SHOW US THE RECEIPTS. THEN SHOW US WHAT THE FUCK WORKED.

Welcome to the Bourbon caucus. No, this is not a whiskey tasting. Although after three hours with a federal procurement spreadsheet, nobody is judging your beverage choices.

We are Mugwumps who have one deeply unreasonable request: if you take money from the public, tell the public what you bought, why you bought it, who got paid, whether the purchase was legal, and whether the damn thing worked. Revolutionary, apparently.

Before the billionaire chorus starts singing 'cut everything,' allow us to ruin the arrangement. Accountability is not a synonym for austerity. A school, clinic, bridge or retirement benefit that works is not waste merely because it costs money. And a private contractor is not efficient merely because its invoice has fewer government letterheads on it.

BOURBONS | BO

The Bourbons specialize in purpose, constitutional authority, audits, public finance, procurement, measurable outcomes and institutional accountability. We investigate the machinery of government without assuming the machine must be gigantic, microscopic, privatized or set on fire.

In the wider Mugwumps movement, the Barnburners ask whether an institution should survive. We ask whether its spending, authority and performance can survive daylight. We will happily keep a program that delivers. We will equally happily retire one that exists because some senator once shook hands beside a bulldozer.

ROOTS · THE ORIGINAL BOURBONS WERE NOT EXACTLY THE GOOD GUYS

'Bourbon Democrats' described conservative Democrats active after the Civil War, especially in the South, with a related national current associated with low tariffs, hard money, restrained federal spending and opposition to aspects of interventionist government. Their views were neither one perfectly coherent platform nor a timeless instruction manual. The label also encompassed politicians who worked to restore white elite political control after Reconstruction. (Sources 01, 02, 03)

Let's make the uncomfortable part plain. In North Carolina and Alabama, Bourbon or Redeemer Democrats helped roll back Reconstruction-era gains, favored low-tax and limited-service government, and participated in political systems that suppressed Black voters and maintained power for landowners and industrial elites. In Alabama, electoral fraud and policies protecting white supremacy were central to the story. That isn't charming fiscal discipline. That's using government restraint as a cover for inequality and coercion. We explicitly reject it. (Sources 01, 02)

Grover Cleveland is often associated with the national Bourbon Democratic current. He preferred gold-backed currency, lower tariffs, merit appointments and limited federal interventions. He also resisted federal protections for Black voting rights and held racist views. The same president could demand honest administration and fail a much more fundamental test of equal citizenship. Read the whole file, not only the flattering chapter. (Sources 03, 04)

WHAT DO WE INHERIT? A QUESTION, NOT THEIR ANSWER.

The useful inheritance is the insistence that taxes, executive power and public expenditures need explanation. The discarded baggage is the original faction's racial hierarchy, political exclusion, and claim that starving schools or public services necessarily produces a better republic. A modern Bourbon asks who benefits when government spends AND who suffers when it refuses.

FUN FACT · THEIR NAME WAS AN INSULT ABOUT LEARNING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

Opponents compared conservative Democrats to the restored Bourbon dynasty of France, whose rulers were mocked for remembering everything and learning nothing after the French Revolution. The quip is often attributed to Talleyrand; the line's exact attribution is less important than the insult. The critics were essentially saying: 'Congratulations, you survived history and missed its entire point.' (Sources 01, 02)

That's the historical joke, and we're turning it into a rule: a modern Bourbon has to LEARN something from the audit. If a report uncovers the same failure every year, filing the report is not the achievement. Fixing the failure is.

TODAY · THE AUDIT IS NOT THE FUCKING FINISH LINE

FIRST, WHAT DOES IT EXIST TO DO?

Name the lawful purpose. Is it delivering medicine, protecting a constitutional right, maintaining a runway, inspecting a bridge, or paying a pension? You cannot measure success until you know the mission. 'Creating stakeholder engagement opportunities' is not an acceptable substitute for an actual outcome.

SECOND, WHO AUTHORIZED THE MONEY?

Find the statute, appropriation, grant authority, contract, procurement rule, and responsible officer. Explain what is discretionary and what is legally required. Being irritated by an expenditure does not magically repeal the law authorizing it.

THIRD, WHAT WAS PROMISED, AND WHAT ARRIVED?

