USDA Review Lacks Transparency Amid Billions in Federal Spending
GAO finds USDA unable to provide clear details on how it reviewed Biden-era spending laws, contrasting with Energy’s detailed scorecard.
4 min read
President Donald Trump’s January 20, 2025, executive order, titled ‘Unleashing American Energy,’ directed federal agencies to pause disbursements under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) while reviewing whether the spending aligned with his administration’s policies. The order aimed to ensure taxpayer dollars were being used effectively and in line with conservative priorities. The Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) were among the agencies tasked with conducting these reviews.
Energy Provides Clear Scorecard, USDA Fails to Deliver
The DOE’s review of the IIJA and IRA spending was thorough and transparent. By the end of its review, the department reported that 381 awards totaling about $19.6 billion would continue, while another 155 awards totaling approximately $9.1 billion were terminated. This level of detail provided a clear scorecard for taxpayers, showing what was approved, what was modified, and what was canceled.
In contrast, the USDA’s review was far less transparent. The department received approximately $37 billion in budget authority for the programs examined by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and obligated $32.2 billion during fiscal years 2022 through 2025. Despite claiming to have completed its reviews by June 30, 2025, the USDA could only report terminating 34 contracts worth approximately $67 million. However, the GAO found that the USDA’s information was not reliable enough to determine the status of all the awards reviewed.
GAO Finds USDA’s Review Lacking in Detail
The GAO attempted to track the status of all awards reviewed by the USDA but found that the department’s records were inadequate. Officials could not identify which awards had been approved to continue, which had been modified, or whether additional awards had been canceled. This lack of transparency raises concerns about the ability of the USDA to provide a clear account of how it managed the billions in federal funds allocated under the IIJA and IRA.
The IIJA and IRA provided significant funding for a range of initiatives, including projects to reduce wildfire risk, improve rural power production, and develop clean energy technologies. The USDA’s programs under these laws included efforts related to wildlife mitigation, conservation, and climate-related initiatives. However, the GAO’s findings suggest that the USDA’s ability to track and report on these programs is limited, leaving taxpayers without a clear understanding of how the money was used.
Budget Obligations and Funding Disbursement
The IIJA provided $78 billion to the DOE, of which $51 billion was obligated during fiscal years 2022 through 2025. Similarly, the USDA received $37 billion in budget authority for the programs examined, with $32.2 billion obligated over the same period. While these figures indicate that a significant portion of the allocated funds was used, the lack of transparency in the USDA’s review process raises questions about the effectiveness of the spending and the accountability of the agency.
The GAO’s report emphasized that the problem is not about improper use of funds, but rather about the inability of the USDA to provide a clear and reliable account of how the money was managed. This issue is particularly concerning given the scale of the programs involved and the public interest in ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used effectively.
Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending
Trump’s directive to review spending under the IIJA and IRA was meant to ensure that federal agencies were using taxpayer funds appropriately. While the DOE provided a detailed scorecard, the USDA’s lack of transparency highlights a gap in accountability. Taxpayers deserve to know what happened to the money Congress authorized, and the GAO’s findings suggest that the USDA has not yet met this standard.
The GAO’s criticism of the USDA is not about mismanagement or fraud, but about the failure to maintain reliable records that allow for accurate tracking of the awards reviewed. This issue is significant because it affects the ability of the public to assess the effectiveness of the programs funded by the IIJA and IRA.
Need for Clear Reporting and Accountability
As the GAO noted, a review becomes a poor accountability tool when auditors cannot reliably reconstruct what the agency decided. The USDA’s inability to provide a clear record of its review process undermines the purpose of the initial directive. Taxpayers deserve a straightforward answer about what happened to the billions in federal spending, and the USDA needs to demonstrate that it can provide this information.
The GAO’s findings also highlight the importance of transparency in federal spending. While the DOE’s approach offers a model for accountability, the USDA’s lack of detail raises concerns about the effectiveness of the review process. This issue is not just about numbers, but about the ability of the agency to provide a clear and reliable account of its actions.
Conclusion: A Call for Greater Transparency
The USDA’s review of the IIJA and IRA spending has left many questions unanswered. While the department claims to have completed its reviews, the GAO’s findings suggest that the process lacked the necessary transparency and detail. Taxpayers deserve to know what happened to the money Congress authorized, and the USDA needs to provide a clear and reliable account of its actions. As the GAO emphasized, the inability to reconstruct the review process undermines the purpose of the initial directive and highlights the need for greater accountability in federal spending.
Source: PJ Media
