Bureaucracy (by Harald Groven)

Here is an incomplete list of Federal agencies. Keep scrolling. And scrolling. (Or look here and keep clicking.) There are hundreds of them, and more created in every major piece of legislation.

I'm sure that a good reason can be found by someone for every agency, bureau, office and board on that list. I'm sure they are full of hard-working and dedicated public servants. And I'm sure most of them need to go if liberty is to be restored to the citizens of the Republic.

With such a target-rich environment one wonders why this Congress hasn't picked an agency a week to (attempt to) close. (Sure would keep those Tea Party freshmen busy while the adults get on with the serious debt-ceiling kabuki.) Even President Clinton talked a good game about cutting the Federal bureaucracy down to size. Eric Pickles had a go at the tangle of quangos in the UK. It can be done, and it ought to be done.

So, which agencies are the first on your list for bureaucracide?

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

CandE
Joined
Jul '11
CandE

Eliminate federal agencies?? Heck, lets just start with departments:

Agriculture

Commerce

Education

Energy

HHS

Homeland Security

Housing and Urban Development

Labor

Veterans Affairs

Whichever necessary activities these departments are engaged in (not many) can be turned over to one of the remaining departments.

genferei
Joined
Oct '10
genferei
CandE: Eliminate federal agencies?? Heck, lets just start with departments· Jul 29 at 10:38am

I don't disagree.

And at State, I'm sure we can dispense with:

  • Office of the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, since this doesn't seem to have worked since 1991.
  • Office for the Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, because that's what the invisible hand is for.
  • Office of the Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs, since this doesn't seem to have worked ever.
  • Office of the Secretary for Political Affairs, because politicians of all nationalities seem to handle this for themselves quite without US help (*cough* DSK *cough*).
  • Office of the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, since it has obviously failed in its mission of "enhanc[ing] national security by informing and influencing foreign publics and by expanding and strengthening the relationship between the people and government of the United States and citizens of the rest of the world".
  • Office of the Under Secretary for Management, because the remaining staff can look after themselves.
etoiledunord
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

It's the only part of the economy where productivity increases, made by adding new technology, make costs go up, not down. Because, their job, at its core, is devouring budgets. "Productivity" is way up.

wilber forge
Joined
Oct '10
wilber forge

Someone could make a career out of examining and the elimination of excess in this area. What a job that would be .... 

Save, the government is not well known for tearing down its own house.

Edited on Jul 29, 2011 at 3:30pm
raycon
Joined
Oct '10
raycon

Forget the lists.  Just kill the Boener, et al approach, and refuse to increase the budget, aka, the debt ceiling.  The House, after all, isn't one third of the government, when it comes to money, they are 100 percent of the government, regardless of what the statist quislings insist.  Unless the administration chooses to make it's authoritarian approach to government a public fact.

David Williamson
Joined
Mar '11
David Williamson
raycon: The House, after all, isn't one third of the government, when it comes to money, they are 100 percent of the government, regardless of what the statist quislings insist.  

So the Boehner bill is law when the House passes it? Would be nice, if true.

If true, the Ryan plan would be law, or CCB, and we wouldn't need to raise the debt limit.

If true, they could start on the CandE list - minus veterans affairs.

Let's change the Constitution to a Parliamentary Democracy :-)

Edited on Jul 29, 2011 at 4:39pm
anon_academic
Joined
Aug '10
anon_academic

Nice graphic. I recognized Max Weber but I had to Google it to find out that the other guy is Franz Kafka (who I've read, but don't know by sight).

raycon
Joined
Oct '10
raycon

David Williamson

raycon: The House, after all, isn't one third of the government, when it comes to money, they are 100 percent of the government, regardless of what the statist quislings insist.  

So the Boehner bill is law when the House passes it? Would be nice, if true.

If true, the Ryan plan would be law, or CCB, and we wouldn't need to raise the debt limit.

If true, they could start on the CandE list - minus veterans affairs.