Report original budget, current total, delays, completed deliverables, maintenance costs, accessible services, user outcomes, and who was harmed by failure. A cheaper bridge that falls down is extremely expensive. A more expensive treatment that prevents hospitalization may save money and suffering.

FOURTH, COMPARE THE ALTERNATIVES

Sometimes consolidation cuts duplication. Sometimes a local office is cheaper than a national queue. Sometimes investing upfront avoids decades of emergency costs. Do the comparison before deciding the winner. A Bourbon needs to be willing to say, 'The spending works. Keep it.'

FIFTH, FIX THE THING AND CHECK AGAIN

Set a deadline, an owner, public performance measures, an independent reviewer and a plan to correct mistakes. Then audit the result. Repeat until the agency can stop announcing that next year is the year the spreadsheet learns manners.

THE NUMBERS ARE REAL. THE HOT TAKES NEED CALCULATORS.

In May 2026, the Government Accountability Office identified 97 new matters and recommendations to address duplication, overlap, fragmentation and other inefficiencies. GAO estimated that fully addressing remaining recommendations could generate over $100 billion in additional financial benefits. That figure is prospective and depends on actual action; it is not a pile of hundred-dollar bills waiting in a government drawer. (Source 05)

In June 2026, GAO reported that agencies estimated $186 billion in improper payments for fiscal year 2025. Crucial distinction: improper payments include overpayments, underpayments, and other erroneous payments. GAO explicitly says they are not the same thing as fraud. Anyone yelling 'THE GOVERNMENT STOLE $186 BILLION' solely from that estimate has failed today's accounting exam. (Sources 06, 07)

The Defense Department's FY2025 agency-wide financial statements received a disclaimer of opinion, the eighth consecutive such outcome. That means auditors could not obtain sufficient appropriate evidence to express an overall opinion; it does NOT establish that the reported trillions in assets were stolen or missing. It's still a serious accounting and control problem demanding correction. Learn the terms before building the guillotine out of chart paper. (Source 08)

The Congressional Budget Office's February 2026 baseline projected a $1.9 trillion federal deficit for fiscal 2026. A baseline is a projection under specified current-law assumptions, not an invoice already settled. Long-run debt and interest pressures are serious questions; so are who pays taxes, which services produce returns, and what happens when programs are cut without replacing their functions. (Source 09)

POLICY TAGS · THE PEOPLE HAVE REQUESTED THE ITEMIZED BILL

Fiscal Accountability · Constitutional Authority · Public Audits · Inspector General Independence · Procurement · Contract Competition · Conflicts of Interest · Debt & Deficits · Performance Measurement · Improper Payments · Public Value · Administrative Consolidation · Tax Fairness · Defense Oversight · Anti-Corruption · Service Delivery · Due Process

These are subjects to investigate, not an automatic endorsement of cuts. The objective is better outcomes for the people paying the bill and the people depending on what it buys. The same person may be both.

→ Explore Audit Every Federal Agency

→ Explore Ten-Year Fiscal Accountability

→ Explore Federal Agency Consolidation & Cost Savings

→ Explore Pentagon Audits, Defense Reform & Personnel

→ Explore Federal-State Constitutional Oversight

→ Explore Corruption, Lobbying, Official Misconduct & Accountability

→ Explore Reform Corporate Charters & Interstate Operations

SIMILAR TO · SHARED RECEIPTS, DIFFERENT QUESTIONS

ANTI-EPSTEINS | AE

They investigate hidden influence, misconduct and accountability failures. We check who authorized the expenditure and whether the spending rules were followed. A suspicious dinner guest is not a budget line item; the actual transfer is.

STALWARTS | ST

They value competent public servants and functional institutions. We want evidence that those institutions can keep doing the job. They're defending the bridge; we're checking the engineering and maintenance contract.

GREENBACKS | GB

They study monetary policy, banking, debt and public credit. We study authorization, spending, outcomes and fiscal risk. Their interest rate may affect our budget, but that doesn't make them the same discipline.

PROGRESSIVES | PG

They ask whether government protects people and improves conditions. We ask how to measure improvement, whether a program is enforceable, and whether resources are reaching the people named in the mission statement.

LESS LIKE · EVERYONE'S INVITED. SOMEBODY'S BRINGING AN AUDITOR

These are tensions of emphasis, not enemies or prohibitions on belonging. Mugwumps can follow multiple caucuses and disagree loudly without becoming somebody else's property.

BARNBURNERS | BB

They are prepared to rebuild the institution if it cannot be repaired. We insist on showing the operational and financial case before the wrecking ball goes on the procurement card.

NEW DEALERS | ND

They often begin with the case for comprehensive public guarantees. We ask how to finance, administer and evaluate those guarantees. The healthiest version of this argument produces better policy, not a shouting match over who loves poor people.

DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS | DS

They start with questions of ownership and democratic economic power. We do not presume a particular ownership model; we audit public, private and cooperative arrangements alike.

FEDERALISTS | FD

They favor national capacity for nationwide rights and services. We ask whether centralizing a function makes it more reliable or merely creates a nationwide customer-service disaster.

FIFTY HYPOTHETICAL BOURBONS · AN IMPOSSIBLE AUDIT COMMITTEE

Ten politicians. Ten celebrities. Ten television characters. Ten book characters. Ten wildcards. All household names, real or fictional. These are comparisons of habits and cautionary examples, not memberships, endorsements or assertions that the people named share the caucus's positions. Some would be excellent auditors. Some are exactly why auditing exists.

We are not claiming that a character who likes spreadsheets is qualified to determine national policy, or that somebody whose public conduct we criticize has any connection to Mugwumps. It's a thought experiment about how power, money, responsibility and outcomes fit together. Also an unusually unpleasant seating chart for the caterer.

01 · TEN POLITICIANS · THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE IS NOW SWEATING

TEN HYPOTHETICAL COMPARISONS. ZERO ENDORSEMENTS. These people and characters illustrate competing approaches to costs, transparency, power or public value—not verified membership, ideological agreement or personal political commitments.

GROVER CLEVELAND · HISTORICAL CAUTION

The national Bourbon Democrat exemplar: hard money, vetoes and administrative restraint. He also held racist views and opposed federal protection of Black suffrage. Keep the audit questions; reject the injustice. (Source 03)

RONALD REAGAN · CAUTIONARY EXAMPLE

Promised to reduce taxes and spending, while military expansion and other choices helped deficits and federal debt rise. A very famous demonstration that the speech about fiscal discipline and the actual budget are two different documents. (Source 10)

HARRY S. TRUMAN

Led a wartime contracting investigation before becoming president. He understood that public contracts shouldn't simply make well-connected manufacturers richer while smaller businesses are frozen out. Somebody has to read the purchase order. (Source 11)

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER

Warned of the military-industrial complex while presiding over vast federal infrastructure and defense programs. An argument for scrutinizing influence, not pretending defense or highways can be operated for free.

JOHN MCCAIN

Frequently challenged costly defense programs and procurement decisions. The Pentagon should have to explain a purchase even when the politician asking the question belongs to the same party that authorized it.

ELIZABETH WARREN

Helped champion the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. A reminder that audit-minded politics can involve creating an institution with measurable duties, not just eliminating programs.

BERNIE SANDERS

Questions wealth concentration and military spending while advocating ambitious public investment. A Bourbon comparison can share his demand for scrutiny without agreeing with each proposed expenditure.

MITT ROMNEY

Known for a background in business and consulting and for joining bipartisan work on financial and legislative questions. Corporate arithmetic is useful; the public is not a corporation that can fire the least profitable citizens.

RAND PAUL

Has repeatedly criticized federal spending and publicized examples he considers wasteful. The essential Bourbon follow-up: are the numbers accurate, and what happens to the service if the appropriation disappears?

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ

Uses congressional questioning to probe corporate and political power. The same method of demanding clear answers should apply to the programs she favors. Everyone's spreadsheet gets checked.

02 · TEN CELEBRITIES · HOLLYWOOD WOULD PREFER WE NOT OPEN THE BOOKS

TEN HYPOTHETICAL COMPARISONS. ZERO ENDORSEMENTS. These people and characters illustrate competing approaches to costs, transparency, power or public value—not verified membership, ideological agreement or personal political commitments.

DOLLY PARTON

Her Imagination Library makes the practical question irresistible: how much did it cost to deliver books, and did the books actually reach children? Good intentions are strongest when the delivery system works.

