so I appre-
ciate your willingness to work, quite honestly, in this Administra-
tion with everything that is going on, but we are going to hold you
accountable. And at the end of the day, I am hopeful that I get to
work with both of you. But we are going to ask the tough ques-
tions, and I am not going to let up. It is too important that we ad-
dress the suffering that is happening across this country.
So thank you again.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Senator Jones.
Senator JONES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope everybody can
hear me.
Mr. Miller, thank you for the phone call the other day. I want
to ask you three questions that just require an answer with a num-
ber. One a scale of one to ten, with zero and one being no respect
and ten being absolute, unshakable respect, how would you rate
President Bush’s respect for the independence of Inspectors Gen-
eral?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, I am not comfortable evaluating Presi-
dents’ performances, whether it is past Presidents or the current
President.
33
Senator JONES. Well, would you at least acknowledge then that
this President has a view of the independence of Inspectors Gen-
eral that is so far less than President Bush or President Obama?
Even though they have let folks go, this President—can you at
least acknowledge that this President—because you told me the
other day in our phone call that it was a challenge, it would be a
challenge working for President Trump. Can you at least acknowl-
edge that?
Mr. MILLER. This is going to be a very challenging and demand-
ing position. There is no question about that. And I will go where
the facts lead, and they may be facts that the President and the
Administration do not like, but I will state them anyway.
Senator JONES. Well, I appreciate that, but I keep hearing so
much—and, look, you have got great records. You have got great
experience. My friend Helen Fahey, who I served with as U.S. At-
torney, thinks highly of you. But I have also heard so much about
this one time when you challenged President Bush. But the fact is
this President is harder to challenge, and I think everybody recog-
nizes that. I would hope to see some acknowledgment of that from
you a little bit more than we have today because that really kind
of shows the independence.
You did mention that you might—there would be occasions where
you would either resign or walk away, but are there other ways to
push back on a President who is trying to influence the independ-
ence of an Inspector General short of just walking away from the
job in frustration?
Mr. MILLER. Certainly, and I will do my job to the best of my
ability, and I will do the job of an Inspector General. Sometimes
that involves working with Administration officials to convince
them that they should change the program or that they should
allow you to get information. That is part of leadership and experi-
ence, both of which I have and would like to use as Inspector Gen-
eral to avoid these conflicts. And it has been more than one time
that I have had to investigate and make adverse reports and face
tough criticism, not just with the one Administrator that was re-
moved but with major contractors and even political appointees in
both Administrations.
Senator JONES. In any of those Administrations, did you ever
work as a lawyer in the White House Counsel for those Adminis-
trations?
Mr. MILLER. Did I work as a lawyer?
Senator JONES. Yeah. Were you in the White House Counsel for
those Administrations and then became an Inspector General like
you are moving to now?
Mr. MILLER. I have not, but President Obama—since my con-
versation with a Senator yesterday, I went back and refreshed my
recollection, but President Obama appointed Elena Kagan to the
Supreme Court, and she had been in a political position in his Ad-
ministration and had served in the Clinton White House.
Senator JONES. OK. I appreciate that.
Mr. MILLER. And there were others.
Senator JONES. And my question was—and it is OK. I mean,
look, I was hoping to get a little bit more from you, but it is OK.
Mr. MILLER. I am not sure what you want.
34
Senator JONES. Well, I was asking about you, not about Elena
Kagan. I know her history.
Mr. MILLER. OK, and there is——
Senator JONES. I was just trying to help out a little bit, to try
to establish a little bit that when you say you are going to be inde-
pendent, your job being independent here is going to be harder
than just about any other Inspector General. But my time is run-
ning out. I appreciate your being here and I appreciate you are
willing to serve, Mr. Miller. I really do. And I hope you will be as
tough and as independent as you say and as to some extent your
history says.
I would like to get a question to Ms. Wade, though. I appreciate,
Ms. Wade, even though I was very disappointed to see your old
boss not wearing his University of Alabama mask—I thought that
would be really good for the Committee this morning. But I would
like to ask you about the proposed rule for disparate impact that
HUD has now published. And I am very concerned about that rule
and how it is going to, in my view, make it almost impossible to
bring discrimination complaints. Are you familiar with that rule?
And do you have an opinion about that rule?
Mrs. WADE. Well, Senator, I appreciate the question. I under-
stand that Secretary Carson has already addressed this. It is my
understanding that the intent of the rule is to codify the 2015 Su-
preme Court decision. However, this is not a rule that would be
under my direct purview as FHA Commissioner.
Senator JONES. OK. I still do not think Secretary Carson ad-
dressed it. I think he gave an answer, but I certainly cannot agree
that he fully addressed it, and I think it is inconsistent with that.
But be that as it may, I will leave it there. I may have some ques-
tions for the record for both of you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing, and thank
you, everybody, for participating.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
Senator Smith.
Senator SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Brown, and thank you to both Mr. Miller and Mrs. Wade for being
willing to serve. And thank you, Mr. Miller, for our conversation
yesterday.
I want to try to get a sense from you of how you see the author-
ity of the Special IG, what parts of the CARES Act you see you
have authority over, and so here is one example. I have heard from
a lot of Minnesotans about problems getting the recovery rebate
payments that most Americans were supposed to receive. Minneso-
tans are calling my office and saying that the payments went to
the wrong bank or to a bank account that does not exist or people
are getting payments based on their 2018 tax information even
though they filed 2019 returns. And, of course, some payments are
going to dead people, and folks do not know how to return them.
This strikes me as exactly the kind of waste and mismanagement
that an Inspector General should be looking into. But when I have
asked the IRS about these problems, what they have told us is that
my constituents should just wait until next year when they file
their 2020 tax return, and then these issues would be resolved by
then. But, of course, these are folks that are needing that $1,200
35
to pay rent or they might get evicted, to buy groceries so they can
postpone going to the food shelves.
So my question is this: If you are confirmed, the CARES Act
would charge you with examining the management of the Secretary
of any program established under this act. Do you believe that you
would have jurisdiction over looking at how these recovery rebate
payments have been made?
Mr. MILLER. If the CARES Act gives me that authority to review
how the Secretary is performing, administering the programs, cer-
tainly I would look at that. And certainly in the situation that you
describe, I certainly would be working with the Small Business Ad-
ministration IG and with the so-called PRAC, Accountability Com-
mittee of IGs, and making sure that they are examining how these
programs are being administered and how these payments are
being misdirected.
Senator SMITH. But do you believe that the CARES Act does give
you that authority?
Mr. MILLER. The CARES Act gives me authority certainly over
Title IV of the CARES Act and certainly authority to work with the
PRAC and the IGs individually. And I think one of the lessons that
I have learned from the SIGTARP is to form task forces to obtain
authority and jurisdiction in areas that need to be explored. And
so certainly I would try and obtain authority where necessary to
look into those matters. And if I did not have that authority, I
would try and make sure that the IG that has authority is actively
and aggressively going after that.
Senator SMITH. OK. Well, I think that my view is that you would
have that authority, and this is exactly the kind of mismanagement
that we need to look into. But let me ask you another one.
There has been a real worry about how these direct recovery pay-
ments are getting to people who are experiencing homelessness, so
I wrote a letter to Secretary Mnuchin about this—27 of my col-
leagues signed on—asking the Treasury Department how they plan
to make sure that folks that are experiencing homelessness could
access their coronavirus payments, and I have not heard back.
Meanwhile, the IRS has published some promotional materials tell-
ing people experiencing homelessness that they can sign up online.
But, clearly, that is not going to work if you do not have access to
online solutions like countless Americans and people especially ex-
periencing homelessness do not.
So would you consider that a part of your role as Special Inspec-
tor General to make sure that all Americans can get access to these
payments as the law requires?
Mr. MILLER. Senator, certainly I would look into that situation,
and certainly I would like the act to get the money to the people
that it is intended to have the money. Certainly this money is nec-
essary to help average Americans during this time and small busi-
nesses that are being depleted during this time and to replace pay-
checks that they otherwise would have gotten.
Senator SMITH. See, I think that one of the most important
things that you can do in this Inspector General role is to hold the
Administration accountable for implementing this law as the law
was intended. And so that is why we so carefully included this In-
spector General in this job, and it is why honestly so many of my
36
colleagues are so concerned about this, especially since, you know,
when he signed the act, the President said, ‘‘Oh, by the way, you
know, I can say whether or not the Inspector General shares infor-
mation with Congress.’’ And that is why we included this language
in the bill, because we wanted to make sure that that did happen.
So this is, I think, why people are feeling so concerned. You
know, we talked about this yesterday. I appreciate you getting on
the phone with me and talking about it, but I have to say I remain
concerned about this.
I also just want to say one last thing before we wrap this up.
This is focused on part of the CARES Act that is extremely impor-
tant to me. It has to do with the tribal governments and getting
the $8 billion in tribal recovery relief to America’s tribal govern-
ments, including Minnesota tribes who are suffering greatly right
now. The Navajo Nation in New Mexico is another example as one
of the worst-hit hot spots in the entire country, and yet we are still
waiting for the Treasury Department to release the $8 billion that
was appropriated and authorized by Congress in the CARES Act.
And I just want to draw attention to this, colleagues. This is unac-
ceptable. The Treasury Department has said something today
about how they might get it out. The deadline for this was April
26, and tribal governments are dealing with a catastrophic loss of
revenue and employment.
Mr. Miller, these are the kinds of challenges that you are going
to be having to cope with, I believe, if you are confirmed to this
role, holding this Administration accountable when it is not doing
what the law requires it to do. And it is why we need such a strong
Inspector General. So thank you for your willingness to serve.
Mrs. Wade, I have a couple questions for the record for you, and
I am grateful for your willingness to serve as well.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you.
And Senator Brown, our Ranking Member, will have the final
question. Senator Brown.
Senator BROWN. Thank you, and if I could, Mr. Chair, a final
question for each one of them. And thank you for the forbearance
of all of you. I think this was an unmitigated success today, doing
this hearing this way. There were probably a lot of skeptics on the
Hill about whether you could pull it off, so thanks again to Gregg
and to Laura and to Cameron, the three real stars who put this
together. And, Mike, thank you for doing this, too.
I wanted to just echo for a moment what Senator Smith just said
about tribal governments. I was on a call this morning with a num-
ber of community action agencies and what has happened with
health disparities in this country. Somebody said to me, not in this
meeting but in an earlier conference call earlier in the week, that
the pandemic is really the great revealer in so much of what has
happened with tribal health and African Americans’ health in
terms of infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy is so
glaring, and I am hopeful that both of you as public servants, long-
time public servants in the case of both of you, will pay special at-
tention to what Senator Smith said, and all of us on these issues.
But I have just a comment or a question to each.
37
Mrs. Wade, I would like to follow up on Senator Rounds’ com-
ments. I never suggested that you did anything inappropriate. I did
not use that word. I do not think you did anything inappropriate.
I did say that under your leadership OMB approved rules that civil
rights leaders and housing advocates and faith leaders and many
Members of this body described as ranging from problematic to con-
trary to the purpose of the law, including fair housing. You said
you would enforce vigorously the Fair Housing Act. But when most
of the participants—again, housing advocates, civil rights leaders,
faith leaders—think what you did there was compromising that,
that is concerning. These rules would undoubtedly be devastating
to millions of people, especially people of color, especially low- and
moderate-income people.
So my question is this: How do I square your work at OMB with
the comments you have made today that you now plan to help so
many of those same people?
Mrs. WADE. Well, Senator, I appreciate the question, and, you
know, I can only assure you and promise to you that I will do ev-
erything to enforce the Nation’s fair housing laws and that I find
housing discrimination abhorrent and completely unacceptable.
HUD spends a lot of time investigating fair housing complaints. It
has an entire office that is dedicated to investigating and to enforc-
ing the Nation’s fair housing laws. If confirmed, I will do whatever
I can to support those efforts.
Senator BROWN. Well, I appreciate that. I take you at your word.
I also, though, am a bit cautious about not believing you but think-
ing you will do this, because at OMB you essentially did the oppo-
site, at least according to people that I trust on these issues, in-
cluding civil rights and housing advocates. And they think this is,
in fact, just, you know, setting more in concrete the kind of dis-
crimination from Jim Crow to redlining to what we have now. But
thank you and good luck to you through this process.
Mr. Miller, a follow-up on an earlier question. You said you
would use your authority to oversee the Secretary of the Treasury.
This was my mistake in the hearing because I should have followed
up, but you did not say anything about the Federal Reserve. The
Treasury is authorized, as you know, to give hundreds of billions
to the Federal Reserve, which will then lend trillions of dollars to
businesses. So do you believe the law that created this Special IG
that you have been nominated for gives you the authority to over-
see the Fed’s lending facilities and the companies who receive loans
under these facilities? You said Treasury. Do you mean also that
you have the authority to oversee the Fed’s lending facilities?
Mr. MILLER. A very good question, Senator. At this point in time,
looking at the act, it is clear that I have jurisdiction over the ac-
tions of the Secretary of the Treasury. And right now I consider
every dollar that goes from Treasury through the Federal Reserve
to also give me jurisdiction over the Federal Reserve.
Now, you know, if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed and I
analyze that and come up with a different view, I may be knocking
on your door to get more explicit authority.
Senator BROWN. OK. I appreciate that. That is exactly what we
wanted to hear, and it is essential. I mean, it is trillions of dollars,
as you know.
38
A last final thing, Mr. Chairman. Again, thank you for your for-
bearance.
Mr. Miller, you have been evasive on questions about your work
in the White House. Senator after Senator asked what matters you
were involved in so we can understand your background, not the
specifics of what you did. I am not a lawyer, but I understand at-
torney–client privilege. I understand those issues working in even
the highest echelons of Government. But they were not asking you
specifics, again, of what you did. They were asking you so that we
understand who you are better, what matters you were involved in.
No one wants you to violate privilege, but this is a job interview,
and your background is important to evaluate how you will do your
job. Unfortunately, you did not give us that information in this
hearing.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for this first-of-its-kind hearing
that I think we will see more of. Thanks.
Chairman CRAPO. Thank you very much, Senator Brown, and
that does conclude the questioning.
Again, I appreciate both you, Mr. Miller, and Mrs. Wade for tak-
ing the time and coming here and presenting yourselves in these
unique new circumstances.
Senator BROWN. Mr. Chairman, could I say one more thing?
Chairman CRAPO. Sure.
Senator BROWN. I appreciated the witnesses and the Chairman
wearing masks when they were there. All the people that called in
from their offices obviously did not need masks, but I appreciate
the Chairman and the witnesses wearing masks. I know how
strongly Governor DeWine feels about that in my State. So thank
you for that.
Chairman CRAPO. Well, thank you. And I also want, in addition
to Gregg and Laura and Cameron, to extend our thanks to the Re-
cording Studio and the Rules Committee, who have worked so
closely with us. There was so much work that went on behind the
scenes to make this come together, and as Senator Brown has indi-
cated, I think it is a success just in terms of the technological abil-
ity to put this kind of a hearing on in these difficult circumstances
and do it in a successful way.
