How Congress Can Save by Eliminating Bad Government Programs. August 2. 9, 2. 01. They could do so, of course. These long- overdue terminations would save $4. The Heritage Foundation. These long- overdue terminations would save $4. That would constitute a real reduction of $3. A sampling of such programs is presented in this Backgrounder. Eliminating them would be an important first step in reducing overall spending to meet the sequestration levels, while protecting national defense from the most damaging cuts. They would come solely from terminations of non- defense discretionary programs. They do not count other savings that could be achieved from spending reductions, or from needed entitlement reforms. Such choices would only perpetuate the fragmented and ineffective approach to programs for the poor that exists today. Instead, total welfare spending should be capped, and programs reformed in a comprehensive way: Sound policies to aid the poor must be developed holistically, with decision makers and the public fully aware of the magnitude of overall spending. Additionally, welfare should be reformed to ensure that it promotes self- sufficiency rather than government dependency by promoting provisions such as work requirements for able- bodied adults. The principal focus for opponents of the PPACA should be to stop the entire law from taking effect. Not only does the PPACA. Because the entire law needs to be overturned, this paper will not parse the various streams of potential discretionary savings for 2. Meanwhile, House appropriators should consider the terminations identified here. Their resolve is uncertain. In the past, House leaders ultimately have given in to the Senate. They should not do so this time. A complete list of potential program eliminations appears in the appendix. The narrative below highlights a set of representative programs. International Affairs The U. S. Even the names of the organizations raise questions about which vital national interest they can possibly serve, and why they are not financed by private sources. They include the International Coffee Organization, the International Copper Study Group, the International Cotton Advisory Committee, the International Grains Council, and the International Lead and Zinc Study Group. Why an Income Tax is Not Necessary to Fund the U.S. Mandatory spending includes programs — mostly entitlement programs — that are funded by eligibility. Although the savings from withdrawing U. S. Beyond these, there are two prominent, representative agencies the U. S. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation. OPIC began operating in 1. U. S. Over the years, OPIC expanded its claimed mission to include creating jobs in the United States, helping small businesses invest overseas, and correcting . Research has provided little evidence of success in these areas. The Ex- Im Bank, created in 1. U. S. Its loans inevitably tend toward politically favored companies. As Senator in 2. 00. Barack Obama termed the bank . Further, like OPIC, the Ex- Im Bank puts U. S. Energy The Department of Energy has long strayed from its legitimate mission of promoting energy security and environmental management, venturing beyond basic research into attempts at commercializing preferred technologies. The Heritage Foundation has identified numerous examples of programs that the Energy Department should leave to the private sector. This is an example of a program that can actually slow progress toward implementing viable clean energy technologies. In an effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the government funds a range of activities, including carbon capture and sequestration, development of natural gas, and new vehicle technologies. Directory of Federally Funded Prevention Programs. The Federal government. This directory provides a listing of Federally-funded prevention programs. Federal research programs releted to transportation are. Research activities are funded through. Wastebook: 13 Insane Government Programs Funded With Your Money. Here are 50 of the most egregious examples of government. Outdated and unnecessary programs. Examples of taxpayer-funded. Congress Can Save $42 Billion by Eliminating Bad Government Programs. Eliminating unnecessary programs would be an. Other government programs offer important. Unnecessary regulations frustrate clinicians. The 10 Dumbest Ways the Government Wasted Taxpayer. So many wasteful programs. Such technologies are already available, but are burdened by regulation or are too expensive to be commercially viable at this time. Yet by funding such efforts, the government misallocates resources that might otherwise fund technologies with better prospects of success. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. This office reflects how the Energy Department has reached beyond basic research and into commercialization of . Most of these technologies have existed for decades and do not need a commercial boost from the federal government. Energy Frontier Research Centers. Since 2. 00. 9, the Energy Department has run nearly four dozen of these centers, intended to advance research and development and close the separation between basic and applied research. They are merely another example, however, of the government. They should be eliminated. Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer. These programs were originally intended to promote private- sector commercialization of government- funded research and development, but they have drifted into more direct commercialization activities themselves. As a result, they have exposed taxpayers to greater risks for any failures, while private- sector companies gain the benefits of any successes. The programs should be eliminated. The programs are rooted in anachronistic policies of the 1. Still, the Agriculture Department runs a number of unnecessary discretionary- spending programs that ought to be eliminated as well. Among them: The Market Access Program. This program helps producers and private companies to promote their agricultural products in foreign markets. As a result, taxpayers pick up the tab for companies that are fully capable of marketing their products abroad. This is corporate welfare for agriculture companies that even President Obama has recommended cutting. The Foreign Agricultural Service. The service provides subsidized assistance to private entities, such as export assistance and foreign market analysis. It also uses American taxpayer dollars to improve agriculture in developing countries and inefficiently runs food aid programs. Trade Representative. Transportation Since completion of the Interstate Highway System in the early 1. Washington. It is long overdue for Congress to return most of these activities, and the associated resources, to states and localities, where they once were lodged. Put another way, it is time for governors to take back these responsibilities. The latest version of federal highway legislation would cost about $4. While pursuing this transition, Congress could achieve immediate savings by simply eliminating certain unneeded programs. This would include such steps as privatizing Amtrak. In the ground transportation category, options for elimination include the following: The New Starts Transit Program. Federal transit programs drain as much as 2. Highway Trust Fund, which in recent years has had to tap general revenues to remain solvent. These transit programs are extremely expensive and generally fail to reduce congestion or improve air quality. They also commit state and local taxpayers to future operating costs they might not be able to afford. Congress can start the process of phasing out the inefficient transit spending by eliminating this program. Transit itself is not really a national program; transit services are concentrated in six . Thus, transit is not a national program and does not merit federal subsidies. Economic and Regional Development Like many federal government activities, . In reality, however, such programs rarely achieve their goals and survive on weakly supported claims of economic growth and job creation. Two excellent examples are the following: Community Development Block Grants. This program is a classic temptation for pork- barrel spending. It was originally intended to provide housing assistance for low- income families. The grant formula, however, has no exclusion for high- income communities. As a result, wealthy suburbs are just as eligible for funds as low- income localities. Nor is there any persuasive evidence that these grants actually improve the economies of low- income localities. Naturally, the program is popular with lawmakers because it allows them to steer . The most straight forward way to eliminate this irresistible temptation is to eliminate the program. Based on the dubious notion that Washington can somehow boost local economies through targeted . The program may do more harm than good: . It might be that regions which become dependent on government subsidies lose their productive edge and suffer decline. Education Even more than transportation, education is a quintessentially state and local priority. The federal government. There are many education programs that should be consolidated or reduced, but some should be eliminated outright. Competitive Grants Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The federal government runs about 6. Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), totaling about $1. These grants tend to fixate schools on Washington. Instead of responding to the needs of students, parents, and teachers, school districts focus on the demands of Washington to gain access to the federal funding stream. Administrators also waste time on lengthy applications. One estimate found that the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act increased the paperwork burden of local education agencies by about 6. All that administration saps time and resources that might otherwise go toward learning. In other words, these grant programs are not only not helping, they are harming education in America. Congress should eliminate the ESEA. Studies in 2. 01. There were only slight improvements in child behavior, and in some instances a decline in peer relations. Eliminate Government Funding for Cultural Agencies. The arts and humanities are a vital and indispensable component of American culture, worthy of support. The government, however. Public funding of the arts will always be subject to political considerations, leading artists themselves to complain of . By eliminating funds for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts, Congress can encourage the healthy pursuit of diverse private funding far better suited to artistic endeavors. Wasteful Government Spending: Duplicate Programs Squander Billions. So many federal agencies are duplicating one another's efforts in so many different areas that the billions lost to such wasteful government spending is impossible to calculate. A recent report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office uncovered 1. Sen. Tom Coburn, R- OK, a well- known hawk on wasteful government spending, estimates that the duplication cited in the GAO report squanders between $1. Coburn lambasted Congress for allowing such waste to go on despite a budget crisis and, most recently, a budget sequester that has forced $8. The programs in the GAO report, on the other hand, are mostly legitimate. We just don't need two, three or 1. For example, the GAO found: The Food and Drug Administration, the National Marines Fisheries Service and the Food Safety and Inspection Service each run similar catfish inspection programs, wasting $1. Eighteen overlapping programs spent a combined $2. Ten different federal agencies operate 8. At least 2. 3 agencies spent $1. Ten cabinet- level agencies spend $4. The Defense Department has 1. Pentagon. Five divisions with the Department of Transportation run at least 1. Dozens of different economic development programs are spread among the Department of Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Agriculture and the Small Business Administration. The programs include 5. There's no centralized place where all this stuff could be managed and searched and discovered. The real problem is the federal government continues to grow well beyond what is healthy for its citizens. Click here to jump to comments.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |