There are 38 comments.

1. Member
   I Walton

   @IWalton

   7:14 AM EST ⋅ Dec 20, 2018

   OldPhil (View Comment):

   I Walton (View Comment):

   He could easily find the money in existing programs and budgets and I understand that is what he is going to do. He should take it from programs Democrats love.

   Unless it’s in the same appropriations account that funds the pertinent activity and follows any guidance from the relevant appropriations committees, he can’t legally do that without Congressional approval.

   He can do it.   You just need to craft the right language and cut the right things.  I was  told I couldn’t close a consulate without Congressional approval, so I left it open but moved all the services to the Embassy in the capital and offered the employees positions in the Embassy consulate, some took them but most didn’t.   I left the flag flying and the consulate officially open.  State eventually went along, I don’t know if they advised Congress or not. I was also told I couldn’t reduce the Embassy staff, mostly because the other agencies always resist cuts and State always caves in.  They ignored the reductions I proposed but I had said not to make any replacement assignments until they’d reviewed the budget and when the time came I used the authority I had to prevent any new assignments until they dealt with the budget I gave them.  They went bananas but they knew we were over staffed and that State and the other agencies needed the positions in Eastern Europe.   I was a lowly Charge.    A President can cut if he ignores those who say he can’t and uses the experts to figure out how to do it, then  just demand results from his cabinet.  We’re talking peanuts. Fumes rising up from the swamp.  

2. Coolidge
   OldPhil

   @OldPhil

   10:10 AM EST ⋅ Dec 20, 2018

   I Walton (View Comment):

   OldPhil (View Comment):

   I Walton (View Comment):

   He could easily find the money in existing programs and budgets and I understand that is what he is going to do. He should take it from programs Democrats love.

   Unless it’s in the same appropriations account that funds the pertinent activity and follows any guidance from the relevant appropriations committees, he can’t legally do that without Congressional approval.

   He can do it. You just need to craft the right language and cut the right things. I was told I couldn’t close a consulate without Congressional approval, so I left it open but moved all the services to the Embassy in the capital and offered the employees positions in the Embassy consulate, some took them but most didn’t. I left the flag flying and the consulate officially open. State eventually went along, I don’t know if they advised Congress or not. I was also told I couldn’t reduce the Embassy staff, mostly because the other agencies always resist cuts and State always caves in. They ignored the reductions I proposed but I had said not to make any replacement assignments until they’d reviewed the budget and when the time came I used the authority I had to prevent any new assignments until they dealt with the budget I gave them. They went bananas but they knew we were over staffed and that State and the other agencies needed the positions in Eastern Europe. I was a lowly Charge. A President can cut if he ignores those who say he can’t and uses the experts to figure out how to do it, then just demand results from his cabinet. We’re talking peanuts. Fumes rising up from the swamp.

   I’m not talking about individual actions on a local scale. At the appropriations act level, you can’t reprogram funds from one account to another with getting approval of the relevant committees. Individual appropriations bills may have language permitting some level of reprogramming (e.g., “up to X % after notification of committee staff”) or something similar, but when Congress appropriates funds in a specific account for specific uses, you are stuck. Some NOAA officials were disciplined and the head of the National Weather Service resigned in one case a few years ago. https://fcw.com/Articles/2012/08/15/COMMENT-Alan-Balutis-NOAA-funding.aspx

    

3. Member
   The Reticulator

   @TheReticulator

   10:39 AM EST ⋅ Dec 20, 2018

   OldPhil (View Comment):
   I’m not talking about individual actions on a local scale. At the appropriations act level, you can’t reprogram funds from one account to another with getting approval of the relevant committees. Individual appropriations bills may have language permitting some level of reprogramming (e.g., “up to X % after notification of committee staff”) or something similar, but when Congress appropriates funds in a specific account for specific uses, you are stuck. Some NOAA officials were disciplined and the head of the National Weather Service resigned in one case a few years ago. https://fcw.com/Articles/2012/08/15/COMMENT-Alan-Balutis-NOAA-funding.aspx

   According to the article, this went on for 5 years before it was stopped. That sounds almost like a “can do” rather than a “can’t do.”  Of course, in the end a few people were sacrificed, but that’s a small price to pay for such an accomplishment. I question how much deterrent effect it will have on the next department that tries it.  

4. Coolidge
   OldPhil

   @OldPhil

   12:34 PM EST ⋅ Dec 20, 2018

   The Reticulator (View Comment):

   OldPhil (View Comment):
   I’m not talking about individual actions on a local scale. At the appropriations act level, you can’t reprogram funds from one account to another with getting approval of the relevant committees. Individual appropriations bills may have language permitting some level of reprogramming (e.g., “up to X % after notification of committee staff”) or something similar, but when Congress appropriates funds in a specific account for specific uses, you are stuck. Some NOAA officials were disciplined and the head of the National Weather Service resigned in one case a few years ago. https://fcw.com/Articles/2012/08/15/COMMENT-Alan-Balutis-NOAA-funding.aspx

   According to the article, this went on for 5 years before it was stopped. That sounds almost like a “can do” rather than a “can’t do.” Of course, in the end a few people were sacrificed, but that’s a small price to pay for such an accomplishment. I question how much deterrent effect it will have on the next department that tries it.