MARTHA STEWART

Built domestic expertise into an enterprise of publishing, products and licensing. She knows a gorgeous centerpiece still needs somebody to price the flowers, pay the staff and own the rights.

TAYLOR SWIFT

Turned ownership of master recordings into an internationally understood business question. A contract is not glamorous until millions of people discover the difference between royalties and control.

RIHANNA

Built a major commercial presence in beauty and fashion. A Bourbon would admire a clear business model and still ask about supply chains, workers and what the numbers really show.

MARK CUBAN

His Cost Plus Drugs venture advertises a visible pricing formula for many medications. We love a posted markup; we also ask about coverage, outcomes and who can actually access the product. (Source 12)

OPRAH WINFREY

Built a multimedia business with enormous influence. The question isn't whether she's inspirational; it's how an institution turns trust into products, salaries, investments and public benefit.

JOHN OLIVER

Bought and forgave millions in medical debt as a television demonstration of the strange economics of debt collection. Nothing gets an auditor's attention like seeing the face value and the purchase price on the same slide. (Source 13)

JON STEWART

Pressed Congress to fund support for 9/11 responders. The Bourbon question here is not 'how much can we cut?' It's why a promised public obligation required so many years of pleading. (Source 14)

BEYONCÉ

A world tour is a logistics machine: performers, sound, lighting, crews, staging and schedules. The backstage budget is as real as the front-row glamour, even if the audience didn't buy a ticket to see it.

GORDON RAMSAY

Knows the difference between a restaurant with a dramatic menu and one that can deliver dinner safely and on time. His customer service training is not recommended, but cost control has never looked so loud.

03 · TEN TV CHARACTERS · YOUR EXPENSE REPORT HAS BEEN REJECTED

TEN HYPOTHETICAL COMPARISONS. ZERO ENDORSEMENTS. These people and characters illustrate competing approaches to costs, transparency, power or public value—not verified membership, ideological agreement or personal political commitments.

BEN WYATT · PARKS AND RECREATION

The municipal-budget specialist who understands that a government spreadsheet has actual consequences for actual residents. He'd audit the town, then make a deeply unnecessary claymation project.

RON SWANSON · PARKS AND RECREATION

Would like to eliminate half the department before lunch. The Bourbon next to him asks how potholes get filled afterward. The steak budget is under review.

LESLIE KNOPE · PARKS AND RECREATION

Sees public service as a calling and an office-supply shopping emergency. She'd defend the library and have to prove its operating plan. Both things are good.

MONICA GELLER · FRIENDS

Has alphabetized the receipts, labeled the cleaning supplies and audited the fridge. An excellent compliance manager until she decides to control everybody else's napkins.

MR. BURNS · THE SIMPSONS

Illustrates why the person saving money isn't necessarily the person serving the public. A spectacularly efficient way to concentrate wealth can still be a civic disaster.

TYRION LANNISTER · GAME OF THRONES

Knows that wars, debts and royal ambition eventually reach the treasury. He'd read the liabilities, then discover the king spent the reserves on another dramatic family quarrel.

CAPTAIN RAYMOND HOLT · BROOKLYN NINE-NINE

Values procedure, documentation and competent public service. The form is correct; now please tell us whether the investigation actually helped anyone.

MICHAEL BLUTH · ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT

Keeps trying to manage a family business where nobody else understands the difference between assets and expenses. A cautionary course in conflicts of interest.

WALTER WHITE · BREAKING BAD

Can calculate margins, inventories and risks with terrifying precision. Proof that a highly profitable enterprise can still be immoral, illegal and catastrophic. We won't be using his accounting software.

LISA SIMPSON · THE SIMPSONS

Will ask whether the evidence supports the school board's priorities. Somebody has to be willing to say that the shiny new mascot did not solve the textbook shortage.

04 · TEN BOOK CHARACTERS · THE LIBRARY HAS A VERY SERIOUS BUDGET PROBLEM

TEN HYPOTHETICAL COMPARISONS. ZERO ENDORSEMENTS. These people and characters illustrate competing approaches to costs, transparency, power or public value—not verified membership, ideological agreement or personal political commitments.