Let's change the Constitution to a Parliamentary Democracy :-) · Jul 29 at 4:36pm

Edited on Jul 29 at 04:39 pm

It cuts both ways.  IF the House refuses to introduce a bill or pass it raising the debt ceiling, then it is a done deal.  Who else has the Constitutional authority??

Charley Davis
Joined
Mar '11
Charley Davis

As an out-of-work architect, I say get the government out of housing first.  Therefore, eliminate HUD, the FHA and sell off all of Fannie and Freddie's assets immediately. 

 Ron Swanson
Joined
Aug '10
Ron Swanson
Charley Davis: As an out-of-work architect, I say get the government out of housing first.  Therefore, eliminate HUD, the FHA and sell off all of Fannie and Freddie's assets immediately.  · Jul 29 at 8:26pm

HUD, FHA, Fannie and Freddie have all been an objective failures but none of them are even talked about being eliminated.  The ideology of need for goods or services which created these programs has to be defeated before we can eliminate the programs.

genferei
Joined
Oct '10
genferei
Ron Swanson HUD, FHA, Fannie and Freddie have all been objective failures · Jul 30 at 2:59a

"HUD’s mission is to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. HUD is working to strengthen the housing market to bolster the economy and protect consumers; meet the need for quality affordable rental homes: utilize housing as a platform for improving quality of life; build inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination; and transform the way HUD does business." No, really.

Even if HUD actually was doing these things - which it pretty obviously isn't - why is it the job of the Federal government to do them?

So, if I'm reading the budget (warning, PDF) right, that's about $48 billion in discretionary savings right off. HUD has about 10,000 employees, so there'll be layoff expenses in that first year, but those should just about be covered by a sale of Ginnie Mae's $14 billion in net assets (warning, PDF).

Gosh, this is easy. What's next?

TheRoyalFamily
Joined
Nov '10
TheRoyalFamily

A harder game would be finding what we want to keep.

Charley Davis
Joined
Mar '11
Charley Davis
TheRoyalFamily: A harder game would be finding what we want to keep. · Jul 30 at 11:15am

Departments of Defense, Treasury, Justice and State; the only constitutionally mandated cabinet departments.   All of their responsibilities could be significantly scaled back as well. 

genferei
Joined
Oct '10
genferei

Charley Davis

TheRoyalFamily: A harder game would be finding what we want to keep. · Jul 30 at 11:15am

Departments of Defense, Treasury, Justice and State; the only constitutionally mandated cabinet departments.   All of their responsibilities could be significantly scaled back as well.  · Jul 30 at 11:35am

I slimmed down State above. As for Justice, let's go back to the pre-70's situation. Pre-1870's, that is, when there was an Attorney General, a handful of assistants and the rest was outsourced. Do we really need Federal prisons, Federal marshalls, Federal drug and firearms enforcement? $28 billion in spending for the DOJ, and 112,000 employees (or equivs) (PDF).

Of this, the FBI accounts for $8 billion and 33,000 positions - but less than half of these are agents (PDF). It is too delicious that the FBI was the product of pure Progressive empire building by Attorney General Charles Bonaparte...

genferei
Joined
Oct '10
genferei

Who said this?

"The impulse among the American people toward a responsive federal government, coupled with an idealistic, reformist spirit, characterized what is known as the Progressive Era, from approximately 1900 to 1918. The Progressive generation believed that government intervention was necessary to produce justice in an industrial society. Moreover, it looked to "experts" in all phases of industry and government to produce that just society."

Howard Zinn? Noam Chomksy? Jonah Goldberg?

How about the FBI. Reading the that history is fascinating: "When the Bureau was established, there were few federal crimes. The Bureau of Investigation primarily investigated violations of laws involving national banking, bankruptcy, naturalization, antitrust, peonage, and land fraud. ... The first major expansion in Bureau jurisdiction came in June 1910 when the Mann ("White Slave") Act was passed, making it a crime to transport women over state lines for immoral purposes. ... The years from 1921 to 1933 were sometimes called the "lawless years" because of gangsterism and the public disregard for Prohibition ... in 1970 alone, an estimated 3,000 bombings and 50,000 bomb threats occurred in the United States."


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In