Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney yesterday outlined the Trump administration’s government reform plan. His explanation of the problem raised a lot of eyebrows – including mine. I had no idea things were this bad.
That sure sounds like a bureaucracy in dire need of reform!
Peter
TVA is another classic example… The Tennessee Valley has been electrified for over 70 years… But they still have a budget of around $200 million a year…
I spent 25 years with a small independent government agency and saw from the depths how the swamp works. At management levels the driving force is that growth is good, more people, more budget, always push to get bigger. Change is threatening unless it promotes growth, then change is a goodness no matter how much damage it might engender.
I wish Mr. Mulvaney all success, but I'll watch with great interest, considerable hope, but little expectation of his winning the fight with a monstrous swamp creature, the US bureaucracy.
The Army Corps of Engineers/Deep Water Ports is a great example of what was important 80 years ago but is irrelevant now. There are very few Navy bases of consequence after all the base consolidation, so it's a great question as to why the Dept of Transportation isn't responsible for ports.
It's an even better question as to why the State of Georgia isn't responsible for dredging the Savannah river, but baby steps.
In reply to Uncle Lar, this looks like it is the first step to reducing duplication. Get all similar programs into one agency, then ask the agency to streamline.
But yeah, that second step is the hard one for exactly the reasons he stated.
Sounds like we need an agency that is purpose tasked to streamline agencies. Give it regulatory authority (law powers, activate!) to cut budgets and headcounts. Make this agency's budget, headcount, and bonuses dependent upon reducing spending elsewhere.
Alternately, you could give the IGs this function, plus some statutory teeth to take independent action upon issuing their findings.