We also want to extend our thanks to all of the workers who pre-
pared and cleaned this room, our law enforcement officials, and all
of the others who have come to make sure that we can operate and
do our jobs in the U.S. Senate Banking Committee.
As I said, that does conclude the questioning at today’s hearing.
For Senators who want to submit questions for the record, those
questions are due to the Committee by Thursday, May 7th. We ask
that both of you nominees respond to these questions by 9 a.m.
Monday morning, May 11th.
Again, we thank you for being here, and this hearing is ad-
journed.
[Whereupon, at 4:37 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Prepared statements, biographical sketches of nominees, re-
sponses to written questions, and additional material supplied for
the record follow:]
39
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN MIKE CRAPO
Since this is our first hybrid hearing, a brief explanation of how it will work will
benefit Senators and the public.
The hearing room has been configured to maintain the recommended 6-foot social
distancing between senators, nominees, and other individuals in the room necessary
to operate the hearing, which we have kept to a minimum.
A number of senators have chosen to use secure video teleconference technology,
which will allow them to remotely participate.
For those joining by video conference, once you start speaking, there will be a
slight delay before you are displayed on screen.
To minimize background noise, we are asking senators who are using the video
conference option to please click the mute button until it is their turn to ask ques-
tions.
If there is a technology issue, we will move to the next senator until it is resolved.
I would remind all senators and the nominees that the 5-minute clock still ap-
plies.
For senators using the video option, you will notice a screen labeled ‘‘clock’’ that
will show how much time is remaining.
At about 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the gavel to remind senators
their time has almost expired.
To simplify the speaking order process, Senator Brown and I have agreed to go
by seniority for this first hybrid hearing.
Thank you to those of you who are here today, those appearing before us, and
those who are keeping the Capitol complex safe and functioning while we honor our
Constitutional duty.
The coronavirus, or COVID–19, pandemic has challenged our sense of normalcy,
and it has tested every institution of daily life we know.
The crisis has had a major impact on the physical and economic health of our
country, and a major response has been required.
Congress and the Administration have taken bold, dramatic steps to limit the
depth of economic shock the country is currently experiencing, and to provide condi-
tions for a quick and robust economic recovery once economic restrictions are lifted.
The CARES Act went into effect just over 1 month ago, putting needed cash di-
rectly into the hands of American workers and families, providing rapid relief to
small businesses, helping to stabilize our markets and the economy, and sending a
massive new infusion of resources to the front lines of the medical response.
Title IV of the CARES Act, which is under the Banking Committee’s jurisdiction,
provides $500 billion in emergency relief in order to provide liquidity to eligible
businesses, States, municipalities and Tribes related to losses incurred as a result
of coronavirus.
Implementing this title is an important step to supporting the flow of credit in
the economy.
On April 9, 2020, the Federal Reserve Board and Department of Treasury an-
nounced new and expanded lending programs to provide up to $2.3 trillion in loans.
The 13(3) Federal Reserve facilities, specifically the Main Street Lending Facili-
ties, are crucial components of the strategy to support the economy and promote a
U-shaped recovery, which reinforces the need to have them up and operating, and
being as broadly available for as many businesses as possible.
Title IV includes robust oversight requirements to ensure the statute is followed,
and to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery will oversee the reporting
and auditing requirements of the law, and it is critical that we quickly confirm the
nominee so that important work can begin.
This afternoon, we will consider the nominations of The Honorable Brian Miller,
of Virginia, to be Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery; and Mrs. Dana
Wade, of the District of Columbia, to be Assistant Secretary for Housing and Fed-
eral Housing Commissioner at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment.
Welcome and congratulations on your nominations to these important positions.
Section 4018 of the CARES Act establishes the Special Inspector General for Pan-
demic Recovery.
The duty of the SIGPR is to ‘‘conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and inves-
tigations of the making, purchase, management, and sale of loans, loan guarantees
and other investments made by the Secretary of the Treasury under any program
established by the Secretary under this Act, and the management by the Secretary
of any program established under this Act.’’
40
Mr. Miller is highly qualified for the Special Inspector General position, having
served as the Inspector General for the General Services Administration for nearly
a decade.
The Senate confirmed Mr. Miller for that position in 2005 via voice vote, a posi-
tion he held for nearly 10 years.
In that role, Mr. Miller led more than 300 auditors, special agents, attorneys, and
support staff in conducting nationwide audits and investigations; and reported on
fraud, waste and abuse.
He has been outspoken on the need for inspectors general to have independence
and access to information, and I am confident that he will carry out the responsibil-
ities and mission of this position diligently, independently, and objectively.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in 2015, Mr. Miller noted, ‘‘ . . .
in order to have effective oversight, an IG must have independence to conduct an
investigation, review or audit. This includes determining what information is need-
ed. It is the judgment of the IG conducting the investigation that matters, not the
judgment of the agency being investigated.’’
I encourage my colleagues to support Mr. Miller’s nomination, so that he can
begin this vital oversight role.
Turning to Mrs. Dana Wade. Dana Wade is well prepared to take over the reins
at the Federal Housing Administration (FHA).
She is familiar to the task, having operated as Acting Federal Housing Commis-
sioner and General Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of Housing.
As Acting Commissioner, she directly managed FHA’s portfolio of single family,
multifamily, and healthcare insurance; Section 8 project-based rental assistance; the
Office of Manufactured Housing; and over 2,400 personnel agencywide.
Mrs. Wade’s extensive record of housing policy experience also includes service as
Senior Advisor to Secretary Ben Carson, Deputy Staff Director to this Committee
and the Senate Appropriations Committee, and as Associate Director at the Office
of Management and Budget, where she led all housing-related issues and supervised
HUD, among other agencies.
Great leadership will be required at FHA during this unprecedented time of
strain on both home ownership and rental markets.
In the wake of COVID–19, we have already seen over 10 percent of FHA bor-
rowers enter mortgage forbearance, FHA-insured healthcare facilities feeling signifi-
cant strain, and many FHA-assisted landlords struggle to make ends meet while
countless renters are unsure where their next rent payment will come from.
In the months ahead, FHA will be on the front lines helping many of these fami-
lies get back on their feet and providing much-needed liquidity throughout the hous-
ing finance system.
I am confident that Mrs. Wade will provide exactly the type of leadership that
is needed during this critical time, as Commissioner Montgomery has done.
I encourage my colleagues to support Mrs. Wade’s nomination, as well as to con-
firm Brian Montgomery as Deputy Secretary, so that we can best position HUD to
tackle the challenges ahead.
Congratulations again to each of you on your nominations, and I thank you and
your families for your willingness to serve.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR SHERROD BROWN
I would like to begin by saying ‘‘thank you’’ to staff at the Sergeant at Arms, the
Architect of the Capitol, the Office of the Attending Physician, the Recording Studio,
and the Senate Rules Committee for working very hard over the last couple of
weeks to try to make hearings as safe as possible, including by using technology for
Members to join hearings remotely. And, I want to thank all of the Capitol Police
and other Senate staff and contractors who have been working to make sure the
Senate continues to run.
I also want to thank Chairman Crapo and his staff for working with my staff and
me to coordinate this hearing and provide a remote option for Senators to join. It’s
the right thing to do to keep everyone safe.
I am very concerned, however, at the reckless decision by Leader Mitch McCon-
nell to open the Senate to session, despite ongoing emergency stay-at-home orders
all over the country, including in Washington, D.C., Maryland, and Virginia.
Leader McConnell’s actions are forcing Capitol complex workers—including con-
tract workers like the cleaning staff who just cleaned this hearing room and will
clean again, and food service workers who just served the Republican caucus
lunch—to go against public health authorities’ advice, and put themselves at risk
to come into work.
41
The Republican Leader’s agenda this week doesn’t include assistance for the un-
employed, anything that helps people to stay in their homes, or support for commu-
nity health services. Those are issues the Senate should be taking on right now.
I want to congratulate the nominees and thank them for their willingness to
serve. This is probably not the confirmation hearing you had hoped for. And, I want
to thank your families watching from home.
The Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery will oversee the CARES Act
lending and investment programs that were designed to stabilize our economy and
get help to communities and workers and small businesses that are hurting during
this pandemic. And this lending will be critical to restarting our economy, to begin
the recovery.
The Federal Housing Administration Commissioner faces an affordable housing
crisis made even worse by the pandemic.
The stability and future of millions of families are on the line as Congress and
the Administration respond to this crisis. If confirmed, the two of you will serve in
positions that are crucial to implementing the policy responses to the COVID–19
pandemic.
This Committee has oversight over the Treasury and Federal Reserve loan pro-
grams under the CARES Act. That’s why I fought for the Office of the Special In-
spector General for Pandemic Recovery. The American people need a strong watch-
dog to make sure the 500 billion dollars of taxpayer money provided under the Act,
and the four trillion dollars that the Federal Reserve will lend, actually goes to sup-
port workers and communities and small businesses.
Because the Act grants the Treasury Secretary and the Federal Reserve broad dis-
cretion over who gets these loans and on what terms, the Special Inspector General
will need to examine the loan terms, the transactions, the lenders involved, and the
eligibility of borrowers.
We’ve seen how the Small Business loans went to big companies and important
clients of Wall Street banks, while community banks and credit unions and their
customers on Main Street and in underserved communities waited and waited. I
think most of us have all heard the frustration from restaurants and barber shops
and cafes and so many other small businesses in our States, that are facing impos-
sible decisions right now. They’ve spent hours on the phones trying to talk to some-
one about a loan, and have either been turned down or can’t get answers, while big,
well-connected franchises go to the front of the line. It’s unacceptable.
We can’t let the same thing happen with these loans by Treasury and the Fed.
The problems with the SBA loans should be a lesson to Congress, as we consider
additional recovery measures, and to the Special Inspector General.
In addition to those concerns, President Trump has shown outright hostility to-
ward anyone who tries to hold him accountable to the American people he serves,
including inspectors general. He removed the acting IG for the Defense Department
who was set to become the chairman of the Pandemic Recovery Accountability Com-
mittee, he fired the intelligence community IG, and last Friday, he replaced the act-
ing Health and Human Services IG. All of these professionals did their jobs and ex-
posed misconduct in the Administration.
Looking at the last 20 years, we found only one IG candidate was nominated
while serving in the White House Counsel’s office, and another nominee served in
the White House Counsel’s office under an earlier Administration. Both of them re-
signed, one for politicizing the office and the other for a lack of independence. Not
a great track record.
We passed the CARES Act to support our economy, by helping workers, Main
Street businesses, State and local governments, and nonprofits. We cannot tolerate
businesses and their workers suffering to protect the President, his family, or their
allies, because of corruption, misuse, or favoritism.
Mr. Miller, if you are confirmed, I expect you to follow the letter and spirit of the
law, and serve the American people—not President Trump. As Special Inspector
General, you must be willing to stand up to the Administration and any other bad
actor and to uphold the goals of the law. Anything less is unacceptable.
While Mr. Miller is the only nominee before us today with ‘‘Pandemic Recovery’’
in his title, make no mistake—the FHA and the Office of Housing will be on the
front lines of our Nation’s response as well.
In good times, FHA provides access to affordable home ownership for millions of
families. When the economy slows, as it is today, the FHA is expected to step up
to meet the needs of more households and keep the mortgage market working, even
as others in the market retreat.
During the 2008 financial crisis, economists estimated that FHA’s actions helped
prevent an additional 25 percent decline in housing prices and the loss of an addi-
tional 3 million jobs.
42
FHA’s decisions will determine whether families can remain in their homes, or
whether communities face a foreclosure crisis on top of a public health crisis.
They will also help determine whether the burden of this downturn, like the 2008
crisis, falls most heavily on communities of color and exacerbates economic inequal-
ity, or whether we will adopt policies and do oversight to provide an equitable recov-
ery that keeps affordable housing in the hands of homeowners and communities,
rather than Wall Street investors.
And decisions at the Office of Housing, which Mrs. Wade would lead if confirmed,
will determine whether policies and funding are in place to keep the lowest income
seniors, persons with disabilities, and people in HUD-financed healthcare facilities
safe during this pandemic.
Over the past 3 years, this Administration has tried to gut funding to housing
and community development programs, rolled back fair housing protections and
other civil rights protections, undermined the safety of manufactured housing resi-
dents, and tried to make home ownership more expensive and harder to attain.
I hope the answers Mrs. Wade provides today will make clear that she will fight
to reverse that trend.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and I look forward to hearing from the nominees.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF BRIAN D. MILLER
TO BE SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR PANDEMIC RECOVERY, DEPARTMENT OF THE
TREASURY
MAY 5, 2020
I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for having this hearing. I
want to thank President Trump for nominating me. Most of all, I want to thank
my wife and family for their encouragement to continue public service, especially
in such a demanding job. Thank you.
I have been fortunate to have a long career in public service that has prepared
me well for this position. I have close to 30 years of experience in the Federal Gov-
ernment. Fifteen years in the Department of Justice and nearly 10 years as the Sen-
ate confirmed Inspector General of the General Services Administration, serving
across Republican and Democrat administrations. I have also served as an inde-
pendent corporate monitor and practiced law in the areas of ethics and compliance,
Government contracts, and internal investigations.
I am amazed and humbled by the letters of support that I received in such a short
time period of time during a pandemic. I am deeply grateful to those who signed
from all varieties of political stripes—from officials in the Obama, Bush, and Clinton
administrations. I would like them to know that I will always endeavor to be the
man they describe in their letters.
If confirmed, I will conduct every audit and investigation with fairness and impar-
tiality. I will be vigilant to protect the integrity and independence of the Office of
Special Inspector General. I pledge to seek the truth in all matters that come before
me and to use my authority and resources to uncover fraud, waste, and abuse.
I stand ready to answer any of your questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
PREPARED STATEMENT OF DANA WADE
TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
MAY 5, 2020
Chairman Crapo, Ranking Member Brown, and Members of this Committee,
thank you for inviting me here today to testify as the nominee for Federal Housing
Commissioner and Assistant Secretary for Housing of the U.S. Department of Hous-
ing and Urban Development. I want to also thank President Trump for the privilege
of being nominated for this position.
It is truly an honor to be here after serving as a staff member of this Committee
and spending a good part of my career working for Senator Shelby on both the
Banking and Appropriations Committees. I’m extremely grateful to him for such op-
portunities.
I’m also very thankful for the love and support of my wonderful family. I regret
that both my husband, Chris, and our daughter, Mary, can only be here today in
spirit, and not in person.
As I look around this hearing room, I see the Senate continuing the people’s work
but under very different circumstances. If confirmed, I will commit to do everything
I can as FHA Commissioner to help the country emerge from the COVID–19 pan-
demic healthier, stronger, and with a more prosperous economy.
HUD and FHA play critical roles in our Nation’s safety net. That is more clear
today than ever. Secretary Carson and the dedicated staff at HUD are working tire-
lessly to minimize the impact of COVID–19 to homeowners, renters, and the vulner-
able populations HUD serves each and every day. We are grateful for the hard work
and bipartisan commitment of Congress during this time in passing legislation that
safeguards American families, communities, and the economy from this terrible
virus.
