The state auditor’s office conducts performance audits of all state entities to ensure that taxpayer money is spent effectively and that state government works as it should — for all Massachusetts residents. We regularly review the executive and judicial departments to help make government work better. Only one department has stood in opposition to the transparency, accountability, and equity these audits bring — the Legislature.
It has refused the same type of performance audit that all other state entities receive, despite the fact that audits are being conducted in line with the strict standards set by the federal Government Accountability Office. While some may think our audits can go rogue — with no guardrails — our auditors are held accountable to the strict methodologies of Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards set by the GAO. Our office receives regular and independent outside oversight and scrutiny from the National State Auditors Association to ensure our office’s programmatic and audit integrity. In fact, our office is working alongside the GAO’s Center for Audit Excellence to ensure the scope of our legislative audit remains in line with federal GAO standards.
That our audit is being met with resistance from Beacon Hill is not an example of how expansionist my vision is — it’s just demonstrative of how opaque the Legislature has become. In other states, such as Connecticut, these types of legislative audits are such routine matters, I’m told they barely make the press. The argument has been made that because audits of the Legislature were once purely financial, any audit our office conducts should be similarly limited in scope. This is a misleading argument.
Auditing has changed over time for every department. As industry standards evolved, audits have transformed from rote number-crunching into dynamic systems analyses. More comprehensive audits produce much more substantial and meaningful information. Today’s methodology goes beyond looking just for financial mismanagement; we now use audits to help identify why and how problems may have come to exist. By identifying operational challenges, our office is able to provide recommendations for improvement so that taxpayers are better served.
As an example, one need only look to the MBTA to understand why our audits reach beyond financial information to examine issues such as safety and performance. A holistic approach produces more meaningful audit reports that can identify challenges in systems to help make government work better. Many of the operational components of the MBTA — and indeed every agency — are intertwined with their finances. It would be irresponsible to avoid these aspects for the T. It is shortsighted to omit the Legislature from the same level of scrutiny.
Advertisement
Imagine if the Department of Early Education and Care told us we were not permitted to look at how they license child-care providers, Elder Affairs told us to mind our business and not audit their processes for reporting elder neglect and abuse, or a sheriff’s department denied our auditors entry into their facilities because they believed their activities and functions should be off the table for public scrutiny. And imagine if our executive department agencies started telling the Legislature that they’ll only comply to a certain extent during legislative oversight hearings.
Should the Legislature be above an audit that ensures employees are receiving their proper and timely access to cybersecurity or sexual harassment training?
The reason the Legislature has had fewer performance audits of their activities and functions than other departments have had is because political will has been in short supply. It’s not because they’ve ever been exempt or above the law, as our 113 previous audits confirm. Any attempt to grant the Legislature special treatment by inequitably limiting the scope of their ongoing audit would be both unwise and unconscionable.
Is it not enough that the Legislature has already exempted itself from public records and open meeting laws? It’s time to end the culture of legislative backroom dealings and bring some much-needed sunshine to the Legislature’s activities and functions.
Advertisement
My office will continue to lawfully conduct an audit of the Legislature despite the repeated attempts to block it. I will pursue every avenue to bring transparency, accountability, and equity to this process — including by asking the Massachusetts attorney general to fully support our efforts — and by supporting a ballot initiative in 2024 to give voters a chance to tell the members of the Legislature they should be held to the same standard as every other state entity.
My hope is that the Legislature will finally acknowledge the law, our state constitution, at least 113 previous audits, and the clear will of the people, to ensure all of us — regardless of background, bank balance, or ZIP code — have access to and accountability from Beacon Hill.
Diana DiZoglio is auditor of Massachusetts.
