1. Where are the biggest opportunities to streamline and modernize government processes?
2. How can we use government resources more efficiently and effectively?
3. Is there overlap or duplication within the federal government that could be consolidated or eliminated?
8 votes
The interdependency and joint aspects of modern warfare have made the concept of 4 separate services inefficient. The amount of staff required to operate four services could be reduced. There would still be Soldiers/Sailors/Airmen and Marines, but there would be one command structure.
2 votes
There are several wasteful programs within all branches of the Federal government that need to be eliminated. All one has to do is look at the 2010 Congressional Pig Book Summary and Senator Tom Coburn’s 2010 Wastebook—A Guide to Some of the Most Wasteful Government Spending of 2010. If any programs listed in either of these is still in existence, then they need to be eliminated. For example: 1) In the Wastebook ...more »
There are several wasteful programs within all branches of the Federal government that need to be eliminated. All one has to do is look at the 2010 Congressional Pig Book Summary and Senator Tom Coburn’s 2010 Wastebook—A Guide to Some of the Most Wasteful Government Spending of 2010. If any programs listed in either of these is still in existence, then they need to be eliminated. For example:
1) In the Wastebook
Why would anyone waste tax dollars on a Grateful Dead Archive to the tune of $615,000
Why would the Dept of Veterans Affairs pay for the upkeep of an unused Monkey house to the tune of $175 million
Overall government printing costs -- $930 million
What is Poems in Zoos (AR, IL, LA, WI & FL) to the tune of $997,766
2) 2010 Pig Book Summary – eliminating 3-5 pork projects from each state listed would save a tremendous amount of money
In addition:
An honest assessment of positions and the work associated needs to be conducted throughout the entire Federal government to determine whether or not the work is actually needed or being done. If not, then something should be eliminated. Layers and layers of management, hiring additional people and there’s not enough work for the employees already on board to do; watch out -- kingdom building time—I have more employees than you do.
Tighter controls on spending within agencies -- Wasteful spending on furniture and other items that some people may not be able to afford at home but come to work and demand it. For example: how many flat screen TV’s does an agency need? Oh, I forgot one for every other person who has an office. Or better yet, new tile of one color was just installed and replaced with a different color. Why – oh that’s right, someone didn’t like the color so why not just have it taken up and purchase more.
There should be more accountability on how and what tax money is spent on. Federal employees are also taxpayers and don’t like to see money wasted.
« less full details »
2 votes
Having Election Day and Tax day on the same date will increase accountability for the use of tax dollars. Imprudent use of government funds would likely result in the end of the line for elected officials.
1 vote
There is a huge redundancy in infrastructure in the government. There are several support staffs that could be combined to gain efficiency. Support staff is the greatest opportunity to reduce the size of government. Consolidated operation like Payroll, HR, Legal, IT, etc are viable and more efficient. Some of these types of organizations exist already. DFAS for the DoD is a great example.
2 votes
Current;y there are numerous agencies creating process improvement offices (Lean/Six Sigma? CPI/ToC, ets). Having a centralized process improvment organization will reduce redundency and allow for further impact of process improvement solutions. THis is especially true of business processes.
4 votes
Any elected official who states publicly that he/she thinks government is a problem should be barred from holding federal office. It's not possible for a person to provide quality government service if that person doesn't believe government is a beneficial thing. I heard a member of Congress describe government as a "predator"; he should resign from office rather than continue to be part of a "predatory" organization. ...more »
Any elected official who states publicly that he/she thinks government is a problem should be barred from holding federal office. It's not possible for a person to provide quality government service if that person doesn't believe government is a beneficial thing. I heard a member of Congress describe government as a "predator"; he should resign from office rather than continue to be part of a "predatory" organization. Instead he continues to hold a cushy job at very high salary. Government should be operated by people who believe in the power of government to make life better for all of its citizens. That would be a more effective government. It would also be more efficient, because it would remove those who believe that shutting down government is a good idea. A government run by people who want to make government work better.
« less full details »
3 votes
There is a critical need to establish efficient , high quality translations for government documents, correspondence, websites, and other forms of communication. Under the current structure, translation – the written replacement of text from one language into another – is the responsibility of and performed by individual federal agencies or, in some cases, subcomponents, field or district offices of federal agencies. ...more »
There is a critical need to establish efficient , high quality translations for government documents, correspondence, websites, and other forms of communication. Under the current structure, translation – the written replacement of text from one language into another – is the responsibility of and performed by individual federal agencies or, in some cases, subcomponents, field or district offices of federal agencies. Many federal agencies also subcontract with private translation companies which can charge significant fees, particularly for obscure languages.