I joined public service in the midst of a different crisis—the financial crisis of
2008—during which I gained valuable experience that will serve me well if con-
firmed. I learned that during times like these, it is important to make sure assist-
ance quickly reaches those in need and that we maximize the effectiveness of every
Federal dollar. As a staff member of the Budget, Banking, and Appropriations Com-
mittees, as well as an Associate Director at the Office of Management and Budget,
I drilled down into the details of multiple agencies and programs, giving them
much-needed scrutiny to ensure that they fulfilled their missions and targeted sup-
port effectively. And as the acting head of FHA and HUD’s Office of Housing, I im-
plemented reforms that better-managed risk, built-up capital, and provided greater
transparency to the public.
If confirmed, my priorities for FHA and the Office of Housing are as follows:
• First, protecting current FHA homeowners—those who are low-to-moderate in-
come, including first-time and minority borrowers—as well as assisted renters
who through no fault of their own have experienced COVID-related hardships.
This includes executing CARES Act provisions like the eviction moratorium and
forbearance for homeowners, as well as fully deploying FHA’s loss mitigation
toolkit for COVID-affected homeowners.
• Second, ensuring that FHA has the necessary staffing and other resources, as
well as continuing the innovative FHA IT Modernization effort, which together
will allow FHA to perform its important countercyclical role to support the
housing market. One of the pillars of FHA’s mission is to provide support when
the economy demands it, especially if there is tightening in conventional and
private markets.
• Third, vigilantly monitoring risk to taxpayers of losses stemming from COVID–
19, and protecting FHA’s capital reserve to the maximum extent possible.
Losses in the current environment are inevitable, and FHA must be transparent
to Congress and the American taxpayers when it comes to its financial position.
Future policies should allow FHA to responsibly rebuild capital when the time
is right, as this current crisis has reminded us of the importance of having a
buffer to protect taxpayers from losses.
I believe that FHA has a duty to support the Nation’s housing markets and home-
owners facing economic hardship. While the virus will pass and the economy will
eventually regain its previous strength, the road to recovery will require our sus-
tained effort.
If confirmed, I will do all that I can to run a strong, sustainable FHA and Office
of Housing, one that can support the needs of those we serve and is accountable
to the taxpayers who stand behind it. I look forward to working with this Com-
51
mittee and with Congress on these objectives and look forward to answering your
questions.
Thank you.
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR BROWN
FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. At your nomination hearing, for clarification, I asked if you
believed the CARES Act gives the Special IG the authority to over-
see the Federal Reserve’s lending facilities and the companies who
receive loans under these facilities.
You said you have jurisdiction over the actions of the Secretary
of the Treasury, and that you consider every dollar that goes from
the Treasury to the Federal Reserve gives you jurisdiction over the
Federal Reserve.
The Treasury and the Federal Reserve are establishing complex
financial arrangements to lend to businesses. Those arrangements
will use funds appropriated to Treasury under the CARES Act and
funds loaned by the Federal Reserve. Please confirm that you con-
sider all of those financial arrangements to be within the jurisdic-
tion of the Special IG.
A.1. These statements correctly summarize my preliminary
thoughts on the starting analysis of SIGPR’s jurisdiction, given the
text of the CARES Act. If I am confirmed, I will analyze these
issues in much more detail. I will consider the jurisdiction of
SIGPR to be as broad as is textually permissible under the CARES
Act, and Congress is always free to clarify or amend the jurisdic-
tion of SIGPR.
Q.2. The CARES Act created the Paycheck Protection Program
(PPP), which is administered by the Secretary of the Treasury and
the Administrator of the Small Business Administration.
As you noted at your hearing, the Special IG has responsibility
for the programs administered by the Secretary of the Treasury.
Please confirm that you consider the PPP to be within the jurisdic-
tion of the Special IG.
A.2. If I am confirmed, I will analyze this issue in careful detail.
I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is tex-
tually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is always
free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR. At this time, it
would be inappropriate to publicly assert a definitive legal pro-
nouncement given the incomplete legal analysis and the potential
for this issue to be litigated.
Additionally, if confirmed, I can and do commit that I will work
diligently with the Small Business Administration’s Inspector Gen-
eral, Mike Ware, as well as the PRAC. In anticipation of possible
confirmation and the need to begin the work of the SIGPR quickly,
I have already had productive preliminary discussions with Inspec-
tor General Ware and key members of the PRAC. In consultation
with other stakeholders, who may have more jurisdiction, we will
delineate responsibilities according to the CARES Act.
Q.3. The CARES Act obligates airlines receiving payroll assistance
from conducting involuntary furloughs or reducing pay rates and
benefits until September 30, 2020. Several airlines have recently
announced that they are reducing workers’ hours, potentially vio-
lating these provisions.
What actions will you take as Special Inspector General to en-
sure that Treasury enforces these worker protections?
59
A.3. If confirmed, I would look into this type of conduct and carry
out thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered.
If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.4. In your testimony, you committed to following statutory re-
quirements to report to Congress, as specified in section 4 of the
Inspector General Act. If confirmed, as required in Section
4018(e)(4)(B) of the CARES Act, will you report to Congress, with-
out delay or interference by the Administration, when in your judg-
ment information or assistance you have requested has been unrea-
sonably refused or not provided? Please be specific as to how you
will fulfill that statutory requirement.
A.4. If confirmed, I would most likely begin by contacting this Com-
mittee to report the situation.
Q.5. Did the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Ef-
ficiency Inspector General Candidate Recommendations Panel
evaluate you for the Special IG position, or for any other IG posi-
tion while you were serving in the White House Counsel’s office?
Did you seek out the panel’s recommendation, or did you avoid its
review?
A.5. As CIGIE’s letter to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs noted, its Panel submitted a recommendation
to the White House Counsel’s Office, evaluating me as an Inspector
General candidate. Letter from Michael E. Horowitz, Chair, Coun-
cil of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, et al., to
Ron Johnson, Chairman, Senate Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs (April 17, 2020).
Q.6. In your testimony, you described encountering resistance from
agency officials during your tenure as GSA IG under Presidents
George W. Bush and Barack Obama. While serving as GSA IG, did
the President or any White House official ever attempt to influence
the scope or outcome of an investigation or inquiry undertaken by
your office? If so, please describe how you responded.
A.6. Most of the pressure was from political appointees in GSA. I
did not allow investigations to be influenced by politics and instead
ensured my office followed the facts where they led and made rec-
ommendations based on those facts alone.
Q.7. While serving as GSA IG, did you ever investigate allegations
of involving the President or other White House official? If so,
please describe the nature of the allegations and the outcome of the
investigation(s).
A.7. No.
Q.8. While serving as GSA IG, did you ever request information,
documents, or testimony from the White House or any component
of the Executive Office of the President (EOP) as part of an IG in-
quiry? If so, please describe the circumstances of the request and
whether you received cooperation from the White House and/or
EOP.
A.8. No.
Q.9. Offices of Inspector General rely on whistleblowers to do their
oversight work. Do you commit to taking any and all actions nec-
60
essary to protect whistleblowers from retaliation, including at-
tempts to undermine their confidentiality?
A.9. Yes.
Q.10. In your testimony, you committed to ‘‘following the law’’ with
respect to the authorities and obligations of the Special Inspector
General for Pandemic Recovery. If confirmed, how will you resolve
any ambiguities or disagreement over what the law requires in
practice?
A.10. I will at all times be guided by the text of the CARES Act
and the IG Act, as it is incorporated by reference into the CARES
Act. When interpreting the text of these statutes, I will consult
with my office’s general counsel. I will also consult other legal au-
thorities as appropriate. I will interpret the law dispassionately.
Should Congress see fit to clarify certain provisions through legisla-
tion, I will always follow those clarifications faithfully and objec-
tively.
Q.11. Title IV of the CARES Act provides up to $32 billion for
other financial assistance, largely intended to be grants: $25 billion
to passenger air carriers; $4 billion to cargo air carriers; and $3 bil-
lion to certain contractors. This financial assistance must be exclu-
sively used for the continuation of payment of employee wages, sal-
aries, and benefits. The funds are subject to conditions and restric-
tions related to collective bargaining agreements, stock buybacks,
dividends, executive compensation, involuntary furloughs, reduc-
tion in pay rates and benefits, and continuation of air service.
The CARES Act obligates airlines receiving payroll assistance
from conducting involuntary furloughs or reducing pay rates and
benefits until September 30, 2020. Several airlines have recently
announced that they are reducing workers’ hours, potentially vio-
lating these provisions. What actions will you take as Special In-
spector General to ensure that Treasury enforces these worker pro-
tections on airlines?
A.11. If confirmed, I will act pursuant to the authority given to my
office to carry out thorough investigations where supported by the
facts gathered. If there is a violation of law, I would make a refer-
ral to the Department of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.12. The CARES Act calls for transparency to ensure the Amer-
ican people understand how the funding is being spent. To date,
the Treasury has shared little information about which airlines re-
ceived grants and loans, and what the terms of the agreement are,
citing the fact that many of the companies are not publicly traded
entities. Shouldn’t the public know how this funding is being
awarded?
A.12. I am unfamiliar with the facts of this situation. But if con-
firmed, my goal would be to make public information regarding
fraud, waste, and abuse of CARES Act authorities.
Q.13. Through September 30, 2021, airlines receiving payroll as-
sistance cannot engage in stock buybacks or pay dividends. What
measures can Treasury take, in your view, to make sure airlines
do not engage in illegal stock buybacks or pay dividends? What ac-
tions will you take as Special Inspector General to audit these obli-
gations?
61
A.13. I am unfamiliar with the facts of this situation. But if con-
firmed, I would look into illegal business practices and conduct
thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered. If
there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.14. Pursuant to Section 4113, not later than 10 days after the
CARES Act enactment, the Secretary was required by law to make
initial payments to air carriers and contractors. To date, Treasury
has failed to meet these statutory deadlines. Contractors, for exam-
ple, have yet to receive funds. How do you plan to ensure that
Treasury meets its statutory deadlines under the CARES Act?
A.14. If confirmed, I commit to fully complying with the CARES
Act and will look further into this situation. Where there are
grounds for SIGPR taking action, I will work to ensure that the
Treasury Department complies with all statutory requirements in
the CARES Act.
Q.15. CARES Act provides specific protections for collective bar-
gaining agreements in regard to Treasury’s implementation of pay-
roll assistance for aviation workers. How would you implement
your authorities to make sure that neither Treasury nor those re-
ceiving funds under CARES do not undermine collective bargaining
agreements?
A.15. If confirmed, I would look into this type of conduct and carry
out thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered.
If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.16. Since December 2018, you have served as Senior Associate
Counsel and Special Assistant to the President. Your nomination
questionnaire does not describe in any way your work in that posi-
tion.
So that the Committee may fully evaluate your experience,
please describe the subject matter of your work and your overall
responsibilities and duties in the White House Counsel’s Office,
without discussing anything that would qualify as privileged or
confidential.
Please indicate the subject matter of your role in each of the fol-
lowing: (i) the removal of Glenn Fine as acting inspector general
at the Department of Defense, (ii) aid to Ukraine, and (iii) the im-
peachment trial of the President.
A.16. My title at the White House Counsel’s office is Senior Asso-
ciate Counsel and Special Assistant to the President. In this role,
I report to the Deputy Counsels to the President and the White
House Counsel. I counsel Federal agencies and other components
within the Executive Office of the President on a wide range of
issues and provide legal advice to my superiors within the White
House Counsel’s Office. My ability to respond to specific questions
about my role in the White House is limited by the ethical obliga-
tions that bind all lawyers. Accordingly, it is appropriate to follow
Justice Elena Kagan’s example of limiting comments about her 4-
year service in the Clinton White House to comply with all ethical
obligations.
62
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR REED
FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. The following is a summary of Section 4019 of the CARES Act:
Section 4019. Conflicts of Interest. Any company in which
the President, Vice President, an Executive department
head, member of Congress, or any of such individual’s
spouse, child, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law [who] own
over 20 percent of the outstanding voting stock shall not
be eligible for loans, loan guarantees, or other investments
provided under this Title.
You currently serve as Special Assistant to the President and
Senior Associate Counsel in the Office of White House Counsel, and
yet, if confirmed, you would be charged with also ensuring that the
President and his family do not benefit from the extraordinary tax-
payer assistance being made available under Title IV of the
CARES Act.
Do you view this is as a potential conflict?
A.1. No.
Q.2. If you are confirmed and were to recuse yourself from these
matters to avoid the appearance of a conflict, can you tell us who
you would delegate these duties to and why this person would be
a suitable proxy so that we may better evaluate your nomination?
A.2. I will apply the generally applicable standards for conflicts of
interest, consult with the relevant ethics officials, and make any
recusal decisions on a case-by-case basis. I cannot comment on
proxies and staffing because I will not be able to staff my office un-
less and until I am fortunate enough to be confirmed.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS
OF SENATOR MENENDEZ FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. To repeat a question you declined to answer in the hearing,
President Trump said of Inspector General Atkinson, ‘‘That man is
a disgrace to IGs. He’s a total disgrace.’’ Based on your knowledge
of Inspector General Atkinson, do you agree with that statement,
yes or no?
A.1. My title at the White House Counsel’s office is Senior Asso-
ciate Counsel and Special Assistant to the President. In this role,
I report to the Deputy Counsels to the President and the White
House Counsel. I counsel Federal agencies and other components
within the Executive Office of the President on a wide range of
issues and provide legal advice to my superiors within the White
House Counsel’s Office. My ability to respond to specific questions
about my role in the White House is limited by the ethical obliga-
tions that bind all lawyers. Accordingly, it is appropriate to follow
Justice Elena Kagan’s example of limiting comments about her 4-
year service in the Clinton White House to comply with all ethical
obligations.
I believe it is important for IGs and nominees to be Inspectors
General to not be political. Under the IG Act and the CARES Act,
IGs are nonpartisan and are not policymakers. To protect my inde-
63
pendence, it would inappropriate to be comment about political dis-
putes.
Q.2. Do you agree that the President making disparaging com-
ments about inspectors general can have a chilling effect on their
work?
A.2. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.3. Do you believe it is appropriate for a President to make dis-
paraging comments about an inspector general?
A.3. I believe it is appropriate for inspectors general to investigate
fraud, waste, and abuse and to follow the facts where they lead.
When I did so as an IG, I received criticism, and even disparaging
comments.
Q.4. During your time as GSA Inspector General, do you recall
President Bush making such comments, in public, about an inspec-
tor general?
A.4. During my tenure as IG under Presidents Bush and Obama,
I recall investigating fraud, waste, and abuse and following the
facts where they led.
Q.5. If the President were to make disparaging comments about
you in the press, how would you react?
A.5. I expect to receive criticism from many quarters. I try to learn
from criticism wherever possible. I received criticism in my pre-
vious tenure as IG of GSA, but it did not affect my commitment
to combating fraud, waste, and abuse. Were any public figure to
criticize my work as SIGPR, I would continue investigate fraud,
waste, and abuse and follow the facts where they lead.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR WARREN
FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. Inspector General Independence—What were your roles and re-
sponsibilities in the White House from 2018–2020?
