Quote:

---

Democrats talk constantly about “restoring trust in government.” But trust is not restored by rhetoric or proclaiming the protection of unpopular institutions.

As of May 2024, only about 22 percent of Americans say they trust the federal government to do the right thing most of the time, according to the Pew Research Center, down from roughly three-quarters in 1964. This collapse in confidence is a central threat to progressive governance.

The left often treats “accountability” like a code word for austerity or conservatism. But accountability is not about slashing public programs to the point of irrelevance. Accountability is about proving that public programs work. When we refuse to measure performance or defend obviously broken systems in the name of protecting them, we are not shielding vulnerable communities. Rather, we are defending an ineffective status quo.

Our government launches programs with admirable goals and then fails at focusing on performance. We add layers of bureaucracy, forms, steps and committees in the name of fairness, but don’t focus on clean execution. Then we’re surprised when that system becomes slow and ineffective or easy to exploit.

During the pandemic, billions in emergency aid programs moved quickly, but created openings for exploitation. Watchdogs estimate that pandemic relief fraud likely reached billions of dollars. For example, in Minnesota, weak oversight of federally funded child nutrition programs allowed an external organization to steal an estimated $250 million that was supposed to feed children. The public sees such incidents and concludes that the federal government just wastes taxpayer money.

Trust erodes when the government cannot spend competently or police itself. Pew finds that large majorities of Americans say that Washington is not careful with taxpayer money and does not respond to ordinary people. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office reported that in 2024 alone, federal agencies admitted to an estimated $162 billion in improper payments across 68 programs. When Democratic leaders wave that kind of waste away or treat it like a talking point from the right, we are telling the public that program outcomes aren’t our priority.

If progressives want a government capable of tackling housing, health care, climate, fair wages and benefits and public safety, we have to be willing to say out loud that not every existing program deserves to survive in its current form. Some systems are outdated or underperforming relative to their costs. Defending every system, institution, or norm makes it easier for opponents to attack everything. We must improve what is working, fix what is underperforming and shut down what is failing.

I have spent my career leading performance audits across public and private organizations, overseeing construction, cybersecurity, financial and program oversight at the executive level. Good audits improve what taxpayers are getting for their investment. They improve service delivery. They improve data integrity and system security. They measure performance so that progressive policies actually achieve results in the real world.

Here is my framework for a pro-accountability, effective government:

First, define what success looks like before a dime is spent. Every program should define the problem it aims to solve, on what timeline and at what cost. For housing, that might be how many families exit homelessness into stable housing for at least 12 months and at what cost per placement. Programs without measurable success metrics should not be funded at scale.

Second, measure and publish results in plain language. This means retiring those government reports that weigh a ton and bury critical details. The standard should be public-facing dashboards and scorecards that clearly state what is being done with taxpayer dollars and the impact of those investments. For example, the GAO and inspectors general routinely translate complex failures into findings and actionable recommendations.

Third, when there is failure, we must act swiftly. Programs that cannot deliver should be reformed immediately or outright replaced. A food program that leaks $250 million to fraud is not a good “safety net.” It is theft from hungry children. Accountability is how resources reach the people they are supposed to reach.

Fourth, invite independent, credible oversight. Progressives should be the first to call for auditors to evaluate every function of government. Oversight should begin at program launch and continue throughout its lifecycle, not just after a scandal. Congress has leaned on the GAO and inspectors general to investigate improper payments, and those investigations have produced concrete recommendations to tighten controls and recover funds. This model should be standard operating procedure for any program handling billions in public money.

Progressives sometimes worry that talking about fraud, waste, abuse and performance failures will feed a narrative that government does not work. The truth is that narrative already exists. The only way to win back the trust of the American people is to prove that public dollars can produce results in people’s lives and that leaders are serious about safeguarding those dollars from waste and abuse.

---