Make O & M Money 2 years
Instead of being a single year funding rollover could limit unfunded requirements by finding savings.
No more Christmas in August and September!
19 votes
Instead of being a single year funding rollover could limit unfunded requirements by finding savings.
No more Christmas in August and September!
9 votes
I know in my agency, The National Weather Service, all scheduled maintenance on our observations systems such as the radars, the automated observation systems (ASOS), NWR transmitters, and other equipment follows a strict "compounding" maintenance schedule as opposed to a flexible, "sliding" scheduling system. The compounding system creates much more maintenance then is needed. It is easy for management to defend strict, ...more »
I know in my agency, The National Weather Service, all scheduled maintenance on our observations systems such as the radars, the automated observation systems (ASOS), NWR transmitters, and other equipment follows a strict "compounding" maintenance schedule as opposed to a flexible, "sliding" scheduling system. The compounding system creates much more maintenance then is needed. It is easy for management to defend strict, compounding maintenance scheduling but it is actually the most innefficienct way to do it. As an example; Let's assume the radar at an office is due for quarterly PM (preventative maintenance) on March 1st. With a compounding schedule, this job may be accomplished on March 15th, but will be rescheduled for June 1st - a full two weeks before it is actually due the next time - there's no flexibility. (by the way, PMs are usually late for one reason or another). The radar really only needs quarterly maintenance done at a minimum 90-days AFTER the last 90-day PM, so after accomplishing the PM on March 15th, the scheduling system should really "slide" the next scheduled 90-day to June 15th. This ensures that maintenance is not done before it is needed. Likewise, if a the 90-day PM is performed two weeks ahead of time, Feb 15th, then the new scheduled 90-day PM should be scheduled for May 15th - 90 days after the last PM. Suffice to say, sliding scheduling would save money and ensure maintenance is done when it is supposed to, and with enough flexibility to make sense. I would have to guess we'd see a significant savings with sliding scheduling over compounding scheduling.
« less full details »
14 votes
The best way to save lots of dollars is to cut the Congress' (House and Senate)'s payroll in half. Their pay is over the top and inflated. They should be public servents. For instance, they received a pay increase when military (you gets paid next to nothing) and government employees received nothing--for several years. Upset, yes I am! Currently we are barely making it from pay check to pay check, all the while ...more »
The best way to save lots of dollars is to cut the Congress' (House and Senate)'s payroll in half. Their pay is over the top and inflated. They should be public servents. For instance, they received a pay increase when military (you gets paid next to nothing) and government employees received nothing--for several years.
Upset, yes I am! Currently we are barely making it from pay check to pay check, all the while congress members have thier own private jets. as servents to the public, I fully believe that by reducing their income, they will be closer to the american public and might even start working for thier dollars... especially at a time when the economy is huurting so badly.
Thomas Jefferson once said: "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
So true.
« less full details »
45 votes
Political campaigns should be taxed just as any business is taxed. These campaigns raise millions of dollars that are non taxable expense accounts for the politicians. At a 20-28% tax rate that would greatly help the economy
35 votes
We are implementing a new financial system at my agency, and before it was even finished, it was renamed. Not only are we paying for the system, but we are paying to rebrand all of the materials for it with the new name. It is confusing to employees and a HUGE waste of time. It's like "freedom fries" for computers. This happens throughout government and especially in Congress. Taxpayers don't pay us all to come up with ...more »
We are implementing a new financial system at my agency, and before it was even finished, it was renamed. Not only are we paying for the system, but we are paying to rebrand all of the materials for it with the new name. It is confusing to employees and a HUGE waste of time. It's like "freedom fries" for computers.
This happens throughout government and especially in Congress. Taxpayers don't pay us all to come up with "catchy" names. They pay us to get real work done. If it has a name that makes sense, let it be!! Stop wasting money trying to come up with the best name that can be made into the cutest acronym. Nobody cares about that!!!!