A.1. My title at the White House Counsel’s office is Senior Asso-
ciate Counsel and Special Assistant to the President. In this role,
I report to the Deputy Counsels to the President and the White
House Counsel. I counsel Federal agencies and other components
within the Executive Office of the President on a wide range of
issues and provide legal advice to my superiors within the White
House Counsel’s Office. My ability to respond to specific questions
about my role in the White House is limited by the ethical obliga-
tions that bind all lawyers. Accordingly, it is appropriate to follow
Justice Elena Kagan’s example of limiting comments about her 4-
year service in the Clinton White House to comply with all ethical
obligations.
It is important for IGs and nominees to be Inspectors General to
not be political. Under the IG Act and the CARES Act, IGs are
nonpartisan and are not policymakers. To protect my independ-
ence, it would inappropriate to be comment about political dis-
putes.
Q.2. Did you at any point, advise the President or any other White
House official to refuse to turn over documents or materials or
64
delay doing so in response to a congressional request or subpoena,
or in response to a request from the Government Accountability Of-
fice? If so, what was the rationale for this advice?
A.2. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.3. Did you at any point, advise the President or any other White
House official to refuse to turn over documents or materials or oth-
erwise not fully cooperate with a request from an Inspector Gen-
eral?
A.3. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.4. As the SIGPR, you would be responsible for a $25 million
budget to conduct investigations and audits. 1 As you hire staff to
manage and conduct these audits and investigations, will you do so
on a strictly nonpartisan basis?
A.4. Yes.
Q.5. Do you have any financial conflicts of interest related to your
private sector experience that would raise questions about your in-
volvement in any matters as SIGPR?
A.5. No.
Q.6. Will you recuse yourself from any investigation involving or
affecting a former company or individual that you represented, con-
sulted for, or with which you otherwise had a financial arrange-
ment?
A.6. I will apply the generally applicable standards for conflicts of
interest, consult with any relevant ethics officials, and make a deci-
sion on a case-by-case basis to resolve any conflicts of interest.
Q.7. White House Efforts To Undermine Oversight—Were you in-
volved in any way in the CARES Act signing statement by Presi-
dent Trump? If so, please describe the nature of your involvement.
A.7. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.8. Do you agree with the CARES Act signing statement’s asser-
tion that the SIGPR cannot freely report information to Congress
absent Presidential approval?
A.8. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.9. Will you commit to reporting immediately to Congress any in-
stance in which Administration officials or any other entity impede
or do not comply with an information request from your office?
A.9. I will comply with the CARES Act and all applicable law that
bind Inspectors General.
Q.10. What action will you take if the President refuses to allow
you to report relevant information to Congress?
A.10. Please see my response to Question 10.
Q.11. Were you aware of the decision, announced on April 7, 2020,
to remove Glenn A. Fine from his post as Acting Director of the De-
partment of Defense and Chair of the Pandemic Response Account-
ability Commission before it was announced publicly? Did you pro-
vide any legal advice to the President regarding this decision? Do
you agree with the President’s decision to demote Mr. Fine?
1 P.L. 116-136, §4018(g).
65
A.11. My title at the White House Counsel’s office is Senior Asso-
ciate Counsel and Special Assistant to the President. In this role,
I report to the Deputy Counsels to the President and the White
House Counsel. I counsel Federal agencies and other components
within the Executive Office of the President on a wide range of
issues and provide legal advice to my superiors within the White
House Counsel’s Office. My ability to respond to specific questions
about my role in the White House is limited by the ethical obliga-
tions that bind all lawyers. Accordingly, it is appropriate to follow
Justice Elena Kagan’s example of limiting comments about her 4-
year service in the Clinton White House to comply with all ethical
obligations.
It is important for IGs and nominees to be Inspectors General to
not be political. Under the IG Act and the CARES Act, IGs are
nonpartisan and are not policymakers. To protect my independ-
ence, it would inappropriate to be comment about political dis-
putes.
Q.12. Were you aware of the decision to fire Michael Atkinson as
Inspector General for the Intelligence Community before it was an-
nounced publicly? Did you provide any legal advice to the President
regarding this decision? Do you agree with the President’s decision
to fire Mr. Atkinson?
A.12. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.13. Were you aware of the decision to remove Ms. Christie
Grimm from her post as Acting Inspector General for the Depart-
ment of Health and Human Services before it was announced pub-
licly? Did you provide any legal advice to the President regarding
this decision? Do you agree with the President’s decision to demote
Ms. Grimm from her role?
A.13. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.14. Please describe your views on what protections IGs should
afford whistleblowers.
A.14. Offices of Inspector General rely on whistleblowers to do
their oversight work. I will take any and all actions necessary and
appropriate under the law to protect whistleblowers from retalia-
tion.
Q.15. If confirmed, will you commit to establishing a direct portal
for whistleblowers to securely and safely communicate allegations
of waste, fraud, or abuse with your office without fear of reprisal,
retaliation, harassment, or persecution?
A.15. I hope to establish a hotline and web portal to encourage
whistleblowers.
Q.16. If confirmed, will you commit to withholding the identity of
any anonymous whistleblowers who bring credible allegations of
waste, fraud, abuse, or misconduct to your office? If not, under
what circumstances would you disclose the identity of any whistle-
blowers to the public or to the White House?
A.16. Offices of Inspector General rely on whistleblowers to do
their oversight work. I will take any and all actions necessary and
appropriate under the law to protect whistleblowers from retalia-
tion.
66
Q.17. Would you ever provide President Trump with the identity
of any anonymous whistleblowers who are officers or employees of
the Executive Branch upon request by the President or the White
House? If so, please describe the circumstances under which you
would provide this information.
A.17. Please see my response to Question 16.
Q.18. The Congressional Oversight Commission was also created
by the CARES Act to conduct oversight of the implementation of
the CARES Act’s economic provisions. 2 Will you commit to appear-
ing, upon request, at hearings of the Commission? Will you provide
information upon request from Commissioners?
A.18. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.19. If confirmed, under what circumstances would you resign
your post? If President Trump asked you to take action that con-
flicted with the clear intent or text of the CARES Act, would you
take such action? Would you resign?
A.19. I would resign if it was impossible for me to do my job effec-
tively.
Q.20. Role of Congress and Inspector General—Please explain your
views with regard to the unitary executive and the role of the
SIGPR, and the implications of these views on the proper functions
of the SIGPR. Can your views be reconciled with congressional in-
tent to create an IG that is independent of the President and statu-
torily obligated to communicate with Congress under certain cir-
cumstances?
A.20. Yes. I will follow the Constitution, the IG Act, and the
CARES Act.
Q.21. Please explain and elaborate on your written view that ‘‘IGs
are not tame watchdogs, and they may bite members of Congress
as well as Executive branch officials. They may also be a danger
to themselves, to the normal functioning of Government, and to
Congress.’’ 3
A.21. IGs should be independent from politics, and the political
branches of the Federal Government often may not like what an
IG reports.
Q.22. The SIGPR was created by an Act of Congress, signed by the
President, and is provided funding on an ongoing basis by Con-
gress. Will you give due consideration to requests for audits or in-
vestigations that come from members of Congress?
A.22. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.23. Do you continue to believe that, as you wrote in August
2018, 4 a Member of Congress holding a press conference to an-
nounce the findings of an Inspector General report is an egregious
example of violation of IG independence and separation of powers?
2 P.L. 116-136, §4020.
3 The Hill, Brian D. Miller, ‘‘Independence of Inspectors General Should not Be Compromised
by Congress’’, August 13, 2018, https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/401491-independence-
of-inspectors-general-should-not-be-compromised-by-congress.
4 The Hill, Brian D. Miller, ‘‘Independence of Inspectors General Should not Be Compromised
by Congress’’, August 13, 2018, https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/401491-independence-
of-inspectors-general-should-not-be-compromised-by-congress.
67
A.23. Respectfully, I never wrote that. An issue arises when a
member of Congress designs a review for an IG and then an-
nounces that review through a press conference. All audits and in-
vestigations should be the IG’s independent work.
Q.24. You also wrote in August 2018 that you deliberately ignored
or ‘‘changed the parameter’’ of Congressional requests when you
were the GSA IG. 5 Is this accurate? Please elaborate and provide
an example from your time at GSA.
A.24. Respectfully, this is a misrepresentation of my writings. I
was asked to evaluate the environmental and health risks in a Fed-
eral building. Instead, I did a review of how GSA managed environ-
mental issues at the facility.
Q.25. If confirmed, would you deliberately ignore or ‘‘change the
parameter’’ of congressional requests if you are confirmed as
SIGPR?
A.25. I will always pay due respect to congressional requests as I
did in my decade of experience as GSA IG. I will independently as-
sess my office’s abilities, resources, and priorities, and conduct
those investigations supported by an independent factual predicate.
Q.26. If requested, will you commit to voluntarily testifying before
Congress on issues within the purview of the SIGPR? If not, under
what circumstances would you reject a request by a committee to
testifying before Congress on issues within the purview of the
SIGPR?
A.26. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.27. If requested, will you commit to voluntarily testifying before
the Congressional Oversight Commission established in the CARES
Act?
A.27. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.28. Transparency and Accountability Among Bailout Recipients—
If confirmed, you would have the clear authority to conduct audits
and investigations of the making, purchase, management, and sale
of loans, loan guarantees, and other investments made by the Sec-
retary of the Treasury under any program established by the Sec-
retary under the CARES Act, and the management by the Sec-
retary of any program established under this Act. Please describe
your understanding of the scope of programs within this authority.
Specifically, are loans provided to small businesses under Section
1102 of the CARES Act 6 within your audit and investigation juris-
diction?
A.28. I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is
textually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is al-
ways free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR.
Q.29. Are the Federal Reserve’s Primary and Secondary Market
Corporate Credit Facilities, the Main Street Lending Program, and
the Municipal Liquidity Facility, all created using funds appro-
5 The Hill, Brian D. Miller, ‘‘Independence of Inspectors General Should not Be Compromised
by Congress’’, August 13, 2018, https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/401491-independence-
of-inspectors-general-should-not-be-compromised-by-congress.
6 P.L. 116-136, §1102.
68
priated to Treasury’s Exchange Stabilization Fund under the
CARES Act, within the SIGPR’s jurisdiction?
A.29. I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is
textually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is al-
ways free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR.
Q.30. Will any future Federal Reserve facility backstopped with
CARES Act funds be under the SIGPR’s jurisdiction?
A.30. I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is
textually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is al-
ways free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR.
Q.31. Will any existing Federal Reserve facility that was estab-
lished before the CARES Act, but is later backstopped with CARES
Act funds be under the SIGPR’s jurisdiction
A.31. I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is
textually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is al-
ways free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR.
Q.32. Which other programs currently established by the Treasury
Secretary are under the SIGPR’s jurisdiction?
A.32. I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is
textually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is al-
ways free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR.
Q.33. Under the CARES Act, the SIGPR is given ‘‘the duties and
responsibilities of inspectors general under the Inspector General
Act of 1978,’’ 7 which include ‘‘to conduct, supervise, or coordinate
other activities carried out or financed by such establishment for
the purpose of promoting economy and efficiency in the Adminis-
tration of, or preventing and detecting fraud and abuse in, its pro-
grams and operations.’’ 8
Broadly, this authority grants the SIGPR the ability to deter-
mine not only if program participants are committing fraud, but if
they are abusing taxpayer funds, and if programs are being run
with appropriate economy and efficiency for taxpayers and the pub-
lic. Using this or other authority given to the SIGPR under the
CARES Act, if confirmed, will you commit to conducting investiga-
tions to determine if loan or grant recipients are using funds to
benefit workers, consumers, and the economy?
A.33. As legally appropriate, I will consider all of the factors identi-
fied below.
Q.34. Specifically, would you:
Determine if Section 4003 loans are being used by recipients to
keep workers on the job, including maintaining at least 95 percent
of payrolls?
Determine if such loan recipients provide a $15 an hour min-
imum wage?
Determine if such loan recipients use taxpayer funds to person-
ally enrich CEOs or senior executives through any form of execu-
tive compensation?
7 P.L. 116-136, §4003(c)(3).
8 P.L. 95-452.
69
Determine if such loan recipients engage in stock buybacks, divi-
dends, or any other direct or indirect form of shareholder distribu-
tion?
Determine if such loan recipients provide at least one seat to
workers on their board of directors?
Determine if such loan recipients engage in union-busting efforts
or seek to weaken collective bargaining agreements?
Recommend that CEOs face civil and criminal penalties for vio-
lating loan terms of agreements with the Department of Treasury
or the Federal Reserve Board?
Hold all companies that receive such loans liable for all assist-
ance received if the company violates any of the terms of their
agreements with taxpayers?
Determine if program participants are engaging in otherwise in-
appropriate uses of loan receipts?
Similarly, using the SIGPR’s authority under the CARES Act, if
confirmed, will you commit to conducting audits and investigations
of program administration and Treasury Department and Federal
Reserve Board decisions to ensure that they are free of conflicts of
interest, including all decisions regarding recipients of assistance
and contractors?
A.34. As legally appropriate, I will consider all of the factors identi-
fied below.
Q.35. Specifically, will you determine if:
Any Federal official, financial agent, contractor, or adviser has
any say or influence over decisions that may affect their own port-
folio, or that may affect a current or former employer?
All contractors and companies retained by the Treasury Depart-
ment for the purposes of helping the Government administer Sec-
tion 4003 operate free of conflicts of interest and contribute to the
funds being used to benefit workers, consumers, and the economy.
Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board are estab-
lishing clear, public rules and guidelines regarding how and why
bailout recipients are chosen and how and why the terms and con-
ditions of any bailouts are established?
Companies receiving funding are engaging in political spending
or lobbying while receiving assistance?
Will you conduct audits and investigations to determine if the
President, his immediate family, or any personal friends, business
associates, or individuals with personal or financial connections to
the President are receiving CARES Act funds (including, but not
limited to, any violations of Section 4019 of the CARES Act), and
if so, will you report to Congress on these matters?
A.35. I will look into conflicts of interests as legally appropriate. It
is important for IGs and nominees to be Inspectors General to not
be political. Under the IG Act and the CARES Act, IGs are non-
partisan and are not policymakers. To protect my independence, it
would inappropriate to be comment about political disputes.
Q.36. If confirmed, will you commit to a thorough and robust eval-
uation of whether the $500 billion bailout fund was an overall ben-
efit to workers, consumers, families, and the economy? If so, how
would you conduct this evaluation? What would be your specific
metrics for success? Would you include rates of employment and
70
wages compared to before the pandemic as metrics in your evalua-
tion?
A.36. It is important for IGs and nominees to be Inspectors Gen-
eral to not be political. Under the IG Act and the CARES Act, IGs
are nonpartisan and are not policymakers. To protect my independ-
ence, it would inappropriate to be comment about political dis-
putes.
Q.37. If confirmed, what other areas would you prioritize for audits
and investigations as SIGPR?
A.37. At this point in time, it is too early to outline priorities for
audits and investigations, but if confirmed I will report these to the
Committee very soon.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF
SENATOR VAN HOLLEN FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. Do you commit to fully support whistleblower confidentiality
and all existing laws and policies to protect whistleblowers?
A.1. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.2. Do you pledge not to be influenced in the conduct of the In-
spector General position by President Trump, anyone in the Trump
administration, or any Federal agency appointee interfering with
the independence and mission of the Inspector General?
A.2. I will be independent as the SIGPR, just as I was independent
as the GSA IG.
Q.3. Do you pledge not to hire or permit the detail to the Special
Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery of any person who is or
was a political appointee of the Trump administration, or is rec-
ommended by the White House or a political appointee of the
Trump administration?
A.3. The Hatch Act forbids taking political affiliation into consider-
ation in hiring. I will hire the best qualified individuals.
Q.4. Your response on behalf of the White House to GAO’s inquiry
regarding the withholding of Ukraine security assistance funds
stated that the White House would not provide a separate re-
sponse, and referred instead to the response sent by OMB General
Counsel Mark Paoletta on December 11, 2019.
Will you personally affirm that this statement in the letter rep-
resents the full and complete truth: ‘‘In fact, at no point during the
pause in obligations did DOD OGC indicate to OMB that, as a mat-
ter of law, the apportionments would prevent DOD from being able
to obligate the funds before the end of the fiscal year.’’
A.4. I do not know the facts or the law regarding this issue.
Q.5. The GAO inquiry letter to the White House asked for the rea-
son that Ukraine security assistance funds were withheld. Will you
personally affirm that the only reason for the hold on Ukraine se-
curity assistance funding was to engage in a policy process regard-
ing those funds, which is the sole reason identified by the OMB let-
ter: ‘‘It was OMB’s understanding that a brief period was needed,
prior to the funds expiring, to engage in a policy process regarding
those funds.’’
71
A.5. I do not know the facts or the law regarding this issue.
Q.6. The GAO inquiry letter to the White House asked for docu-
mentation that would substantiate the Administration’s stated rea-
son for holding Ukraine security assistance funding. Your response
provided no such documentation or any other information, aside
from citing the response provided by OMB. Please state whether or
not the White House had documentation or information in its pos-
session that was not included in the response from OMB, and that
would have been relevant to GAO’s inquiry about the reason that
the funds were withheld.
A.6. I do not know the facts or the law regarding this issue. OMB
is the budget office within the Executive Office of the President.
Please direct any budget inquiries to OMB.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF
SENATOR CORTEZ MASTO FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. The Inspector General for the Department of Health and
Human Services Christi Grimm released a report detailing short-
ages of testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) in hos-
pitals. Last week, President Trump said he would replace her.
In your capacity as White House counsel, did you advise on this
decision, or any matters related to acting Inspector General
Grimm’s role?
A.1. My title at the White House Counsel’s office is Senior Asso-
ciate Counsel and Special Assistant to the President. In this role,
I report to the Deputy Counsels to the President and the White
House Counsel. I counsel Federal agencies and other components
within the Executive Office of the President on a wide range of
issues and provide legal advice to my superiors within the White
House Counsel’s Office. My ability to respond to specific questions
about my role in the White House is limited by the ethical obliga-
tions that bind all lawyers. Accordingly, it is appropriate to follow
Justice Elena Kagan’s example of limiting comments about her 4-
year service in the Clinton White House to comply with all ethical
obligations. I believe it is important for IGs and nominees to be In-
spectors General to not be political. Under the IG Act and the
CARES Act, IGs are nonpartisan and are not policymakers. To pro-
tect my independence, it would inappropriate to be commenting
about political disputes.
Q.2. Do you believe acting Inspector General Grimm participated
in unlawful or unethical conduct to merit her replacement?
A.2. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.3. Do you agree with the President’s decision?
A.3. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.4. Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson,
followed the law and reported the whistleblower complaint that the
President withheld aid for Ukraine until President Zelensky de-
clared a scam investigation.
In your capacity as White House counsel, did you advise on this
decision, or any matters related to Inspector General Atkinson’s
role?
72
A.4. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.5. Do you believe Inspector General Atkinson participated in un-
lawful or unethical conduct to merit his firing?
A.5. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.6. Did you agree with President Trump’s decision to fire Inspec-
tor General Atkinson?
A.6. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.7. Glenn Fine was acting inspector general for the Defense De-
partment and was set to become the chairman of a new Pandemic
Response Accountability Committee to police how the Government
carries out the $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief bill.
In your capacity as White House counsel, did you advise on this
decision, or any matters related to acting Inspector General Fine’s
role?
A.7. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.8. Do you have concerns with the President’s decision to dis-
qualify Mr. Fine from serving on the new oversight panel?
A.8. Please see my response to Question 1.
Q.9. The President questioned the constitutionality of the law’s re-
quirement that the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recov-
ery notify Congress immediately if the Administration ‘‘unreason-
ably’’ withholds information requested by investigators.
If the White House or an agency asks you to withhold informa-
tion would you notify Congress immediately of this request?
A.9. I will follow the statutory requirements to report to Congress,
as specified in section 4 of the Inspector General Act and as re-
quired in Section 4018(e)(4)(B) of the CARES Act.
Q.10. Do you foresee any circumstance when you wouldn’t notify
Congress of this request to withhold?
A.10. Please see my answer to Question 9.
Q.11. If the White House wanted Treasury to provide financing to
States that had elected representatives from one party first in the
allocation of CARES financing, would you consider that a violation
and report it immediately to Congress?
A.11. If confirmed, I would look into this type of conduct and carry
out thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered.
If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.12. If the White House wanted Treasury to consult information
on corporate political donations prior to allocating CARES financ-
ing, would you consider that a violation and report it immediately
to Congress?
A.12. If confirmed, I would look into this type of conduct and carry
out thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered.
If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.13. If you are confirmed for the SIGPR job, what is your worst
case scenario? Where do you see the opportunities for corruption or
unfair treatment?
73
A.13. I believe that unscrupulous individuals and companies are al-
ready scheming to take advantage of the programs and divert mon-
ies to themselves. But as a former Federal prosecutor, I believe
that I should be circumspect in publicly commenting on specific
cases or aspects of the business of the office. Accordingly, I am re-
luctant to directly answer hypothetical questions posing particular
factual circumstances. I also do not want to hypothesize, or even
plant ideas for, opportunities for corruption. If confirmed, I would
look into all potential instances of fraud, waste, or abuse, and con-
duct thorough investigations where supported by the facts gath-
ered. If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the
Department of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.14. Do you plan to gain presidential approval before inves-
tigating contracts, issuing reports or communicating with Con-
gress?
A.14. No.
Q.15. Do you intend to comply with the CARES Act, and provide
timely reports to Congress?
A.15. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.16. If the President or any member of the Administration at-
tempts to block your reports or requests for information, will you
report these issues to Congress?
A.16. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.17. Do you commit to testify before Congress when requested
without gaining permission from the White House or submitting
your testimony for approval?
A.17. Yes, as legally appropriate.
Q.18. If the President denies you permission to testify before Con-
gress, would you still appear before Congress and answer ques-
tions?
A.18. I would not ask for permission.
Q.19. The CARES Act appropriated $25 million for the Special In-
spector General’s office. If your office needs additional funds to con-
tinue its work, would you come back to Congress and let us know?
A.19. Yes.
Q.20. Outside of programs established by Title IV of the CARES
Act, what other programs fall under the purview of the SIGPR?
A.20. If I am confirmed, I will analyze this issue in careful detail.
I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is tex-
tually permissible under the CARES Act. Congress is always free
to clarify the jurisdiction of SIGPR. At this time, it would be inap-
propriate to publicly assert a definitive legal position given incom-
plete legal analysis and the potential for this issue to be litigated.
Q.21. The CARES Act prohibits members of the Administration or
Executive branch from receiving funds from the law. How will you
ensure that no officials are receiving funds from the CARES Act?
A.21. If confirmed, I would look into this type of conduct and carry
out thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered.
74
If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
Q.22. While I understand that you don’t want to duplicate the
work of the Government Accountability Office or the Council of In-
spectors General, will you commit to oversight of programs that the
law specifies you oversee, regardless of whether other entities are
conducting oversight of those programs.
A.22. Yes, I will work to find ways to complement their work.
Q.23. Early data on the SBA’s Paycheck Protection Program
showed that the funds were distributed unevenly across States.
Many States in the Midwest received a disproportionate amount of
the relief while in other States, including Nevada, businesses
struggled to access the loans. Will you commit to investigating
these inequities and reporting on what the agency could have done
better to ensure a more fair distribution of relief, including to mi-
nority owned businesses?
A.23. If confirmed, I would look into this type of conduct and carry
out thorough investigations where supported by the facts gathered.
If there is a violation of law, I would make a referral to the Depart-
ment of Justice for formal legal action.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR SINEMA
FROM BRIAN D. MILLER
Q.1. Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(CARES) Act, Congress provided an $8 billion set-aside for tribes
from the Coronavirus Relief Fund. Arizona is home to 22 federally
recognized tribes, including the Navajo Nation, that urgently need
this Federal funding. Earlier this week, Treasury released $4.8 bil-
lion of the $8 billion from this fund. This announcement came over
a month after Congress passed the CARES Act. Tribes need these
resources now. Lives are depending on it. If confirmed, what will
you do to ensure that the last 40 percent of this set-aside will be
delivered to federally recognized tribal and Alaska Native Govern-
ments as soon as possible and in compliance with Congress’s inten-
tion of providing funding for tribal governments to meet their most
pressing needs?
A.1. If I am confirmed, I will analyze this issue in careful detail.
I will consider the jurisdiction of SIGPR to be as broad as is tex-
tually permissible under the CARES Act, and Congress is always
free to clarify or amend the jurisdiction of SIGPR.
Q.2. Technology has come to play a very important role in the ad-
ministration of COVID response programs to the public and in the
functioning of our day-to-day lives during this pandemic. It also
provides opportunities for us to understand the effectiveness of the
programs authorized under the CARES Act as well as the level of
fraud associated. If confirmed, what will your approach be to de-
ploying technology to perform oversight?
A.2. Traditional means of investigation and analysis to protect the
interests of the American people in the proper use of money dis-
bursed under the CARES Act may be rendered inadequate by the
sheer scale of the appropriations at issue. We will need to rely on
75
technology to help analyze vast quantities of information, and iden-
tify the most significant areas for further investigation. If I am con-
firmed, I will quickly determine how best to make use of technology
to ensure the OSIGPR can efficiently conduct its investigations and
analyses.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR BROWN
FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. During your tenure as Principal Associate Director for General
Government at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was re-
sponsible for administering billions in Community Development
Block Grant–Disaster Relief (CDBG–DR) grant funding for Puerto
Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and a number of States. Congress
provided this funding in February 2018. 1 Fifteen months later,
when HUD still had not issued the notice necessary for funding re-
cipients to begin planning to use the bulk of their mitigation funds
or Puerto Rico’s funds to restore its electrical grid, Congress again
acted to require that HUD publish the notice on the use of mitiga-
tion funds within 90 days. 2 But HUD ignored this deadline and did
not publish the notice until more than 4 months after the deadline
required by law. 3
During your tenure at OMB, OMB reviewed and approved a no-
tice on the use of mitigation funds for all recipients except Puerto
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 4 Were you aware of the decision
not to include Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands in a CDBG–
DR mitigation notice that set out the eligible uses and terms for
all other CDBG–DR mitigation recipients? If so, did you participate
in or agree with that decision? If you were not aware, why not?
During your tenure at OMB, were you aware that HUD did not
meet the legal deadline to issue a notice on the uses of CDBG–DR
mitigation funds for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands? If so,
why did you allow HUD and OMB not to comply with the legal
deadline? If not, why not?
As a former staff member of the Appropriations Committee and
a current employee within the Executive branch, do you believe it
is appropriate for OMB or any Federal agency it oversees to will-
fully ignore any statutory requirement or deadline? If so, why? If
not, why did you allow HUD and OMB not to comply with the legal
requirement in this case?
A.1. I am proud of this Administration’s response to the natural
disasters that occurred in 2017. Puerto Rico was provided with an
unprecedented level of resources to rebuild and mitigate against fu-
ture storms, and the Administration made sure Puerto Rico always
had sufficient funds to administer its disaster recovery programs.
With respect to my participation in specific decisions, your question
seeks the substance of communications between the White House
and OMB, the disclosure of which would reveal confidential, delib-
erative, and internal Executive Branch information.
1 P.L. 115-123.
2 P.L. 116-20.
3 85 FR 4676.
4 85 FR 45838.
76
Q.2. Under your leadership, OMB reviewed and approved and
HUD published a proposed rule that would overhaul HUD’s process
to ensure that grantees ‘‘affirmatively further’’ fair housing in com-
pliance with the Fair Housing Act, including approval of amended
information collection.
During your tenure at OMB, did you participate in the develop-
ment, review, or approval of the proposed Affirmatively Furthering
Fair Housing rule and its associated data collection? If so, please
describe your role in the review and approval. If not, please explain
why you were not involved in the review and approval of what
OMB determined to be a significant regulatory action.
The proposed rule estimates that it will take just 10 hours for
each local respondent responsible for complying with the obligation
to ‘‘affirmatively further’’ fair housing to assess and plan to address
local barriers to fair housing. Do you believe 10 hours is sufficient
time for a jurisdiction to fully assess all barriers to fair housing for
all protected classes under the Fair Housing Act and plan meaning-
ful steps to address any barriers? If so, please explain why this
time is sufficient for such a consequential review.
This proposed rule replaces a 2015 final rule and associated data
and tools that HUD provided to communities to help them assess
fair housing barriers. Why did HUD and OMB elect not to provide
data or any tools to help communities assess their fair housing bar-
riers?
How will reducing the amount of data that HUD provides to com-
munities to assess fair housing barriers facilitate evidence-based
policies to address fair housing barriers?
A.2. As you correctly noted, HUD’s proposed Affirmatively Fur-
thering Fair Housing rule will significantly reduce the administra-
tive burden for thousands of communities across the country, there-
by permitting them to better engage in furthering housing choice.
With respect to my participation in specific decisions, your question
seeks the substance of communications between the White House
and OMB, the disclosure of which would reveal confidential, delib-
erative, and internal Executive Branch information.
Q.3. Under your leadership, OMB also reviewed and approved and
HUD published a disparate impact proposed rule that civil rights,
housing, and consumer advocates said is ‘‘directly contradictory to
the Fair Housing Act and its purposes.’’ 5 The proposed rule would
make it even more difficult to root out discrimination in pricing
and access in the mortgage market that you would help oversee if
confirmed.
Did you review and approve HUD’s proposed disparate impact
rule during your time at OMB? If so, why did you allow a rule that
undermine enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to move forward?
If not, why was the Policy Associate Director not involved in the
review and approval of what OMB determined was a significant
regulatory action?
If you are confirmed as FHA Commissioner, how will you ensure
that no borrower is subject to discrimination in mortgage access or
pricing, including less obvious discrimination driven through algo-
5 https://ourfinancialsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Coalition-Comment-on-HUD-
Disparate-Impact-10-18-19.pdf
77
rithms, under this disparate impact proposal that provides a safe
harbor for algorithms? Please be specific on the policies you will
put forward.
A.3. HUD enforces the Fair Housing Act of 1968 and I will work
closely with the Department’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity to ensure we are living up to the letter and spirit of
that landmark law. With respect to my participation in specific de-
cisions, your question seeks the substance of communications be-
tween the White House and OMB, the disclosure of which would
reveal confidential, deliberative, and internal Executive Branch in-
formation.
