Skip to content

52 Groups and Coalition for Sensible Safeguards Oppose Mulvaney as Too Extreme to Direct OMB

Critics of Mulvaney Send Letters and Statements of Opposition to Congress

For Immediate Release:
Jan. 23, 2017

Contact: Lisa Gilbert,, (202) 454-5188
Michell McIntyre,, (202) 454-5156
David Rosen,, (202) 588-7742

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, 52 groups and the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards sent letters to Capitol Hill urging members of Congress to reject the nomination of U.S. Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) to direct the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The U.S. Senate is expected to hold confirmation hearings on Tuesday.

“Both Rep. Mulvaney’s public statements and his voting record show that he is unfit and unqualified to run OMB,” the 52-group sign-on letter reads. “We cannot put our federal agencies and budget in the hands of someone who is willing to ‘play chicken’ with our debt ceiling, would like to put Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block, and calls into question the need for government funded research. This nomination gives the reins of government to someone who doesn’t value its continual and effective operation.”

OMB coordinates the president’s legislative proposals and policies, proposes and implements the federal budget, oversees executive branch departments and agencies as well as federal procurement, manages the regulatory process, implements executive orders and much more. Mulvaney’s record (PDF) reveals an unmistakable pattern of ideological extremism, reality denial and flagrant hypocrisy that render him unfit to carry out these duties, the groups maintain.

Below are statements from several of the groups leading the opposition to Mulvaney:

“Because of its enormous power and reach, OMB should be led by someone who has shown interest in governing, creating reasonable budgets and funding important programs – all basic duties of the office. Instead, Trump’s pick has routinely sabotaged our nation’s ability to govern and trumpeted views that are wildly at odds with the preferences of voters in both parties. Mulvaney’s anti-government beliefs could have disastrous consequences for American workers, consumers and families, because at OMB, he would be in a position to carry them out.”
Lisa Gilbert, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division

“Mulvaney is an extremist who has voted against allowing the federal government to pay its bills. He has been repeatedly reckless in his willingness to halt payments for medical care, food aid, military and civilian pay, and pretty much every other obligation that Congress has approved – and willing to create a crisis by refusing to extend our nation’s authority to borrow. His nomination threatens the services that Americans depend on, with the greatest harm to low-income and other vulnerable people. His interest is in slashing, not managing, and he is the last person who should be directing OMB.”
Deborah Weinstein, executive director, Coalition on Human Needs

“Mulvaney would have approval and veto power over budgets to implement and enforce – or not – federal regulations. Under Republican deregulatory bills, only a rule’s costs, as claimed by industry, are evaluated, while its social, public health and environmental health benefits are ignored. Senate approval of Mulvaney would unleash a budgetary assault on agricultural conservation, food safety, nutrition programs and food assistance, farmer and food worker safety, food labeling and other farm-to-fork rules.”
Steve Suppan, senior policy analyst, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy

“We support government that operates of, by and for the people. OMB and its director occupy a critical final path for passage of rules and regulations, which means essential public protections could be halted or held up for years. As a New Yorker, I am particularly concerned that Mulvaney opposed emergency funding for New York after Hurricane Sandy. It is impossible to be a public servant and anti-government at the same time.”
Barbara Warren, executive director, Citizens’ Environmental Coalition

“Mulvaney didn’t want transparency or disclosure for political donations, and he didn’t bother paying $15,000 in taxes for the nanny he employed. He is an extremist who will continue to rig the system against hardworking Americans. If he does not withdraw himself from consideration, the Senate should reject his nomination.”
Tiffany Muller, executive director, End Citizens United