« less full details »
170 votes
24 votes
29 votes
Currently a 20 year military vet that joined at 18 and retires at 38 gets a retirement immediately. I am military so I understand this isn't popular but that means if they live the life expectancy they get this for 40+ years!
This is not true for the reserves so the system needs to be more balanced.
10 votes
We need to have the President set an ambitious export goal. Like increase so much by this date.
This should be the goal of all executives - even states. They should want the US to lead the world in goods and services.
17 votes
The U.S. needs to do more to get China to stop manipulating its currency or threaten to do the same to ours.
14 votes
America can use the lower dollar to her advantage and with the right incentives for business become a manufacturing giant again.
54 votes
Keep this website open and collect ideas routinely.
13 votes
Help U.S. companies expand into international markets with products slated to be exported by giving them tax breaks. Even it is a new break even the jobs alone help the United States and establish better reputation for "Made in America" products.
20 votes
The dollar is low and now is the best time to lure Europeans, Middle easterners, and Asians to America for their vacations.
I have not seen much of this but it would help the U.S. Economy.
18 votes
It is about time the U.S. invest in all power sources. Wind, solar, AND nuclear power are a must. By increasing supply the cost will go down allowing more dollars into the economy and more jobs. With huge increases in energy and health care costs how is the nation ever going to recover!
68 votes
Create bonus structures tied to agency goals.
Example: Share budget saving with employees. If agency ABC comes in under budget, share 5% of that amount with employees in the form of a bonus.
There are disconnects between agency initiatives, and the reality of how they are achieved. Rewards should be tied to the bottom line, not the short sighted initiative.
18 votes
Allow/encourage agencies to buy back government debt. If an agency can manage to come in under budget for a given fiscal year, they should spend the surplus buying back treasuries (Federal Debt). This would allow an agency to "look" like they are spending their whole budget (which they apparently already do), without having to actually waste the money. The treasuries could than be spent by said agency in a future "bad" ...more »
Allow/encourage agencies to buy back government debt.
If an agency can manage to come in under budget for a given fiscal year, they should spend the surplus buying back treasuries (Federal Debt). This would allow an agency to "look" like they are spending their whole budget (which they apparently already do), without having to actually waste the money. The treasuries could than be spent by said agency in a future "bad" year without having to request extra funding.
Doing so would drive down borrowing rates for federal debt, and reduce the net national debt.
« less full details »
14 votes
I have noticed that a number of ideas are more social causes and not ideas to reduce gov't waste such as smoke free environments. Another area is e government programs that don't work or work poorly like gov trip. Why not look at last years ideas and creat buckets so information is group together to reduce redundant suggestions and make for more effective voting. Also lets some select some ideas that really make a difference. ...more »
I have noticed that a number of ideas are more social causes and not ideas to reduce gov't waste such as smoke free environments.
Another area is e government programs that don't work or work poorly like gov trip.
Why not look at last years ideas and creat buckets so information is group together to reduce redundant suggestions and make for more effective voting.
Also lets some select some ideas that really make a difference. last year's winners were alright but did they really make a difference.
The thumbs up and down make sense as well as reporting abusive comments
« less full details »
11 votes
When in travel status and staying a hotel that provides breakfast, you should not be allowed to also get per diem for that meal. For example just in my district if we have 100 people traveling for one week (4 nights), if they all were not allowed to take the $7 for breakfast, then that would save $2800. And that is just in one agency, one distrcit, one week. When you multiply that by 52 weeks that's $145,600, and we ...more »
When in travel status and staying a hotel that provides breakfast, you should not be allowed to also get per diem for that meal. For example just in my district if we have 100 people traveling for one week (4 nights), if they all were not allowed to take the $7 for breakfast, then that would save $2800. And that is just in one agency, one distrcit, one week. When you multiply that by 52 weeks that's $145,600, and we are still only talking about one district in one agency. When you multiply that out across the whole government, you are talking about millions of dollars just by not allowing travelers to cliam the $7 for a meal that is being provided to them anyway.