Q.4. During your tenure as Principal Associate Director for General
Government at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), OMB
approved and the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) proposed a rule on ‘‘Verification of Eligible Status’’ that re-
verses decades of HUD policy and contradicts clearly communicated
Congressional intent. Under current HUD policy, if a family has
some members who have an immigration status that makes them
eligible to receive HUD assistance but others in the household do
not, HUD will assist the eligible family members while requiring
those who are not eligible to stay with their family but pay their
full share of housing costs. Under the rule OMB approved on your
watch, families where one member is not eligible for HUD assist-
ance based on their immigrations status will be forced to choose be-
tween breaking up their family or making their entire family more
vulnerable to housing instability and homelessness.
HUD’s own regulatory impact analysis found that this proposed
rule could result in the displacement of more than 108,000 people,
including 55,000 children, and would increase the cost or decrease
the number of families served by HUD’s housing assistance pro-
grams while potentially driving up the number of families experi-
encing homelessness. 6 The increase in need for those who become
homeless could cost $20,000 to $50,000 per family per year, by
HUD’s estimates, compared to the $1,900 per year in housing sub-
sidy these families currently receive.
Under your leadership, why did the OMB approve and HUD pro-
pose a rule that would result in higher programmatic costs per
family served or displaced?
Under your leadership, why did the OMB approve and HUD pro-
pose a rule that by HUD’s own analysis said would likely result in
the displacement of the lowest-income families, including 55,000
children who are eligible for HUD assistance?
While this proposed rule is within the Office of the Secretary’s
jurisdiction, according to HUD’s analysis it will have a direct im-
pact on more than 3,000 households with nearly 12,700 residents
who are in Section 202 or project-based rental assistance units
under your jurisdiction. Will you commit not to displace these fami-
lies and vulnerable seniors if you are confirmed? If not, why not?
A.4. HUD proposed this rule to ensure its programs are in legal
compliance with Section 214 of the Community Development Act of
1980, which prohibits the Department from making financial as-
6 https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=HUD-2019-0044-0002
78
sistance available to persons other than U.S. citizens or certain cat-
egories of eligible noncitizens in HUD’s public and specified as-
sisted housing programs. The proposed rule would require the
verification of the eligible immigration status of all recipients of as-
sistance under a covered program who are under the age of 62.
With respect to my participation in specific decisions, your question
seeks the substance of communications between the White House
and OMB, the disclosure of which would reveal confidential, delib-
erative, and internal Executive Branch information.
Q.5. While you were at OMB, OMB reviewed and approved HUD’s
proposed rule on equal participation of faith-based organizations in
HUD programs and activities. While this proposed rule takes great
care to ensure that the religious expression of any HUD grantees
or partners is not hindered in any way, it offers no such protection
to the individuals and families in need of HUD-funded services.
Did you review and approve HUD’s proposed faith-based organi-
zations rule during your time at OMB? If so, why did you allow a
rule that would prioritize the religious rights of HUD grantees over
religious freedom of the individuals and families those grantees are
funded to serve? If not, why was the Policy Associate Director not
involved in the review and approval of what OMB determined was
a significant regulatory action?
If confirmed, how will you ensure that no individual or family is
forced to choose between compromising their religious beliefs or
identity and access to safe, affordable housing or services?
A.5. Protecting religious liberties and ensuring access to safe and
affordable housing are not mutually exclusive goals; HUD’s pro-
posed rule strikes an appropriate balance between these important
interests. With respect to my participation in specific decisions,
your question seeks the substance of communications between the
White House and OMB, the disclosure of which would reveal con-
fidential, deliberative, and internal Executive Branch information.
Q.6. In its Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards
proposed rule, HUD notes that it has decided not to include Manu-
factured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) recommendations
regarding energy efficiency in manufactured homes due to pending
regulations being prepared by the Department of Energy. 7 But
HUD is required to act on the MHCC’s proposed revisions to stand-
ards within 1 year of the proposal being submitted.
Based on your experience at HUD and at OMB, do you believe
the decision to withhold an MHCC revision is consistent with
HUD’s statutory requirements?
If confirmed, will you commit to advance a rulemaking on the en-
ergy efficiency recommendation approved by the MHCC without
waiting for action by other agencies? If not, why not?
A.6. In 2007, congressional legislation provided authority to the
Department of Energy to establish energy standards for manufac-
tured homes. Section 413 of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (EISA) directs DOE to establish energy conservation
standards for manufactured housing. Therefore, HUD must also co-
ordinate with DOE when updating the energy standard rec-
7 85 FR 5589.
79
ommendations submitted to the Manufactured Housing Consensus
Committee (MHCC) for consideration.
By way of background, the MHCC is a statutory Federal Advi-
sory Committee body charged with providing recommendations to
the Secretary on the revision and interpretation of HUD’s manufac-
tured home construction and safety standards and related proce-
dural and enforcement regulations. By regulation, HUD has in-
cluded the MHCC in the process of revising the Manufactured
Home Model Installation Standards, Installation Program Regula-
tions, and Dispute Regulation Program regulations. The MHCC is
organized and carries out its business in a manner that guarantees
a fair opportunity for the expression and consideration of various
positions and for public participation.
HUD has great respect for the members of the MHCC who com-
mit to 3-year terms while maintaining their full-time ‘‘day’’ jobs, to
provide substantial expertise and familiarity with the market to
the Department. Under auspices of the Manufactured Housing Im-
provement Act of 2000 which established the MHCC, recommenda-
tions are provided by the committee to the Secretary and his dele-
gates for consideration by the Department. Recommendations may
be accepted without change, may initiate discussion between the
MHCC and the Department for further consideration, or may be
held by the Department for future consideration where such rec-
ommendations may intersect more efficiently with other items rec-
ommended. HUD has a backlog of standards which should be up-
dated on a regular basis and is currently working on the backlog
of standards in order to keep pace with innovation in the industry
and other Code making bodies.
If confirmed, I intend to examine this issue and make a deter-
mination at that time as to whether to proceed with a rule or seek
more information for further consideration.
Q.7. The Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards
proposed rule also proposes changes to the definition of an ‘‘at-
tached accessory building or structure.’’ 8
If confirmed, how will you ensure that HUD can verify that any
additions are safely installed and that all parties, including current
and future owners of the home, are aware of the structural limita-
tions and can use the additions safely?
If confirmed, how will you work with home installers or their
representatives to ensure that any final rule will ensure that all
manufactured housing units remain safe for current and future
residents?
A.7. HUD administers the Manufactured Home Construction and
Safety Program (24 CFR 3280 and 3282) that establishes Federal
standards for the design and construction of manufactured homes
to promote the quality, durability, safety, and affordability of the
homes, as well as the implementing regulations to monitor and en-
force compliance with the standards. The quality, durability, safety,
and affordability of homes must be considered by the MHCC, the
public during the public comment period, and HUD in its
rulemakings regarding manufactured housing.
8 Id.
80
HUD also administers the Manufactured Home Installation Pro-
gram (24 CFR 3286) that regulates installation (including installa-
tion of attached accessory building or structure) in all States unless
a State has been accepted by HUD to administer its own qualifying
installation program. All States must meet HUD’s model installa-
tion standards, and States that administer their own installation
program may choose to exceed HUD’s minimum requirements.
HUD’s model manufactured home installation program ensures
that States have in place minimum installation standards that in-
clude ensuring the home and any attached accessory building or
structure are safe, sound, and habitable; further, States can exceed
HUD’s minimum installation standards if they so choose. HUD will
continue to regulate installation in States that have decided not to
administer their own qualifying installation program.
The quality, durability, safety, and affordability of homes must
be considered by the MHCC, the public during the public comment
period, and HUD in its rulemakings regarding manufactured hous-
ing.
Q.8. During the financial crisis, HUD built upon existing programs
to give low- and moderate-income prospective homeowners an op-
portunity to purchase homes that came into HUD’s real estate
owned (REO) portfolio within their communities. But last year
HUD reported that nearly two-thirds of FHA homes that went
through foreclosure were sold through third party sales in which
there is no first look or preference for owner-occupants, including
teachers and firefighters, or monitoring of outcomes. While there is
a benefit to transferring vacant properties quickly to avoid blight,
there is a much longer term cost if those properties go to out-of-
State investors, absentee landlords, or for-profit contract for deed
lenders who do not repair or maintain the property.
If you are confirmed, do you commit to begin collecting and pub-
lishing data on FHA asset dispositions, including both REO and
third party sales, that includes information on the time to sale, the
ultimate purchaser, the end use (rental/home ownership/other),
whether the property went through any FHA programs (like the
Good Neighbor Next Door program) intended to transfer the prop-
erty to an owner or community partner, and the cost of repairs? If
not, why not?
If confirmed, will you prohibit the transfer of any FHA property,
whether from REO or through the third party sales process, to a
for-profit owner who intends to sell the property through a preda-
tory contract for deed or similar arrangement? If not, why not?
If confirmed, will you commit to expand the requirement for a
first look for homeowners and community purchasers to additional
REO sales, as well as third party sales? If not, why not?
A.8. If confirmed, I will evaluate and strengthen each program to
ensure fair treatment of borrowers and encourage participation by
nonprofit partners.
FHA publishes a significant amount of data on its asset disposi-
tion currently. That data can be found at: https://www.hud.gov/
program-offices/housing/hsgrroom#Reports. The additional data
requested is not collected and I understand that FHA would have
no way to accurately and efficiently collect many of the data points
81
identified, even from public records. The third-party sales are what
FHA refers to as its Claims Without Conveyance of Title program
(CWCOT). The CWCOT program is where the Mortgagee attempts
to secure a third-party purchaser for the mortgaged property at
foreclosure sale so that conveyance to HUD is not required in ex-
change for mortgage insurance benefits. This process allows the
property to return to the market quickly through an auction that
is open to the public, so everyone has an equal opportunity to pur-
chase the property. Separate of being a blight deterrent, third-
party sales realize a significantly improved recovery rate compared
to REO dispositions, saving taxpayer funds. Overall, FHA’s asset
disposition programs should be calculated to protect the Mutual
Mortgage Insurance Fund as well as to protect and sustain commu-
nities.
Q.9. While you were the Principal Assistant Director at OMB,
HUD and the Department of Treasury proposed housing finance re-
form plans.
Did you participate in the development of, offer feedback on, re-
view, or approve those plans?
Please describe your role in the development of these proposals.
The HUD plan proposes to implement ‘‘tiered pricing’’ for FHA
loans, which would raise the cost of home ownership for the bor-
rowers who can least afford it without lower costs for others. 9
How does raising costs on eligible borrowers facilitate access to
home ownership?
How would raising the price of home ownership through tiered
pricing as HUD has proposed help or hinder FHA’s ability to serve
a countercyclical role and stabilize the mortgage market?
In both the HUD and Treasury housing finance reform plans, the
agencies expressed concern about ‘‘duplicating support’’ by estab-
lishing eligibility criteria that would allow some homeowners a
choice between an FHA loan and a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac
backed loan. But a borrower does not take out two mortgage loans
at one time on the same property. How is giving borrowers choice
‘‘duplicating support’’?
The HUD plan proposes to make FHA its own Government cor-
poration, which the report says will ‘‘provide the agency tools and
resources necessary to make appropriate risk decisions to respond
to changing markets.’’ While it is critical that FHA and all HUD
programs have the tools and resources they need, it is not clear
how making FHA a Government corporation would provide addi-
tional resources. As part of this proposal, would FHA retain its re-
ceipts, which currently help fund other HUD programs, to increase
resources? If FHA did not retain these receipts, how would chang-
ing FHA’s structure to a corporation structure provide additional
resources?
A.9. FHA proposes a tiered pricing approach that would roughly
mirror the current GSE pricing structure for high LTV loans while
maintaining the most important benefits of cross subsidization.
This structure would be revenue neutral at the loan level to FHA’s
9 The plan states that tiered pricing ‘‘would not open new markets to already served by pri-
vate mortgage providers, which FHA would not lower premiums on its 30-year fixed rate prod-
uct through this effort.’’ See p. 20.
82
current pricing for all FHA borrowers and anticipated to improve
the welfare of all FHA borrowers as the loan seasons.
A central principle of the Administration’s Housing Finance Re-
form plan is that Federal mortgage credit policies should be better
coordinated in order to allow qualified borrowers to access respon-
sible and affordable borrowing options and choices. Coordination
ensures that there is not unhealthy and irresponsible competition
between Government-supported programs, which can lead to lower
underwriting standards, increase risk to taxpayers, and threaten
the long-term availability of credit to qualified borrowers.
With respect to my participation in specific decisions, your ques-
tion seeks the substance of communications between the White
House and OMB, the disclosure of which would reveal confidential,
deliberative, and internal Executive Branch information.
Q.10. The HUD Budget’s Congressional Justification notes that
there is a positive correlation between housing counseling and bet-
ter credit and fewer foreclosures. 10 In recent weeks, the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the
FHA, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Department of
Agriculture have all recommended that homeowners experiencing a
hardship contact a HUD-certified housing counselor, but HUD has
not requested any additional resources for counseling providers.
If confirmed, will you advocate for significant supplemental re-
sources to provide HUD-certified housing counseling services to
millions of struggling homeowners and renters? If not, how will
counselors be able to fund the staff necessary to provide the coun-
seling resources that Federal agencies have recommended they
seek?
A.10. If confirmed, I will take a fresh look at ways we can
incentivize housing counseling as a tool to provide homeowners and
potential borrowers with information to maximize the level of suc-
cess of all borrowers.
Last year, HUD-approved housing counselors provided approxi-
mately one million families with counseling services related to
homebuying, preserving home ownership, rental assistance, dis-
aster relief, and with reverse mortgages. Agencies generally raise
five to six dollars for every dollar provided by HUD. During the
housing crisis, counselors were able to provide counseling services
to three times as many clients due to the additional funding pro-
vided by Congress at the time.
Q.11. In recent years, for-profit owners and out-of-State investors
have purchased properties providing project-based rental assistance
and allowed those properties to fall into disrepair. Too often tenant
complaints go unaddressed and elevator outages, water leaks,
mold, and infestations become part of tenants’ daily life. Neglect of
existing properties endangers the lives of current tenants and
threatens the viability of critical sources of affordable housing.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to improve inspections and
subsequent repairs of the assisted units within the Office of
Housing’s jurisdiction?
10 https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/28lFY21CJlProgramlHCA.pdf
83
If confirmed, how will you ensure that tenants have the informa-
tion they need to report unaddressed maintenance and nonrespon-
sive property owners and managers?
A.11. Secretary Carson has made the restructure of HUD’s inspec-
tion program, under HUD’s Real Estate Assessment Center
(REAC), a priority of his administration. To that end, since 2017,
HUD has been undertaking a wholesale reexamination of the
REAC physical inspection process and are working to modernize its
inspection model.