One solution is to use the National Virtual Translation Center (NVTC) to serve as the centralized government agency that will handle all written translations for federal agencies. Having one repository for all translations will eliminate costly overlap or duplication of, for example, Miranda warnings in multiple languages. Moreover, NVTC can ensure the quality of translations throughout the federal government.
The National Virtual Translation Center (NVTC) was established in February, 2003 for the purpose of providing timely and accurate translations in support of national security.
The NVTC current goal is to augment existing government translation capabilities by:
• acting as a clearinghouse for facilitating interagency use of translators;
• partnering with elements of the U.S. Government, academia, and private industry to identify translator resources and engage their services;
• building a nationwide team of highly qualified, motivated linguists and translators, connected virtually to our program Office in Washington, D.C.;
• applying state-of-the-art technology to maximize translator efficiency.
NVTC has already partnered with several different government agencies, academia, and industry and provides expertise and experience in a variety of fields and organizations. The team connects virtually to active duty military personnel, reservists, active and retired government employees, academia, and private industry.
Using NVTC's expertise would not only ensure translation quality, it would eliminate much of the time individual agency employees spend on finding high-quality translations. Moreover, this would be in line with the Attorney General's recent memorandum on improving access to services for limited English proficient (LEP) individuals.
As background, on June 28, 2010, the Attorney General issued a Memorandum to the heads of Department of Justice (DOJ) components to ensure that all DOJ components communicate effectively with limited English proficient (LEP) individuals. Under Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency, this requires ensuring effective communication at all points of contact between a LEP person and your agency. In a more recent memo, dated February 17, 2011, the Attorney General expanded the scope of his June memo by directing all federal agencies to develop and implement a system by with LEP persons can meaningfully access an agency’s services.
« less full details »
5 votes
Current practice is to give senior level military officers (Lt Col and above) who elect to retire from military service and whom have a desire to enter into civilian service, positions at the level of GS-14 and GS-15 right away. These people were managers as military leaders, but have retired and at that point should have no direct sense of entitlement to senior levels of civil service nor should the system allow it. ...more »
Current practice is to give senior level military officers (Lt Col and above) who elect to retire from military service and whom have a desire to enter into civilian service, positions at the level of GS-14 and GS-15 right away. These people were managers as military leaders, but have retired and at that point should have no direct sense of entitlement to senior levels of civil service nor should the system allow it. These personnel have little to no technical understanding of the positions they are being given; they are managers of people. However, those "people" have worked hard to get through the ranks with exceptional levels of technical knowledge that supports far better understanding of how to deal with the needs of the people and the specialty area they oversee. When senior military officers choose to retire, they must recognize and accept that what they have achieved in their most recent position, does not translate into some automatic entitlement over others who have chosen a different path and excelled to a point of being deserving of such leadership opportunities. It is wholly unfair and unreasonable for senior officers to assume leadership roles in civilian service, they lack the technics and, most assuredly have not paid the price on this side of the fence to be granted such status. They were great in the military, and few had many civilians to deal with directly..so why should they be given senior status in civil service when that process is entirely different? The truth is, they shouldn't. If this were true, then why doesn't the sytem take in senior enlisted personnel? These people were exceptional leaders and technical experts that got the job done and made the senior officers jobs a whole lot easier and had daily supervisory duties over a whole lot of personnel with different skill levels, both military and oftentimes, civilians. The bottom line is, when you elect to end your military career to start another, it is entirely wrong to assume that your past status, should equal your present status. Each individual should be evaluated upon the techical knowledge they must already have acquired and practiced to meet the need of the position vacancy. Competition is exactly that...competitive. And there is nothing competitive about sidelining opportunities for civilian servants who deserve to excel to positions of great authority being bypassed by an individual who was fortunate to get his/her assignment via their former position in the military, selecting another of his/her kind, over someone of far greater technical knowledge, a capable and experienced civilian leader, and one who has earned the right to be at the top.