   I guess it depends on who’s in charge. I worked for a Federal agency budget office, and when we told the poobahs that they could or couldn’t do something concerning appropriated resources, they listened to us.

5. Member
   The Reticulator

   @TheReticulator

   12:54 PM EST ⋅ Dec 20, 2018

   OldPhil (View Comment):

   The Reticulator (View Comment):

   OldPhil (View Comment):
   I’m not talking about individual actions on a local scale. At the appropriations act level, you can’t reprogram funds from one account to another with getting approval of the relevant committees. Individual appropriations bills may have language permitting some level of reprogramming (e.g., “up to X % after notification of committee staff”) or something similar, but when Congress appropriates funds in a specific account for specific uses, you are stuck. Some NOAA officials were disciplined and the head of the National Weather Service resigned in one case a few years ago. https://fcw.com/Articles/2012/08/15/COMMENT-Alan-Balutis-NOAA-funding.aspx

   According to the article, this went on for 5 years before it was stopped. That sounds almost like a “can do” rather than a “can’t do.” Of course, in the end a few people were sacrificed, but that’s a small price to pay for such an accomplishment. I question how much deterrent effect it will have on the next department that tries it.

   I guess it depends on who’s in charge. I worked for a Federal agency budget office, and when we told the poobahs that they could or couldn’t do something concerning appropriated resources, they listened to us.

   I sometimes had Federal grant money to spend, and a couple times got a call from the University Grants and Contracts office, saying they didn’t see the item I requisitioned anywhere on my grant budget. So I’d have to explain just where and how. If my explanation was good, I didn’t have to provide further documentation.  Some people were more creative in explaining these things than I was, but shifting technology money to personnel would have been called out so many ways that I don’t think anybody would have ever tried it. It’s impressive that a NOAA department got by with it for five years.  

6. Coolidge
   OldPhil

   @OldPhil

   4:36 PM EST ⋅ Dec 20, 2018

   The Reticulator (View Comment):

   OldPhil (View Comment):

   The Reticulator (View Comment):

   OldPhil (View Comment):
   I’m not talking about individual actions on a local scale. At the appropriations act level, you can’t reprogram funds from one account to another with getting approval of the relevant committees. Individual appropriations bills may have language permitting some level of reprogramming (e.g., “up to X % after notification of committee staff”) or something similar, but when Congress appropriates funds in a specific account for specific uses, you are stuck. Some NOAA officials were disciplined and the head of the National Weather Service resigned in one case a few years ago. https://fcw.com/Articles/2012/08/15/COMMENT-Alan-Balutis-NOAA-funding.aspx

   According to the article, this went on for 5 years before it was stopped. That sounds almost like a “can do” rather than a “can’t do.” Of course, in the end a few people were sacrificed, but that’s a small price to pay for such an accomplishment. I question how much deterrent effect it will have on the next department that tries it.

   I guess it depends on who’s in charge. I worked for a Federal agency budget office, and when we told the poobahs that they could or couldn’t do something concerning appropriated resources, they listened to us.

   I sometimes had Federal grant money to spend, and a couple times got a call from the University Grants and Contracts office, saying they didn’t see the item I requisitioned anywhere on my grant budget. So I’d have to explain just where and how. If my explanation was good, I didn’t have to provide further documentation. Some people were more creative in explaining these things than I was, but shifting technology money to personnel would have been called out so many ways that I don’t think anybody would have ever tried it. It’s impressive that a NOAA department got by with it for five years.

   I do remember one time my boss, who was in charge of grants and contracts in addition to the budget, got reamed out by the agency head about a contract one of her department chiefs wanted to give to one his private sector buddies. “What’s wrong with your contracting people over there?! Do I have to get rid of them?!? etc.” But he knew what he was doing and the contract wasn’t awarded.

7. Coolidge
   CarolJoy, Above Top Secret

   @CarolJoy

   2:31 PM EST ⋅ Dec 28, 2018

   Stina (View Comment):

   CarolJoy, Above Top Secret (View Comment):
   If they were, ads proclaiming that product X now has “twice the real tomato” in its sauce would not be quite so prolific. The average person has no idea that doubling something that is 3.5% of the entire amount is not all that significant. Nor do they realize that product X may still be far less nutritious than a product that already contains 15% tomato.

   Twizzlers and York Peppermint Patties are fat free.

   My household is proof that Twizzlers and Peppermint Patties are not only fat free, but calorie free – for me at least. Some un-nameable someone eats them before I get a chance to!

8. Coolidge
   TBA

   @RobtGilsdorf

   8:34 PM EST ⋅ Dec 28, 2018

   CarolJoy, Above Top Secret (View Comment):

   Stina (View Comment):

   CarolJoy, Above Top Secret (View Comment):
   If they were, ads proclaiming that product X now has “twice the real tomato” in its sauce would not be quite so prolific. The average person has no idea that doubling something that is 3.5% of the entire amount is not all that significant. Nor do they realize that product X may still be far less nutritious than a product that already contains 15% tomato.

   Twizzlers and York Peppermint Patties are fat free.

   My household is proof that Twizzlers and Peppermint Patties are not only fat free, but calorie free – for me at least. Some un-nameable someone eats them before I get a chance to!

   Un-nameable, or unspeakable?