HUD is currently revising the methodology for physical inspec-
tions to make it more accurate, consistent, and less complex for
program participants. Meeting these goals will improve the quality
of life for many residents in HUD-assisted facilities. If confirmed,
I will continue to work with HUD’s Office of Public and Indian
Housing, which oversees REAC, to ensure that any new model is
implemented and Congress receives as much transparency as pos-
sible on the process. Within the Office of Housing, I will regularly
and closely monitor the Quarterly Report to Congress on Oversight
of Property Owners and Multifamily Properties Assessed through
HUD’s Real Estate Assessment Center (Section 219), and will
strive to ensure that Multifamily staff continue to enforce owners’
addressing and correcting REAC inspection deficiencies, local code
violations, and resident complaints in a timely manner.
Q.12. Property owners and property maintenance organizations
often hold or operate across multiple HUD-financed or -subsidized
properties. In some cases, these owners and maintenance organiza-
tions are allowed to continue to operate or expand operations
across multiple properties or States even as some of their prop-
erties deteriorate and endanger the health and safety of residents.
If confirmed, how will you ensure that owners or managers that
are not taking appropriate steps to address health and safety con-
cerns are not allowed to reduce the value of or service at other
HUD-financed or -subsidized properties?
A.12. The Office of Multifamily Housing has in place a robust re-
view of all applications for the transfer or assignment, of Section
8 HAP contracts. That review process ensures that prospective
owners who do not have the requisite monetary resources or man-
agement oversight to manage a Section 8 property will not be ap-
proved for the transfer. Also, the review includes an examination
of owner compliance with their business agreements on existing
HUD properties.
In addition, the Multifamily staff, working with HUD’s Office of
General Counsel, are monitoring owners with larger, national port-
folios, and have taken actions against poorly performing owners in
an effort to enforce compliance or have them divest of their HUD
properties. I will work with the Multifamily Housing staff to ensure
they continue to effectively implement the above procedures and
will review staff property level oversight to ensure that property
condition and resident health are in the forefront of the monitoring
regime.
Q.13. While you were at OMB you signed off on one budget and
helped develop another that would have eliminated funding for the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and the
84
HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) program, while making
devastating cuts to other housing and community development
funds. But in the weeks between the declaration of the COVID–19
national emergency and when communities will receive additional
CARES Act funds, HUD recommended that communities use the
very CDBG funds you would have eliminated to provide testing and
diagnostic services, provide grants and loans to small businesses to
manufacture critical medical supplies, and help small businesses
that were struggling. 11
If Congress had enacted the budget that was proposed under
your leadership, there would have been significant effects on the
communities on the front lines responding to the health con-
sequences of this pandemic. Do you still support the cuts in those
two budgets?
A.13. The Office of Management and Budget has an extensive role
in supporting agencies as they implement the President’s priorities
and agenda, including working with them to formulate the Presi-
dent’s Budget. The CDBG program was proposed for elimination
because its mission can best be performed at the State and local
levels, thereby freeing up scarce taxpayer resources for programs
targeted at more vulnerable populations, including the rental as-
sistance programs administered by the Office of Housing, which I
would lead if confirmed. Because grantees had unspent CDBG
funds in their accounts, it is my understanding that HUD’s Office
of Community Planning and Development provided them with
flexibility so they could use these funds to respond to the current
pandemic.
Q.14. In the HUD budget proposals released and developed during
your time at OMB, HUD proposed to double rents for the lowest
income HUD-assisted renters, impose arbitrary work requirements
those households, and allow disparate rent policies set by local pub-
lic housing agencies or even a private building owner.
If Congress had enacted the rent reforms HUD proposed, how
would those higher rents, disparate rent policies among landlords
administering the same HUD-assisted programs, and work require-
ments have directly affected the housing and financial stability of
HUD-assisted families?
If confirmed, will you continue to support implementing the pro-
posed rent reforms, including doubling rents on the lowest income
households living in the 1.2 million units in the project-based rent-
al assistance units, low-income senior housing, and housing for per-
sons with disabilities that would be within your jurisdiction? If so,
why?
A.14. I support the Administration’s proposed rent reforms and
want to work with Congress to strengthen the Office of Housing’s
rental assistance programs. That said, if confirmed, my top priority
will be to respond to the current coronavirus pandemic.
Q.15. A month after passage of the CARES Act, HUD’s Inspector
General published a memorandum detailing its review of the
11 https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/Main/documents/Quick-Guide-CDBG-Infectious-Disease-
Response-031920.pdf
85
websites of the 30 largest FHA mortgage servicers. 12 The Inspector
General found that the written material readily available on some
of these large servicers’ websites had not been updated to reflect
the changes made in the CARES Act, did not include information
about the availability of forbearance for borrowers facing a finan-
cial hardship, or gave the impression that the borrower would be
required to pay back all missed payments in a lump sum at the
end of forbearance.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that all FHA
servicers are complying with all legal requirements and FHA Mort-
gagee Letters, including those implementing the CARES Act?
Will you conduct reviews of servicers’ written materials,
websites, and audio communications with borrowers to ensure that
all servicers comply with the law and that all borrowers are treated
equitably? If not, why not?
A.15. If confirmed, I will be committed to ensuring that mortgage
servicers meet all FHA program requirements and their respon-
sibilities to borrowers, including specific actions implementing the
CARES Act.
Q.16. In response to the CARES Act, FHA issued a Mortgage Let-
ter detailing post-forbearance options for homeowners, including a
partial claim and standard loss mitigation. But borrowers who
were struggling prior to COVID–19 or who have faced a natural
disaster in the past may not have access to the same options to get
back on track and stay in their homes.
If confirmed, will you review barriers to borrowers accessing a
partial claim, including being the victim of a prior natural disaster,
and take steps to ensure that all borrowers who could remain in
a sustainable loan with a partial claim at the end of forbearance
have access to that option?
If confirmed, will you ensure that any borrower who was in a
trial modification or performing in a modified loan immediately
prior to the national emergency is not penalized, either by loss of
the ability to access an affordable modification or in their credit,
by accessing the forbearance provided for in the CARES Act?
A.16. If confirmed, I will commit to reviewing the FHA loss mitiga-
tion waterfall to ensure that all options available to borrowers are
appropriately tailored to the current situation.
Q.17. If confirmed, will you commit to cooperate with all Inspector
General investigations, including providing timely access to all re-
quested documents and e-mails; making yourself available for per-
sonal interviews; and allowing staff under your supervision to par-
ticipate in requested interviews without the presence of a HUD at-
torney representing the interests of the Department?
A.17. I commit to complying with all legal obligations and the
terms established through the normal accommodation process.
Q.18. During your nomination hearing, you were asked whether
there was anything within the FHA Commissioner and Assistant
Secretary for Housing’s jurisdiction that Congress should be think-
ing about for future legislation passed in response to COVID–19.
12 https://www.hudoig.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/Single%20Family%20Mortgage
%20Forbearance%20Brief.pdf
86
In response, you mentioned additional flexibility but did not men-
tion any need for resources to support the millions of people who
lose jobs and income, homeowners needing help navigating the
mortgage system, or housing providers, particularly those providing
housing to vulnerable seniors, who are required to do additional
cleaning.
If confirmed, what additional funding would you recommend that
Congress provide in response to COVID–19 to help low-income sen-
iors, low-income individuals and families, or homeowners stay safe
and navigate the system? If you would not recommend any addi-
tional funding, why not?
A.18. The Office of Housing has utilized existing flexibilities and
those provided through the CARES Act to support homeowners in
preserving their homes and owners/sponsors to facilitate the con-
tinued operations of properties and facilities in our insured and/or
assisted multifamily and healthcare portfolios (nursing homes/hos-
pitals). Fund assignments for CARES Act dollars were executed ex-
peditiously and directed to service coordinators and income loss gap
coverage for the extremely low income and very low-income resi-
dents of Sec 202 Housing for the Elderly and Section 811 Housing
for Persons with Disabilities properties.
In my testimony I was referring to the need for additional flexi-
bilities, not included in the CARES Act, to prevent, prepare for,
and respond to COVID–19. For example, while the CARES Act pro-
vides flexibilities for homeowners and multifamily property owners,
there was no mention maintaining operations of the residential
care facilities (nursing homes) and hospitals in the FHA-insured
portfolio.
I agree that the nearly 33.5 million U.S. workers that have filed
for unemployment benefits will need assistance to stay in their
homes, owned or rented. While HUD traditionally targets rental
assistance to those underserved by conventional housing markets,
I would be happy to meet and discuss additional funding strategies
for providing rental assistance to people who have lost their job
and were earning more than the area median income that HUD
programs target.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF
SENATOR MENENDEZ FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. Over the past 3 years, during which when you were acting
FHA Commissioner and Program Associate Director at the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), the President’s budget included
a proposal to raise rents by an average of 44 percent in federally
assisted housing and triple rents for the lowest income households,
according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
With the current unemployment rate at 12.4 percent and the
Congressional Budget Office estimating the unemployment rate
will remain above 9.5 percent at least until the end of 2021, do you
think families living in HUD-assisted housing will be able to afford
HUD’s proposed rent increases? If you do believe families in HUD-
assisted housing can afford rent increases during this unprece-
dented economic turmoil, please provide data and analysis sup-
porting your justification.
87
Will you commit to abandoning this dangerous plan if you are
confirmed? If not, why not?
A.1. I support the Administration’s proposed rent reforms and want
to work with Congress to strengthen the Office of Housing’s rental
assistance programs. That said, if confirmed, my top priority will
be to respond to the current coronavirus pandemic.
Q.2. As we discussed in your hearing, when the protections in the
CARES Act run out, we could be facing a foreclosure crisis even
greater than the one we faced in the Great Recession. In the com-
ing months, families unable to pay their mortgage will need to
navigate the complexity of requesting and accessing mortgage relief
programs. Homeowners already in forbearance will have to work
with their mortgage servicers to repay forborne amounts.
Given the quickly changing economic circumstances and the com-
plicated differences in forbearance repayment options offered by
both federally backed agencies and private lenders, do you believe
Congress should consider increasing resources for HUD-approved
housing counselors to help American families make educated mort-
gage decisions as the country works through this crisis?
A.2. Yes, housing counselors are well-positioned to assist home-
owners with understanding the loss mitigation/mortgage relief op-
tions available through both the FHA and conventional lenders.
Last year, HUD-approved housing counselors provided approxi-
mately one million families with counseling services related to
homebuying, preserving home ownership, rental assistance, dis-
aster relief, and with reverse mortgages. During the aftermath of
the financial crisis of 2008, counselors were able to provide coun-
seling services to three times as many clients due to the additional
funding provided by Congress at the time.
Q.3. Over the last few years, HUD has relocated key multifamily
housing staff from its office in Newark to the New York regional
office. As a former mayor, I understand that this presents a signifi-
cant challenge for residents, landlords, and property managers. It’s
critical that HUD maintains boots on the ground that are familiar
with the local conditions and issues facing residents throughout the
State, especially as the COVID crisis places particular strain on
New Jersey’s multifamily market.
If confirmed, what are you going to do to make sure the Newark
office has the staff it needs and that New Jersey remains a priority
at HUD?
A.3. I want to extend to you that same offer made by my prede-
cessor, Brian Montgomery. If you or your staff are aware of specific
instances in which New Jersey is receiving inadequate multifamily
coverage from HUD, please do not hesitate to bring them to my at-
tention. There are currently 722 active properties in the multi-
family portfolio in New Jersey, and I agree that HUD must make
providing decent, safe and affordable housing to the families who
reside in them a priority.
In addition, when it is safe for residents and communities in
light of COVID–19, I am happy to visit these properties and view
any issues or challenges firsthand. I am also always happy to talk
to your constituents regarding their concerns.
88
It is my understanding that earlier this year, the Office of Hous-
ing conducted a quality control review of the Northeast Region
Multifamily Office to address your concerns regarding customer
service for New Jersey. This assessment included an overview of
staffing composition, workload management, and challenges and
opportunities for the Multifamily Northeast Region (the Region),
and more specifically New York and New Jersey.
Properties in New Jersey are assigned to 17 different project
managers. The average portfolio size for an account executive with
New Jersey properties is 76.3 properties; the average portfolio size
for Resolution Specialists with New Jersey properties is 30.4. These
portfolio size numbers are consistent with Office of Multifamily
Housing national averages.
The Office of Multifamily Housing utilizes a workload tracking
system that allows managers to track workload volume and output
in real time. FY19 data reflect that the Northeast Region as a
whole processed nearly 90 percent of the work items on time.
Northeast Region Managers will use this system to monitor New
Jersey work volume and timeliness of response and take corrective
action, including shifting workload or assets, if numbers reflect the
need.
The New York Regional Center anticipates hiring three (3) addi-
tional account executives, which would decrease the average port-
folio size for all account executives serving New York and New Jer-
sey from 81.3 to 72.3 properties per account executive.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR TESTER
FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. Affordable Housing—Montana, and many areas of the country,
face challenges of housing availability, affordability, and aging
housing stock. As you know, this is a significant issue for rural as
well as urban areas and is one of the largest barriers to success
nationally. In Montana, lack of workforce housing is one of the
greatest inhibitors of economic development.
What can be done to increase workforce housing and encourage
more affordable housing to be built?
What do you see as the largest barrier to affordable housing, par-
ticularly in rural areas?
How do you implement an effective affordable housing strategy
nationally? In rural America? In Indian Country?
How has your work at the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) impacted housing in rural America? Where is there room for
additional efforts to support rural housing at Federal Housing Ad-
ministration (FHA) and HUD?
A.1. I believe FHA has a very important role in creating, pre-
serving, and increasing affordable housing opportunities across
America, including rural areas and Indian Country. Regulatory
barriers continue to be one of the largest impediments to the con-
struction of affordable housing. I support this Administration’s ef-
forts to reduce overly burdensome requirements that drive up the
cost of housing through the White House Council on Eliminating
89
Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing which is led by Sec-
retary Carson.
Through its single family, multifamily, and healthcare insurance
programs, FHA provides access to credit in markets, including
rural, which might otherwise be underserved. FHA insurance prod-
ucts are sought by lenders and borrowers to fill needs that other
capital providers fail to support.
In Fiscal Year 2019, 63 percent of FHA’s multifamily production
was affordable, and HUD brings that experience to workforce hous-
ing. Providing mortgage insurance for workforce housing is also an
important component of FHA multifamily’s mission and I would be
happy to work with you on ways to spur production in this area.
During these difficult times, the countercyclical role of FHA is
more important than ever to meet the unmet needs of borrowers.
In addition to FHA’s programs to serve homeowners, renters, and
low-income, senior, and disabled populations throughout the coun-
try, the Office of Housing works with other HUD offices, including
the Office of Public and Indian Housing and the Rural Housing and
Economic Development program within Community Planning and
Development, to support rural and Native American populations.
Q.2. Trump Budgets—Affordable housing is an issue across this
country yet President Trump’s budgets have eliminated nearly
every affordable housing program and take an axe to others like
the housing counseling program which you would be in charge of
in your role at the FHA. These programs are critical in Montana.
Please describe your role in these budgets during your previous
time at HUD and while at OMB.
What will you do to support affordable housing construction and
rehabilitation?
Will you advocate the importance of these programs with the
President and Secretary?