« less full details »
3 votes
I think it is unfair that Government leaders have decided to freeze DoD Civilians pay and not the Military. Everyone associated with this ballooning deficit should have to chip in equally to make it right. There should be no special exemptions. How are you going to freeze DoD Civilan’s pay when they are fighting along side of the military overseas? Are DoD Civilians efforts and lives less important to American? ...more »
I think it is unfair that Government leaders have decided to freeze DoD Civilians pay and not the Military. Everyone associated with this ballooning deficit should have to chip in equally to make it right. There should be no special exemptions. How are you going to freeze DoD Civilan’s pay when they are fighting along side of the military overseas? Are DoD Civilians efforts and lives less important to American? DoD Civilian directly support the troops in everything they do. This policy is not right.
« less full details »
5 votes
The American economy and society are being destroyed by American Government taxing workers to give handouts to select domestic and foreign people and companies while the U.S. economy, infrastructure, and education decline. Limit Government spending to effort that actually increases employment and productivity, maintains a strong economy, increases the quality of education, provides adequate infrastructure, provides effective ...more »
The American economy and society are being destroyed by American Government taxing workers to give handouts to select domestic and foreign people and companies while the U.S. economy, infrastructure, and education decline. Limit Government spending to effort that actually increases employment and productivity, maintains a strong economy, increases the quality of education, provides adequate infrastructure, provides effective protection, and provides necessary health care. Keep Government out of other issues. Prohibit the Government from giving tax money or any benefits to people who are able but do not work, to criminals, to those who are in the U.S. illegally, or as reimbursement like insurance proceeds for select events or groups. Government actions should be limited to those actions that address issues that affect Americans, as a whole, and are designed to improve America. For example, Government actions should result in increased employement rather than a "handout" for not working. Actions that increase the quality of public education by removing requirements and restrictions unrelated to teaching students reading, math, science, and language and actions that provide rewards and incentives to encourage students to achieve higher education. Government actions should require individual responsibility along with individual rights and eliminate the "entitlement" mentality created by previous Government actions. For example, disruptive students should lose their "right" to a free public education (at least for a period of time) because their behavior inhibits other's rights to learn. Enact legislation that encourages disruptive students and their parents to stop this behavior rather than legislation that permts this type of behavior to ruin the learning experience for others. The U.S. Government should not be taxing workers so they can give money away as charity or insurance proceeds or because someone made bad choices because this penalizes those who work hard, buy insurance, pay their bills, and make good choices. Some issues should be outside the realm of Government involvement. Remove the incentive of elected officials to legislate based on benefits to select groups (so they can be re-elected) by enacting a requirement that, after being elected, each elected official's performance at achieving the American objectives (full employment, strong economy, increased education, etc.) is evaluated annually by an independent, non-Government body and those whose performance does not meet these objectives lose their positions and are replaced by an elected alternate. This provides an incentive for elected officials to make the betterment of America, as a whole, the focus of their effort as opposed to focuing on special projects and interests. Focusing Government action and restricting Government's ability to tax and spend to specific issues and areas can reduce the size and cost of Government while increasing productivity and the quality of life for Americans.
« less full details »
3 votes
Currently, in civil service, if a position is listed requiring the applicant to become or accept the role of supervisor, these positions are being filled by personnel desiring to be promoted bringing them greater wealth and status as opposed to the desire to be effective and efficient supervisors. The requirements for taking on such positions should not require that sometime after you accept a position you must take ...more »
Currently, in civil service, if a position is listed requiring the applicant to become or accept the role of supervisor, these positions are being filled by personnel desiring to be promoted bringing them greater wealth and status as opposed to the desire to be effective and efficient supervisors. The requirements for taking on such positions should not require that sometime after you accept a position you must take one course for supervisors, but rather you should have minimum qualifying factors for having completed requirements prior to being considered, be required to complete continual levels for bettering their capabilities and effectiveness throughout the period in which they continue to serve as supervisors , accept the position, in writing, stating that they will remain in the position for a minimum of two years, unless removed for ineffectiveness or some other viable reason to minimize the disruption of constant changes and maximize opportunities for their subordinates to grow in technical proficiency. Supervisors who believe in keeping corporate knowledge in their heads to be viewed as irreplaceable, in lieu of growing their subordinates into future leaders, should be immediately replaced and returned to the grade they were prior to accepting the position, not pushed out at current grade as ineffectual, but able to move on to a position of greater responsibility having already demonstrated that they are not capable at the current grade.
« less full details »
3 votes
With all the talk from Congress on ways to reduce the deficit, whose wages should be frozen and which programs should be cut, maybe we need to take a look at what it costs just to maintain the just the congressional portion of our government. Currently Congressmen earn an annual salary of $174,000 with the Speaker of the House making $223,500 and the Majority and Minority leaders making $193,400 per year. A Cost of ...more »
With all the talk from Congress on ways to reduce the deficit, whose wages should be frozen and which programs should be cut, maybe we need to take a look at what it costs just to maintain the just the congressional portion of our government. Currently Congressmen earn an annual salary of $174,000 with the Speaker of the House making $223,500 and the Majority and Minority leaders making $193,400 per year. A Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) takes effect annually unless Congress votes to not accept it. Additionally each Congressman is given a Members’ Representational Allowance (MRA) consisting of three components which averaged $1.52 Million in 2010. The personnel allowance component of the MRA is $944,671 for each member and allows members to employ no more than 18 permanent employees. Four additional employees may be designated by the member, but need not be counted as permanent. Pursuant to a Pay Order issued in 2009, employees’ salaries in member offices are set at annual rates of not more than $168,411. Based on the numbers, The House alone is costing the taxpayers an average of $737,809,590. If you add the cost of Senate’s portion into the equation the number jumps to $913,702,940. These figures appear in the CRS Report for Congress - Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress January 4, 2011. To streamline government and make it work efficiently, we need to take a look at ALL levels not just the basic federal workers when making financial decisions. There is a lot of money tied up in the red tape of Washington that could be better used elsewhere – like education. Let's start making cuts at the top. LEAD BY EXAMPLE!
« less full details »
6 votes
For Civil Service GS-15 members, the law should require each member of this grade to recompete for their position. Rather than simply achieve to the highest grade and once there have no where to go, the system should ensure that performance standards that meet or exceed agency goals are evaluated and scored, to weed out those who are, in effect in the position to wait on retirement, as opposed to required to be involved ...more »
For Civil Service GS-15 members, the law should require each member of this grade to recompete for their position. Rather than simply achieve to the highest grade and once there have no where to go, the system should ensure that performance standards that meet or exceed agency goals are evaluated and scored, to weed out those who are, in effect in the position to wait on retirement, as opposed to required to be involved with meeting standards, simplifying processes or eliminating them, and being active in the growth of their most prized assets, their people. Presently, far too many of our so-called leaders, are powerful people lacking leadership, technical, or management skills and whom support the approach of managing by going to a series of never ending meetings, some for no other reason but to determine when next to meet, leaving little to no time for face-to-face personnel actions or other issues requiring attention by leaders at their level. Recommend the re-competing of GS-15 positions against serious standards to eliminate the retired-on active duty, and ensure successful and effective leaders are given the greatest opportunities where vacancies exist. This is not the current system, by far.
« less full details »
2 votes
Someone should review the NOAA Seattle Sand Point Security plan. This is a very costly effort that is overblown. The people at the entrances, inspection of cars entering, door locks on buildings next to large open entrances, etc. Certainly the scale could be trimmed without endangering anyone and make a significant savings.
7 votes
I've been in the Navy for over eight years now, and much of how the military purchases equipment doesn't make sense in the real world. For example, there are many instances where Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) products are used, and this is fine for most products. However, when it comes to computers & high tech devices, quality goes up and price goes down rapidly. I've seen instances where a multi-year computer contract ...more »
I've been in the Navy for over eight years now, and much of how the military purchases equipment doesn't make sense in the real world. For example, there are many instances where Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) products are used, and this is fine for most products.
However, when it comes to computers & high tech devices, quality goes up and price goes down rapidly. I've seen instances where a multi-year computer contract is signed that pays for high end systems, and locks that initial price in for additional and replacement units. The problem is that the price of a specific computer model will drop to about half in a single year and be worthless in three, while the Navy will continue paying the original purchase cost for now obsolete replacements five years later.
Also, there are specialized equipment systems where the final purchase authority doesn't have more than a conceptual idea of the system, i.e. s/he knows what the system does, but doesn't know the details of the individual pieces of gear within the system and how they interact with the whole. This leads to contract padding, where a system is made unnecessarily complex in order to increase the contract cost. If enlisted maintenance technicians & installers were more involved with the final purchase it could result in a better and less costly product.
More examples can be given, but this post is long enough as it is.
« less full details »
4 votes
It's no scret! Everyone knows that no one knows! How many contractors work for the U.S. Government? On a daily basis, how many contractors work side by side with Goverhment employees and use Government equipment? The biggest opportunities to streamline and modernize Government processes are to send the contractors away. Then allow the Government employees to LEAN to use Government resources more efficiently and effectively. ...more »
It's no scret! Everyone knows that no one knows! How many contractors work for the U.S. Government? On a daily basis, how many contractors work side by side with Goverhment employees and use Government equipment? The biggest opportunities to streamline and modernize Government processes are to send the contractors away. Then allow the Government employees to LEAN to use Government resources more efficiently and effectively. Contractors are being paid more money to do less. Contractors monitor Government employees' work and tell Government supervisors that the Government employees are not productive. If the Congress and the American people really want a smallder Government, audit the contractors, convert the Veterans to Government employees, and send away the contractors who are doing duplicate work or no work. This will decrease the the cost of running the Government by approximately 50% or more. Examples of Contractor Waste: 1. Former beautician hired to perform receptionist responsibilities. After approximately two to three years, beautician is now a program analyst. She monitors the length of time it takes a Government employee to complete and process forms. She wastes much time in other offices and away from her desk. She plans office parties that exclude Government employees who have worked for years with the retiring or departing employee. 2. Another contractor began work with no computer knowledge. Government employees had to explain all processes to her. I thought the purpose of using a contractor was because they could immediately come into the work place and perform the job without an extensive training process. When this contractor thinks she has a small amount of knowledge, she tells senior Government employees how to do their jobs. I thought was illegal. 3. Another contractor spends some of his time monitoring other Government employees and then reports to managers what he considers to be the transgressions of Government employees. Yet, it is okay for him to walk from one building to another to waste time talking with contractor and Government employees and interferring with their productivity. 4. Contractor told Government employee to sharpen pencil for her. The pencil sharpener was approximately 11 1/2 feet from the contractor, and approximately 8 1/2 feet from the Government employee. 5. Three contractors spend much of their time cruising around center parking lots in a Defense Logistics Agency olive green with a crew cab vehicle. Government employees are not allowed to use Government vehicles for personal reasons. I realize that these examples may seem ridiculous, but the truth of the matter is that contractors can do what they want, when they want. They can take long lunch breaks. They can monitor Government employees' work. Then when the work does not get completed, the Government employee has to pick up the slack.
« less full details »
3 votes
In the hierarchy of government agencies it seems that all the agencies that benefit the people the most are actually UNDER the department of Energy. Which means that ALL regulation (including EPA, national parks etc) are determined by what is dictated by the department of energy. Change that. Make the DOE a stand alone without any power to manipulate our economy, our public lands and our government function
12 votes
Tax loopholes? Companies like G&E that pay no taxes? They made no money? Close the loopholes and get rid of the subsidies.
Flat tax would be great and eliminate a lot of unnecessary IRS jobs.
5 votes
In keeping with our use of social networking I think we should encourage the use of professional social network sites. Among other things this will allow talent benchmarking and aid recruiting. Not sure what kind of legal hurdles we'd need to consider for that. Ultimately finding the right talent seems to be part of the challenge. To the best of my knowledge this is the most credible site for professionals: http://www.linkedin.com/ ...more »
In keeping with our use of social networking I think we should encourage the use of professional social network sites. Among other things this will allow talent benchmarking and aid recruiting. Not sure what kind of legal hurdles we'd need to consider for that. Ultimately finding the right talent seems to be part of the challenge. To the best of my knowledge this is the most credible site for professionals: http://www.linkedin.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinkedIn
« less full details »
3 votes
What I am calling the "dead man" switch is a buzzer that goes off in the cab of a train locomotive at infrequent intervals. The locomotive engineer has only a short time (seconds) to respond (slap the switch) or else his locomotive controls will be safely disabled. This is to prevent a "runaway train". The locomotive will come to a safe controlled stop, while simultaneously alerting the railway system of the problem ...more »
What I am calling the "dead man" switch is a buzzer that goes off in the cab of a train locomotive at infrequent intervals. The locomotive engineer has only a short time (seconds) to respond (slap the switch) or else his locomotive controls will be safely disabled. This is to prevent a "runaway train". The locomotive will come to a safe controlled stop, while simultaneously alerting the railway system of the problem on that train and that section of track, in the event the operator has a heart attack or is otherwise incapacitated. Hitting the “dead man” switch within the designated period of time allows the train to continue. All pertinent train-operating data, to include the "dead man" switch, is digitally recorded. If the operator is in the process of actually working some control, e.g. throttle or brake, the "dead man" switch resets itself to occur after some period of inactivity of the controls.
It should be feasible to put a similar “dead man” switch system in air traffic control towers. The controller would have to respond to the "dead man" switch at periodic and infrequent intervals during the work shift.
NOTE: We should not blindly adopt the “buzzer” that is used in the railroad industry. That would just serve as an alarm clock. Use a mixture of visual and auditory signals that an alert air traffic controller would be expected to notice during the course of his duties when not actively supporting the take off/landing of aircraft. When the “system” is actively supporting the take off/landing of aircraft, the “dead man” switch is disabled.
Initiate an escalating series of actions if an air traffic controller "failed" to respond to the "dead man" switch.
I have only listed two such actions below to develop some metrics (measureable standards - the air traffic controllers should help write these).
First "failure" – Establish phone contact with the controller. Alert controller(s) in adjacent area(s) to be prepared to assist with air traffic control for the affected area.
Second "failure" – Establish physical contact with the controller. Controller(s) in adjacent area(s) take over air traffic control for the affected area.
The use of the “dead man” switch in all air traffic control towers manned by just one controller, day or night, should be cheaper and more effective than requiring a second controller on each shift.
« less full details »
4 votes
Get rid of the middle man. Bloated waste of tax dollars. Serves no purpose. Invents work to justify agency jobs.
4 votes
As a USDA economist since 1995, I have never understood the reasoning behind the Economic Research Service (ERS). This academically oriented group of economists should unite with their policy focused colleagues in the Office of Chief Economist (OCE). If the senior managers of ERS desire to maintain a separate organization, they should either integrate their group more closely into the Department or be absorbed by OCE. ...more »
As a USDA economist since 1995, I have never understood the reasoning behind the Economic Research Service (ERS). This academically oriented group of economists should unite with their policy focused colleagues in the Office of Chief Economist (OCE). If the senior managers of ERS desire to maintain a separate organization, they should either integrate their group more closely into the Department or be absorbed by OCE.
« less full details »
4 votes
There are a number of ways Gov't Agencies can reduce cost without touching Employees pay raises or benefits or valuable programs that service the public. And, make the Gov't run more efficient and effective. For Example: Gov't Agencies across the board need to review their service contracts for cost savings. Most contracts can either be reduced by half or even eliminated which would save time and money in administering ...more »
There are a number of ways Gov't Agencies can reduce cost without touching Employees pay raises or benefits or valuable programs that service the public. And, make the Gov't run more efficient and effective. For Example: Gov't Agencies across the board need to review their service contracts for cost savings. Most contracts can either be reduced by half or even eliminated which would save time and money in administering them. Contractors have become a valuable commodity since they virtually replace Gov't workers that are not pulling their own weight. Meaning, instead of Supervisors going through HR and do what needs to be done for non productive employees, agencies will just hire contractors to do the job. Then, public funds are not only used to pay non productive employees, but used to pay contractors as well. And, those Employees administering contracts are over worked with all the legalities, etc.
Agencies need to get their noses to the grind stone and start working on it.
« less full details »
3 votes
THEY EXIST! Obama has a joint commission reviewing electronic medical records, denying on length of hospial admissions and specific medications, contrary to the family doctor's decision! THE FAMILY DOCTOR THERE WITH THE PATIENT - AND A DOCTOR IN ANOTHER STATE MAKES THE DECISION.
5 votes
In twenty five years of serving my nation I have realized that the budget process has a built in "fudge factor" for which agencies are rewarded and punished for telling the truth and saving money. In an era when deficits are reaching catastrophic proportions we should overhaul the system by which agencies request funds. Historically when an agency saves money (doesn't expend all funds it has been allocated) their budgets ...more »
In twenty five years of serving my nation I have realized that the budget process has a built in "fudge factor" for which agencies are rewarded and punished for telling the truth and saving money. In an era when deficits are reaching catastrophic proportions we should overhaul the system by which agencies request funds. Historically when an agency saves money (doesn't expend all funds it has been allocated) their budgets are cut by that number the next year so there is NO incentive to save only to SPEND SPEND SPEND. SO agencies over inflate their requirements in order to MAYBE get enough to cover the 'real' requirements. IF we could build in HONESTY into requirement planning and reward agencies for saving dollars by allocating to them the dollars they request during the next budget cycle versus cutting them it might encourage all agencies to be forthright and honest in submitting budget requirements. A cousin of my husband tells the story of being in the service and spending 'year end' dollars rather than lose them only to realize within a few weeks that an inspection was upcoming. They were ordered to throw brand new equipment and furniture into the trash so that the inspectors wouldn't question why these items had been purchased. WHAT A WASTE!
« less full details »
