BURSTIn their latest effort to cut perceived government waste, House Republicans have proposed slashing the Government Accountability Office’s annual budget by nearly 50 percent. It’s the latest political challenge in 2025 for the congressional watchdog agency, which has historically enjoyed strong bipartisan support. But rather than cutting GAO, lawmakers should modernize the agency to better serve Congress.
GAO’s team of more than 3,500 workers conducts reviews and provides reform recommendations to Congress and federal agencies. Its work routinely improves executive agency operations and informs legislation.
GAO is a rare institution in Washington that reports measurable financial savings. Last year, it estimated that its work yielded $67.5 billion in savings — $76 for every dollar of its $900 million budget. That’s why the office has long had backers in both political parties and is widely considered the government’s most effective cost-cutting agency.
But now, GAO faces political opposition over its statutory responsibilities. Under the Congressional Review Act, GAO issues legal opinions on federal regulations. In March, GAO responded to a congressional inquiry by issuing a decision that undermined congressional Republicans’ plans to repeal Clean Air Act waivers issued by the Biden administration. Congress ignored GAO and voted to revoke the regulations anyway.
This controversy has grown into a broader clash over GAO’s relationship with the White House. The Impoundment Control Act requires GAO’s comptroller general to review presidential funding delays, issue rulings and potentially sue the executive branch. GAO has already found two violations by the Trump administration in 2025 and is reportedly examining dozens more.
In response, the executive branch has shown a new aggression towards GAO. The Office of Management and Budget has called GAO’s oversight “voluminous, burdensome, and inappropriately invasive,” and said it will only cooperate with GAO’s reviews if they “do not unduly impede OMB’s ability to implement the president's agenda.”
But GAO is not actively seeking political conflict — it is simply following the law by issuing these decisions. Congressional Republicans should reform the statutes if they disagree.
Beyond legal disputes, some Republicans on Capitol Hill have concerns about GAO’s management. Its union secured a telework agreement allowing most employees to work remotely, while Republicans have pressed for other federal workers to return to the office. Some lawmakers and staff also complain GAO reports offer overly cautious, process-oriented recommendations that lack actionable solutions. GAO has also reported some disappointing results in recent years with 30 percent of their recommendations being ignored by federal agencies.
Following the Department of Government Efficiency’s aggressive efforts to streamline federal spending and trim the federal workforce, GAO’s approach of year-long reviews and lengthy reports with even handed framing may seem timid and ineffectual.
All these conflicts have come to a head in a recent party-line vote by the House Appropriations Committee to approve a bill that would deeply cut GAO’s funding and bar the comptroller general from acting on recent impoundments.
Congressional Republicans are right to think that GAO needs reform. But rather than gutting GAO, Congress should fix it to better serve taxpayers and revise its legal responsibilities.
Congress has already been working to improve GAO’s return on investment. A 2019 law required agencies to report on progress implementing GAO recommendations, while 2023 laws asked GAO to estimate potential savings from unheeded guidance. Last year, appropriators directed GAO to add deadlines to new recommendations to promote faster action.
Now is a timely moment for Congress to enact broader reforms. Congress and President Trump are poised to choose the next comptroller general after Gene Dodaro’s 15-year term ends in December. Legislation to modernize GAO’s role, clarify the comptroller general’s legal responsibilities, and streamline and refocus the office’s work on the most pressing issues facing the federal government could enhance GAO’s value for Congress.
Absent such reforms, GAO’s future will depend on its next leader. But steep budget cuts will make that job even more difficult.
Former Comptroller General David Walker, who led GAO from 1998 to 2008, warned that the proposed cut is akin to Congress “shooting itself in the head.” He urged the House and Senate to protect GAO’s budget.
Walker knows firsthand the effect of steep budget cuts on the office. In the 1990s, Congress downsized GAO’s staffing by over a third. In response, Walker rebranded the agency, refocused its mission, and introduced return-on-investment reporting to demonstrate the office’s value. These reforms restored congressional confidence that has largely lasted until now.
But Congress shouldn’t force GAO’s next leader to endure a similar rebuilding project. Holding hearings and using legislation to modernize GAO’s mission would position the next comptroller general to succeed. Congress needs a proactive and trusted watchdog to navigate the difficult governance challenges ahead.
Dan Lips is a senior fellow with the Foundation for American Innovation.