On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office coyly trolled President Trump on Twitter, posting a statement that delineated the cost of creating an Office of Special Counsel. The statement read:
S. 582 would authorize appropriations for the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for fiscal years 2017 through 2022. The bill also would amend several of the laws governing the OSC and would extend new legal protections to federal employees (known as whistleblowers) who report abuse, fraud, and waste related to government activities.
CBO estimates that implementing this legislation would cost $155 million over the 2017-2022 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Enacting S. 582 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting S. 582 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
S. 582 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
Of course, the CBO was indirectly referring to the hue-and-outcry erupting over Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey last week, which included calls from Democrats to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Last Tuesday, immediately after Comey was fired, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called for a special prosecutor in the investigation, snapping, “I have said from the get-go that I think a special prosecutor is the way to go, but now with what’s happened it is the only way to go.”
On Sunday, Schumer doubled down, saying that no new FBI director should be named until a special prosecutor was named. He told Jake Tapper on State of the Union, “We will have to discuss it as a caucus, but I would support that move because who the FBI director is, is related to who the special prosecutor is. Yes, I think there are a lot of Democrats who feel that way . . . to have that special prosecutor, people would breathe a sigh of relief because then there would be a real independent person overlooking the FBI director.”
For a comprehensive answer as to why appointing a special prosecutor would be wrong, see here.