EBENEZER SCROOGE · A CHRISTMAS CAROL

Can account for every penny and initially ignores the humans whose lives depend on wages and care. His character arc is Bourbon 101: balanced books are not enough if you have no heart.

HERMIONE GRANGER · HARRY POTTER

Has read the law, the regulations and the amendment that nobody else noticed. She'll want an audit trail for the magic ministry—and an actual plan to protect vulnerable people.

KATNISS EVERDEEN · THE HUNGER GAMES

Watches the Capitol spend extravagant resources turning suffering into entertainment. She asks what that luxury costs, who pays, and whether the people outside the capital have enough to eat.

SHERLOCK HOLMES · SHERLOCK HOLMES STORIES

Will not accept the treasurer's confident summary as evidence. He has a habit of finding the entry that doesn't belong, although somebody else should probably handle employee relations.

JO MARCH · LITTLE WOMEN

Knows writing is labor and that publishers have contracts, payments and editorial power. Somebody better explain the royalty statement before declaring the artist grateful for exposure.

JANE EYRE · JANE EYRE

Refuses to confuse wealth with authority over her choices. The person controlling the purse does not automatically possess the moral right to make every decision.

JEAN VALJEAN · LES MISÉRABLES

Knows the public cost of punishing poverty without understanding its causes. An expensive prison system may balance an enforcement ledger while failing society spectacularly.

SAMWISE GAMGEE · THE LORD OF THE RINGS

Remembers provisions, watches the road and carries the supplies when the great and powerful forget the basics. The most important expenditure may be the one that gets everybody home.

WILLY WONKA · CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY

Owns a fantastical manufacturing enterprise whose safety controls deserve a rather urgent visit from inspectors. A profitable factory is not necessarily an accountable factory.

MR. DARCY · PRIDE AND PREJUDICE

Has a formidable inherited estate and considerable social power. Wonderful for illustrating that capital, class and good manners are different things—and none automatically proves public virtue.

05 · TEN WILDCARDS · WHO APPROVED THE DRAGON LINE ITEM?

TEN HYPOTHETICAL COMPARISONS. ZERO ENDORSEMENTS. These people and characters illustrate competing approaches to costs, transparency, power or public value—not verified membership, ideological agreement or personal political commitments.

ALEXANDER HAMILTON · TREASURY ARCHITECT

Helped establish the early republic's system of federal credit and public finance. Even the most ambitious Bourbon should distinguish borrowing for state capacity from borrowing without a plan.

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN · PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS

Built and supported practical civic institutions, from libraries to postal systems. A reminder that a public service can be worth its cost when the benefit is widely shared.

FLORENCE NIGHTINGALE · HEALTHCARE DATA

Used statistical evidence to argue for improvements in health care and hospital conditions. An outcome measure beats an elaborate ceremonial dinner about compassion.

IDA B. WELLS · INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST

Exposed false narratives and documented racist violence. A warning for anybody who thinks official numbers and elite testimony should go unquestioned: examine who collected the data and whom it erased.

MARIE CURIE · SCIENTIST

Represents research whose value could never be captured by an accountant demanding an instant commercial return. Good Bourbon auditing measures long-term benefit rather than treating curiosity as waste.

ROBIN HOOD · FOLKLORE

Interested in changing who gets the money, but the modern Bourbon still wants audited distribution rules. 'I gave it to the poor' is a good start and a terrible complete financial statement.

SCROOGE MCDUCK · DISNEY

Can swim through a vault full of coins while apparently neglecting very basic workplace safety. Accounting and public purpose are not the same discipline.

MR. MONOPOLY · BOARD-GAME MASCOT

A splendid mascot for a market that rewards collecting rent until everyone else lands on your property. The antitrust committee will be taking a look at his little hat.

SANTA CLAUS · FOLKLORE

One delivery night, worldwide distribution and a suspicious number of unpaid elves. Impressive logistics; we have questions about payroll, occupational safety and whether reindeer maintenance is capitalized.

BATMAN · DC COMICS

A billionaire operating costly equipment outside ordinary public accountability. Is Gotham safer? What is the alternative? Does anybody have receipts for the Batmobile? Excellent cautionary audit.

THE DISCLAIMER · THE ACCOUNTANT AND THE CIVIL-RIGHTS LAWYER BOTH APPROVED

These examples are fictional comparisons. No living person named here is claimed to belong to, endorse, support or seek membership in Bourbons or Mugwumps. Historical figures are not retroactively recruited. Some examples are cautionary, including characters who use efficiency to justify cruelty, control or coercion.

Our institutional demands are compatible with equal voting rights, due process, disability access, labor protections and nondiscrimination. The historical Bourbon Democrats often failed those tests. We are not carrying that legacy forward under a cleaner spreadsheet.

THE BOURBON TEST · BEFORE ANYBODY TOUCHES THE BUDGET

01 · NAME THE PURPOSE

What legal authority exists, what public problem is being solved, and for whom? State both intended and unintended effects.

02 · PRICE THE REAL COST

Include staffing, compliance, construction, maintenance, time, external harms and long-run liability. A 'savings' estimate that moves the bill to a hospital, a family or a city is not a savings estimate.

03 · REPORT THE OUTPUT AND THE OUTCOME

How many people were served? Did their lives improve? Which groups were left out? Is the result measurable, and did an independent evaluator check it?

04 · IDENTIFY WHO BENEFITS FINANCIALLY

Disclose contractors, ownership, lobbying, conflicts and procurement terms where lawful. An auditor needs access to evidence, but public transparency must still respect privacy and security rules.

05 · CORRECT, COMPARE AND REPEAT

Retain what works, redesign what doesn't, and check again. Make the correction visible. Don't celebrate a low number unless you can explain what the number means.

EXPLORE · THE RECEIPTS ARE ON THE TABLE

→ Explore Mugwumps

→ Explore All Thirteen Caucuses

→ Explore Audit Every Federal Agency

→ Explore Ten-Year Fiscal Accountability

→ Explore the Five Pillars of Justice

→ Explore the Vault

→ Explore Membership

SOURCES & HISTORICAL NOTES

01 · NCpedia — Bourbons: conservative Democrats in North Carolina after Reconstruction.

https://www.ncpedia.org/bourbons

02 · Encyclopedia of Alabama — Alabama Bourbons: Reconstruction, taxation, education and white supremacy.

https://encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/alabama-bourbons/

03 · University of Virginia Miller Center — Grover Cleveland: Domestic Affairs.

https://millercenter.org/president/cleveland/domestic-affairs

04 · University of Virginia Miller Center — Grover Cleveland: Key Events and civil-service changes.

https://millercenter.org/president/grover-cleveland/key-events

05 · U.S. Government Accountability Office — 2026 Annual Report on Duplication, Overlap and Fragmentation, May 12, 2026.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108505

06 · U.S. Government Accountability Office — Improper Payments: Agency Actions Needed, June 4, 2026.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108044

07 · U.S. Government Accountability Office — Fraud and Improper Payments, definitions and distinctions.

https://www.gao.gov/fraud-improper-payments

08 · U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General — Independent Auditor's Reports on FY2025 Financial Statements, December 18, 2025.

https://www.dodig.mil/Reports/Audits-and-Evaluations/Article/4365178/independent-auditors-reports-on-the-dod-fy-2025-financial-statements/

09 · Congressional Budget Office — The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036, February 2026.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/62105/

10 · University of Virginia Miller Center — Ronald Reagan: Domestic Affairs and federal budget deficits.

https://millercenter.org/president/reagan/domestic-affairs

11 · United States Senate — Truman Committee: Investigations of Defense Contracts, 1941–1948.

https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/investigations/truman.htm

12 · Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company — How Transparent Pricing Works.

https://www.costplusdrugs.com/

13 · CBS News — John Oliver Forgives Nearly $15 Million in Medical Debt, June 6, 2016.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-oliver-just-forgave-nearly-15-million-of-medical-debt/

14 · U.S. House Judiciary Committee — Jon Stewart Testimony on the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund, June 11, 2019.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-116hhrg44433/html/CHRG-116hhrg44433.htm

15 · Performance.gov — Federal Performance Framework and the GPRA Modernization Act.

https://www.performance.gov/about/performance-framework/

16 · U.S. Government Accountability Office — Duplication and Cost-Savings Recommendations Directory.

https://www.gao.gov/duplication-cost-savings

WE ARE ONE.  ·  E PLURIBUS UNUM.