The Independent Record.
The Center for Federal Accountability (CFA) is a non-partisan news media and research organization. We exist to bring the unfiltered reality of the Executive Branch into the public domain.
The Public Record is the Only Record.
In an era of performative politics and press release governance, the truth is often buried in the data. The CFA was founded on a single principle: The public record is the only record. This principle is not ours alone—it is enshrined in the First Amendment, which guarantees the freedom of the press and the right to petition the government. The Supreme Court recognized in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) that "debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open." In Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), the Court affirmed that journalists have a right to gather news, and in Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia (1980), it established that the public has a right to access government proceedings.
We do not rely on access journalism or official statements. We rely on forensic research. We aggregate, analyze, and publish the hard data of government operations—from procurement logs to regulatory filings—to expose the gap between what the government claims and what the evidence proves. The Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552) establishes the public's right to access government records. The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a) requires agencies to publish System of Records Notices. The Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. § 1501 et seq.) mandates publication of rules and regulations. These statutes create the legal foundation for our work: the public record is not a privilege—it is a right.
A News & Research Bureau.
The CFA operates as a specialized press entity. Our function is distinct. We are not a think tank. We are not an advocacy organization. We are a news media and research bureau, operating under the constitutional protection of the First Amendment and the statutory authority of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552).
- We Gather: We utilize the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), and whistleblower testimony to retrieve raw government artifacts. The First Amendment guarantees the right to petition the government, and FOIA codifies that right into law. The Whistleblower Protection Act protects government employees who disclose waste, fraud, and abuse. We use these legal tools to access the public record—not as a favor, but as a right.
- We Analyze: Our editorial board and data researchers process these artifacts to identify trends, inconsistencies, and statutory violations. We compare agency claims against procurement data, budget documents, and regulatory filings. This methodology is not novel—it is the same comparative analysis used by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congressional oversight committees, and Inspector Generals. We simply apply it at scale.
- We Publish: We disseminate our findings to the public, the press, and the market through daily intelligence briefs, deep-dive investigations, and our proprietary Agency Scorecards. The First Amendment protects our right to publish, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the press plays a vital role in democratic governance. As the Court stated in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), the press serves as a "watchdog" over government operations.
Fact-Based Investigation.
We employ a "Zero Trust" methodology. We verify government operations against the three pillars of accountability.
1. The Financial Investigation (Waste)
The Question: Where did the money go?
The Method: We track appropriations from Congress to the specific contract award. Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution requires that "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." The Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341) prohibits agencies from spending more than Congress appropriates. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires agencies to report on how they spend taxpayer dollars. We use the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act) spending data to verify that appropriations are spent as Congress intended. We expose "Zombie Projects" that burn tax dollars on systems that never launch, violating both the Appropriations Clause and the public trust.
2. The Legal Investigation (Abuse)
The Question: By what authority does this exist?
The Method: We cross-reference agency actions against the Constitution and Federal Statutes. Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the power to make laws. Article II, Section 3 requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq.) requires agencies to follow formal rulemaking procedures when creating binding regulations. We expose "Mission Creep" where agencies expand their power without Congressional approval, violating the separation of powers doctrine established in Marbury v. Madison (1803). When agencies act beyond their statutory authority, they violate the Constitution itself.
3. The Operational Investigation (Fraud)
The Question: Does it actually work?
The Method: We audit the technical reality. The Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) requires agencies to implement security controls and report on their effectiveness. The Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) grants IGs the authority to audit agency operations. We use these same verification techniques, comparing agency claims against operational data. We compare safety claims against security logs, performance metrics against actual results, and capability statements against technical documentation. When the government misleads the public about its capabilities, it violates the public trust and potentially violates fraud statutes.
Unbought and Unbossed.
To maintain absolute editorial independence, the CFA adheres to a strict ethics policy. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of the press precisely so that journalists can operate independently of government influence. The Supreme Court recognized in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) that the press must be free to criticize government without fear of reprisal. In Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts (1967), the Court extended this protection to coverage of public officials. We follow in the tradition of independent journalism that predates the Republic—from the muckrakers like Ida Tarbell and Upton Sinclair, who exposed corporate and government abuses, to the journalists who broke the Pentagon Papers and Watergate stories.
- No Government Funding: We accept $0 in federal grants or contracts. We answer only to our subscribers and the public interest. This independence is not a preference—it is a requirement. Government funding creates a conflict of interest that undermines our ability to hold government accountable. We are structured as a private LLC, not a 501(c)(3) non-profit, to maintain absolute independence from any potential "chilling effect" of tax-exempt status.
- No Partisanship: Accountability is not a partisan issue. A violation of the law is a violation, regardless of who occupies the Oval Office. The First Amendment protects our right to criticize all parties equally. We follow the evidence wherever it leads, regardless of political consequences. As the Supreme Court stated in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), "debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open"—and that includes criticism of all political parties.
- The "Revolving Door" Ban: Our researchers are prohibited from lobbying or holding equity in the government contractors they investigate. This prohibition ensures that our investigations are driven by evidence, not by financial interests. We maintain the same ethical standards that govern professional journalism and government oversight.
Sunlight is the Standard.
We believe that a government that operates in the dark will inevitably turn against its own people. Our goal is to flood the bureaucracy with light. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote: "Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." This principle is not merely philosophical—it is constitutional. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of the press and the right to petition the government, rights that are meaningless without access to information. The public trust doctrine holds that government information belongs to the people, not to the agencies that create it.
The statutory framework for transparency is comprehensive. The Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552) establishes the public's right to access agency records. The Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. § 552b) requires agencies to hold open meetings. The Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. § 1501 et seq.) mandates publication of rules and regulations. The Supreme Court recognized in Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee (1989) that FOIA's purpose is to "shed light on an agency's performance of its statutory duties." In Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (1977), the Court affirmed that executive privilege is not absolute and that the public has a right to access government records.
We provide the "Receipts" that others ignore. We are the check. You are the balance. The Constitution requires that government be accountable to the people. The statutes require that government be transparent. We enforce these requirements by publishing the evidence—the procurement records, the regulatory filings, the performance data—that reveals the gap between what the government claims and what the evidence proves.
The Constitutional Mandate for Independent Journalism
The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of the press and the right to petition the government. These are not privileges granted by the state—they are rights inherent to democratic governance. Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." James Madison, in Federalist No. 10, argued that a free press is essential to prevent the "mischiefs of faction" and ensure that the people remain informed.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the vital role of the press in American democracy. In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), the Court established that "debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open" and that the press serves as a "watchdog" over government operations. In Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), the Court recognized that "news gathering is not without its First Amendment protections" and that journalists have a right to gather information. In Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia (1980), the Court established that the public has a right to access government proceedings, recognizing that "the First Amendment goes beyond protection of the press and the self-expression of individuals to prohibit government from limiting the stock of information from which members of the public may draw."
The public trust doctrine holds that government information belongs to the people, not to the agencies that create it. When government operates in secret, it violates this trust. The CFA exists to enforce this trust by publishing the evidence that government would prefer to keep hidden. We are not creating new rights—we are exercising rights that have existed since the founding of the Republic.
The Legal Framework for Oversight
The CFA operates within a comprehensive legal framework that establishes both the right and the responsibility to hold government accountable. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution grants Congress the power of oversight—the authority to investigate how the executive branch spends appropriated funds and executes the laws. This power is not exclusive to Congress. The First Amendment guarantees the public's right to information, and the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552) codifies that right into law.
The statutory framework for transparency is extensive. The Freedom of Information Act establishes the public's right to access agency records. The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a) requires agencies to publish System of Records Notices and limits data collection. The Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) creates independent oversight within agencies. The Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. § 552b) requires agencies to hold open meetings. The Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. § 1501 et seq.) mandates publication of rules and regulations.
Independent journalism complements official oversight. Congressional committees, Inspector Generals, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct official oversight, but they are limited by resources, jurisdiction, and political constraints. Independent journalism fills the gaps—investigating issues that official oversight bodies cannot or will not address, using the same legal tools (FOIA, public records, whistleblower testimony) but operating with complete independence. The First Amendment protects this independence, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the press plays a vital role in democratic governance that cannot be replaced by official oversight alone.