A.2. I will do my utmost to address the Nation’s affordable housing
needs. Key to this is supporting innovative approaches to pre-
serving and constructing affordable units. Focusing on very low in-
come and low income affordable housing need, I will expand on
FHA’s successes leveraging housing tax credit equity (4 percent
and 9 percent) with FHA mortgage insurance products, Section 202
Housing for the Elderly and Section 811 Housing for persons with
Disabilities programs. FHA and HUD have streamlined the proc-
esses and requirements to better utilize housing tax credits in mul-
tifamily new construction and preservation transactions. Addition-
ally, I will support FHA’s continued work with the Office of Public
and Indian Housing through the successful Rental Assistance Dem-
onstration (RAD) Program to rehabilitate and/or reconstruct public
housing, serving extremely low income and very low-income resi-
dents.
Q.3. COVID–19—As you know, many Public Housing Authorities
(PHAs) have closed or reduced operations due to COVID–19.
How will you ensure that Section 8 and HUD–VASH vouchers
are being utilized while also ensuring the safety of rental units?
As many States move forward with reopening, Montana being
one of them, what assistance and guidance are you providing PHAs
in regards to reopening?
90
A.3. The programs covered by these questions are run by HUD’s
Office of Public and Indian Housing. HUD’s congressional affairs
staff would be pleased to reach out to your office to ensure we an-
swer your questions about these important programs.
Q.4. HUD–VASH—What are your thoughts on the HUD–VASH
program?
Funding for new HUD–VASH vouchers has remained the same
for several years. Do you think this funding is sufficient to achieve
the goal of ending veteran homelessness?
How will you work with the Department of Veterans Affairs to
administer the HUD–VASH program and ensure that homeless
veterans get access to affordable housing in a timely manner?
How will you work to address barriers in the Tribal HUD–VASH
program?
How will you work to ensure that we enhance this program to
make sure that it works even more efficiently in rural America—
places like Miles City, Montana?
A.4. The programs covered by these questions are run by HUD’s
Office of Public and Indian Housing. HUD’s congressional affairs
staff would be pleased to reach out to your office to ensure we an-
swer your questions about these important programs.
Q.5. Housing Finance Reform—Given this role and your previous
responsibilities, I would like to get your thoughts on an issue that
is very important to me.
What are your thoughts on our housing finance system and do
you support reforming the system?
What are your thoughts on the Administration’s 2019 housing fi-
nance reform proposal? And the FHA provisions specifically?
Do you support a Government guarantee or a fully privatized
system?
A.5. Yes, I do support reforming the housing finance system and
the Administration’s recent proposal to provide liquidity, support
homeowners, and protect taxpayers. Right now, my top priority if
confirmed would be making sure that coronavirus-related assist-
ance reaches homeowners and renters experiencing hardship
through no fault of their own. FHA has an important counter-
cyclical role to play during adverse economic events; regardless of
the contours of future housing reforms, this should always be a
part of FHA’s mission.
When the time is right, I would look forward to working with
Congress on housing finance reform. I support structural changes
to FHA that would provide more autonomy and enable its sole
focus to be supporting low-to-moderate income homeowners and
managing risk to taxpayers. FHA’s explicit guarantee of the Fed-
eral Government has enabled it to perform its mission of providing
access to credit for mostly first-time borrowers. I support proposals
that would expand the role of the private sector in housing finance
and believe that they can be accomplished while preserving FHA’s
focus on creditworthy borrowers who may be underserved by tradi-
tional markets.
91
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR WARREN
FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. What was your involvement in putting together the 2019 De-
partment of Housing and Urban Development’s Housing Finance
Reform Plan?
Are there any aspects of this plan that you disagree with or
would like to be changed?
A.1. I fully support both HUD’s and the Treasury Department’s
Housing Finance Reform plans. Other portions of this question
seek the disclosure of confidential, deliberative, and internal Execu-
tive Branch information.
Q.2. At your confirmation hearing you stated, if confirmed, you
would, ‘‘monitor vigilantly’’ whether mortgage servicers were pro-
viding fair treatment for homeowners entering into forbearance
during the COVID–19 crisis.
What specific actions would you take, if confirmed, to monitor
servicer actions and compliance with the law, and address any un-
clear or unfair conduct you identify?
A.2. If confirmed, I will be committed to ensuring that mortgages
servicers meet all FHA program requirements and their respon-
sibilities to borrowers. FHA’s servicing and loss mitigation require-
ments provide specific instructions on working with borrowers who
are unable to make their payments. If any servicer fails to comply
with FHA’s requirements, FHA can take a variety of actions rang-
ing from providing increased technical assistance and increased
monitoring to making a formal referral to HUD’s Mortgagee Re-
view Board (MRB) in the case of more serious violations. Sanctions
imposed by the MRB can include civil money penalties and suspen-
sion or withdrawal from the program. I will also commit to working
with other agencies within the Federal Government, including the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Federal Housing Fi-
nance Agency to explore sharing information on mortgage servicer
performance where appropriate.
Q.3. You served as Associate Director for General Government at
the OMB when HUD issued its proposed Disparate Impact rule,
Mixed Status rule, and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule.
Are there any aspects of the disparate impact proposed rule that
you disagree with or would like to be strengthened?
Are there any aspects of the mixed status proposed rule that you
disagree with or would like to be strengthened?
Are there any aspects of the affirmatively furthering fair housing
proposed rule that you disagree with or would like to be strength-
ened?
A.3. The Office of Management and Budget has an extensive role
in supporting agencies as they implement the President’s priorities
and agenda, which includes reviewing legislative proposals, regu-
latory proposals, notices/reports and the availability of budgetary
resources. With respect to my participation in specific decisions,
your question seeks the substance of communications between the
White House and OMB, the disclosure of which would reveal con-
fidential, deliberative, and internal Executive Branch information.
92
Q.4. At his nomination hearing, in response to a question about
HUD Secretary Ben Carson raising the rents in federally assisted
housing, former FHA commissioner Brian D. Montgomery stated:
‘‘no mass evictions will occur as long as I am FHA commissioner,
Assistant Secretary for Housing.’’
Will you make this same pledge if confirmed?
Will you commit to evaluating the potential impact of rent raises
on affordability and potential evictions before issuing any proposals
or taking action to raise rents in federally assisted housing?
A.4. No mass evictions will occur as long as I am FHA Commis-
sioner and I will always evaluate the impact of changes in rent on
the programs run by the Office of Housing.
Q.5. HUD’s requested budget for fiscal year 2021 includes no fund-
ing for the Public Housing Capital Fund. There is currently an esti-
mated $70 billion backlog in critical repairs and maintenance for
existing public housing. This backlog results in approximately
10,000 public housing units being lost every year, and subjects tens
of thousands of residents to living in unsafe and unhealthy condi-
tions.
If confirmed, would you advocate for funding for the Public Hous-
ing Capital Fund?
A.5. The Public Housing Capital Fund is administered by HUD’s
Office of Public and Indian Housing and therefore would be outside
my purview if I am confirmed to serve as Federal Housing Com-
missioner and Assistant Secretary for Housing.
Q.6. Do you believe there is a national affordable housing crisis?
A.6. If confirmed, I will prioritize the issue of affordable housing.
Across the country, Americans are stretching their finances too far
to be able to afford a place to live. Far too many households are
rent-burdened and housing supply does not match demand in many
areas, creating undue pressures on low-to-moderate income work-
ers and families. Many Americans are finding it increasingly dif-
ficult to reside near good schools, places of work, and access to
transportation. Nurses, firefighters, teachers, and cops often cannot
afford to live in the communities that they serve. Exacerbating this
problem is the financial strain and uncertainty caused by the
COVID–19 pandemic.
I believe that FHA must help to alleviate these affordability bur-
dens, made more difficult by the current health crisis. If confirmed,
my goals would be to run a strong and sustainable FHA that can
play an important countercyclical role in providing access to mort-
gage credit during this time. I support recent HUD policies to ex-
pand access to condo markets and manufactured housing, both of
which are important options for first-time homebuyers. In addition,
FHA’s multifamily loan program is and will continue to step in to
increase affordable rental housing supply for low-to-moderate in-
come families. If confirmed, I also hope to participate in several of
the Administration’s initiatives to address housing unaffordability,
including through the Councils on Opportunity Zones and Elimi-
nating Regulatory Barriers to Affordable housing.
93
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF
SENATOR VAN HOLLEN FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. As the Associate Director for General Government at OMB
what role did you have in overseeing HUD’s proposed Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) rule? As the nominee to be Com-
missioner of FHA, do you support this proposed rule? Can you also
please describe why you think it’s appropriate to give lenders a
safe harbor for policies or practices driven by algorithms?
A.1. I support HUD’s proposed Affirmatively Furthering Fair Hous-
ing (AFFH) rule, though it will be outside my purview if I am con-
firmed to serve as Federal Housing Commissioner and Assistant
Secretary for Housing. With respect to my participation in specific
decisions, your question seeks the substance of communications be-
tween the White House and OMB, the disclosure of which would
reveal confidential, deliberative, and internal Executive Branch in-
formation.
Q.2. Last week, the Mortgage Bankers Association reported that
nearly 7 percent of the mortgage market was in forbearance. The
largest segment of borrowers in forbearance have mortgages
backed by the FHA or VA. According to the report, 9.73 percent of
the loans in Ginnie Mae’s portfolio are in forbearance. That’s an in-
crease of 1.47 percent from the previous week’s total of 8.26 per-
cent. How do you plan to ensure servicer compliance with the
CARES Act forbearance provisions? How do you plan to work with
the FHFA, Ginnie Mae, and the Federal Reserve to support home-
owners and the mortgage market throughout this crisis? What do
you anticipate will be the impact of the COVID crisis on the health
of the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund (MMIF)? Do you plan on
increasing mortgage insurance premiums? If so what impact would
increasing premiums have on FHA’s countercyclical role in the
mortgage market?
A.2. If confirmed, I will be committed to ensuring that mortgage
servicers meet all FHA program requirements and their respon-
sibilities to borrowers, including those contained in the CARES Act.
HUD is working closely with other governmental organizations to
ensure a consistent response to the current COVID–19 crisis. HUD
will continue with this collaborative effort under my leadership.
The depth and length of the COVID–19 crisis will pose a chal-
lenge to the health of the MMIF. It is too early to predict the im-
pact, although I will continue to monitor the data closely if con-
firmed. Under my last tenure at FHA and continued by Commis-
sioner Montgomery, HUD has built up a capital reserve that is
more than twice the statutory level. This will be important to pro-
tect taxpayers from losses moving forward.
I understand that FHA is not currently planning to increase pre-
miums. While the FHA Commissioner is statutorily required to
maintain capital, I agree that it is also important during this time
to provide steady access to credit to eligible borrowers and to en-
sure that the housing market is well-functioning.
94
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF
SENATOR CORTEZ MASTO FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. Please provide details on how will you ensure that servicers
provide clear and fair guidance on forbearance to homeowners.
How will you ensure any lender seeking payment on the FHA
guarantee has provided documentation on its compliance with loss
mitigation requirements?
Will you ensure FHA conducts oversight of servicers with appro-
priate sampling and review of companies and borrowers, and if so,
how?
Will you ensure FHA establishes a robust complaint and appeals
process for borrowers who believe they have been subject to unfair
treatment related to noncompliance with FHA’s servicing require-
ments, including its loss mitigation requirements? If yes, how?
Will you report annually to Congress regarding the types and
volume of complaints received from borrowers who allege the rules
for loss mitigation were not followed?
A.1. If confirmed, I will be committed to ensuring that mortgage
servicers meet all FHA program requirements and their respon-
sibilities to borrowers. FHA’s servicing and loss mitigation require-
ments provide specific instructions on working with borrowers who
are unable to make their payments. If any servicer fails to comply
with FHA’s requirements, FHA can take a variety of actions rang-
ing from providing increased technical assistance and increased
monitoring to making a formal referral to HUD’s Mortgagee Re-
view Board (MRB) in the case of more serious violations. Sanctions
imposed by the MRB can include civil money penalties and suspen-
sion or withdrawal from the program. As Federal Housing Commis-
sioner, I would chair the MRB. I will also commit to working with
other agencies within the Federal Government, including the Con-
sumer Financial Protection Bureau and Federal Housing Finance
Agency to explore sharing information on mortgage servicer per-
formance where appropriate.
Q.2. How will you ensure that any action taken by FHA or the Of-
fice of Housing will not have a disparate impact on households
who’ve historically faced discrimination? If so, how?
A.2. If confirmed, I will be committed to ensuring that actions
taken by FHA and the Office of Housing comply with all applicable
legal requirements, including antidiscriminatory laws.
Q.3. Will you ensure HUD continues to support living wages for
construction workers so that those workers can afford a home, too,
and continues to require environmental assessments prior to con-
struction? If so, how?
A.3. If confirmed, I will maintain HUD’s commitment to its mission
of providing affordable housing and to ensuring that owners and
lenders comply with all applicable environmental laws and regula-
tions.
Q.4. How will you ensure HUD supports transit-oriented develop-
ment that is designed to reduce income inequality, increase equity,
and fight climate change?
A.4. The FHA mortgage insurance programs currently support
transit-oriented development, typically through the new construc-
95
tion programs 221(d)4 and 220. These programs allow borrowers to
select sites close to transit hubs and HUD considers the proximity
to public transit to be a marketing benefit, improving the overall
strength of the transaction. In addition, the FHA mortgage insur-
ance programs have rigorous environmental review standards, en-
suring that all FHA insured mortgaged properties are fully compli-
ant with NEPA and Federal energy standards.
Sixty-three percent of the loans HUD approved in fiscal year
2019 were affordable. I will work with Office of Housing staff to en-
sure they continue supporting borrowers seeking to build transit-
oriented development, to preserve and expand the supply of afford-
able housing, and to implement the appropriate building standards.
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR SINEMA
FROM DANA WADE
Q.1. As housing affordability challenges continue to grow, many
Arizonans are turning to manufactured homes for attainable, high-
quality homes that do not create an unsurmountable financial bur-
den. HUD provides financing for manufactured housing through
the Federal Housing Administration’s Title I and Title II programs,
however, these programs are underutilized and outdated. If con-
firmed, how will you revise these FHA programs to improve access
to financing for manufactured homes?
A.1. Manufactured housing is an important part of our Nation’s
housing stock which often provides an affordable entry point to
home ownership for American families. Secretary Carson has made
it a priority to revitalize HUD’s role in facilitating the construction
and financing of manufactured housing. If confirmed, I am com-
mitted to reviewing FHA’s guidelines for its manufactured housing
financing programs to ensure that access to sustainable mortgage
credit is not unduly restricted.
96
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUPPLIED FOR THE RECORD
LETTER OF REGRET FROM SENATOR TOM COTTON
97
LETTERS OF SUPPORT FORM NOMINEE BRIAN D. MILLER
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR NOMINEE DANA WADE
145
File and source
- File
- CHRG-116shrg42247.pdf
- Size
- 5,134,840 bytes
- SHA-256
- 64038ed8d0904f1c4d340fe9fb9a1286d4d220420d62f5365deaf90bc3e6e7fb
- Our copy
- CHRG-116shrg42247.pdf
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov