congress intended that sigar would exercise its authority swiftly. and it came into existence in 2008 in july of last year with an authorization to hire 18 auditors, 13 inspectors and three investigators. but from the beginning, sigar has been hindered by certain limitations contained in standard federal government personnel authorities, and by the difficulty of attracting qualified candidates to work in the difficult security environment of afghanistan. a year after its creation, sigar has conducted only one independent audit and has only hired nine auditors, five inspectors and three investigators. this resolution would help resolve this problem by granting sigar a special hiring authority under 5 u.s.c. section 3161. section 3161 would allow sigar a more flexible accepted service authority and empower the office to select, appoint and employ the necessary staff to fulfill its duties. in particular, section 3161 would grant return rights to federal employees, provide interagency detailed authority and permit the setting of pay rates above the caps

president and executive branch, not the courts, that have a greater expertise and responsibility for sigar the national security. this view in my opinion underestimates the ability and responsibility of the courts and our constitutional scheme and elses scenes overlook what you described as "the natural tendency on the part of the executive branch to overstate clinton secrecy and to avoid disclosure whenever polis-- possible." doesn't the argument regarding the expertise of the executive branch also overlooked the potential conflict for the government in the case of information it seeks to prove embarrassing politically or otherwise might provide evidence of unlawful conduct or otherwise undefined positions taken in the case? >> the key point is that we have to give the courts the tools and the guidance to insure an independent review. in the language such as substantial deference would undermine that independent review. in terms of the ability of the courts to way expert testimony, that is what is marvelous about our judiciary and our rule of law in this country, is that you can have a ju