« less full details »
48 votes
Intro: Every federal employee loves when the IT guys says " you are getting a new computer" - which in many agencies means a laptop. This happens every three years and it is time. Three years of use at 40 hours a week and newer programs on dated technology are a problem - but why the new monitor? I have seen the property book and what they cost and been involved in "excessing" the old ones that all work fine. Do ...more »
Intro: Every federal employee loves when the IT guys says " you are getting a new computer" - which in many agencies means a laptop. This happens every three years and it is time. Three years of use at 40 hours a week and newer programs on dated technology are a problem - but why the new monitor? I have seen the property book and what they cost and been involved in "excessing" the old ones that all work fine. Do you replace yours at home every three years?
My Suggestion: Change the lifecycle from 3 to five years for flat screen monitors. From years 0 to 3 they can be supported under the help desk agreements or warranties and from 3 to 5 years if they have a problem they are replaced.
2.15 million Federal works x $175 per monitor (I am low balling here) = $376,250,000 every three years or $125,416,667 per year. If it was 5 years it would be $75,250,000 per year and a savings of $50,166,667 per year! Over 20 years the savings is $1,003,333,340 - that is over a BILLION dollars for such a simple change.
Impact: None. All federal employees still have a monitor. No loss in services!
« less full details »
11 votes
When there are training excercises in the Air Force we usually send multiple air refueling aircraft to service the aircraft flying. Here is the problem; there may be 4 planes on a training mission that would only take 1500-3000 gallons of fuel to fill them up; but we send up 2-3 KC135's which can carry enough fuel to cover the mission plus some. We send 1-135's up to refuel the mission and the other one or two are just ...more »
When there are training excercises in the Air Force we usually send multiple air refueling aircraft to service the aircraft flying. Here is the problem; there may be 4 planes on a training mission that would only take 1500-3000 gallons of fuel to fill them up; but we send up 2-3 KC135's which can carry enough fuel to cover the mission plus some. We send 1-135's up to refuel the mission and the other one or two are just backups. When these KC-135's are not used they have to dump 100's to 1000's of gallons before they can land at thier destinations. I recomend that we have this policy closely reconcidered.
« less full details »
26 votes
I suggest not just working on the SAVE idea that won, or a few of them. Work on many of the other ideas that didn't win but are just as valid to many of us. I see a lot of ideas in this ideascale.com that are very similar to what I saw in the SAVE program. Why are we reinventing the wheel? Combine all the like Save and ideascale.com ideas and try to make a common thread out of them for the greater good. There were ...more »
I suggest not just working on the SAVE idea that won, or a few of them. Work on many of the other ideas that didn't win but are just as valid to many of us. I see a lot of ideas in this ideascale.com that are very similar to what I saw in the SAVE program. Why are we reinventing the wheel? Combine all the like Save and ideascale.com ideas and try to make a common thread out of them for the greater good. There were a lot of travel ideas, green energy saving ideas, duplication of software and process ideas that maybe weren't stated exactly the same but had the same basic premise.
« less full details »
14 votes
The US spends a lot of money keeping peace.
There should be a global peace keeping fund that could be used for "Wars run by committees" that could save the US a lot of money. We could still man the missions, but the expense would be shared by UN counties.
283 votes
We travel all the time to meet and for training. With such budget problems is travel really needed with our current technology. Why can't we make the best of it for now and use web, video and phone conferencing. When times are good we can travel again. Thanks EDIT: I found these posts buried down in the hundreds of ideas. Thanks to the authors: http://governmentreform.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Elimninate-End-of-Year-Spending/118530-13060 ...more »
We travel all the time to meet and for training. With such budget problems is travel really needed with our current technology.
Why can't we make the best of it for now and use web, video and phone conferencing.
When times are good we can travel again.
Thanks
EDIT: I found these posts buried down in the hundreds of ideas.
Thanks to the authors:
http://governmentreform.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Elimninate-End-of-Year-Spending/118530-13060
http://governmentreform.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Utilize-the-Site/120215-13060
« less full details »
19 votes
Stop relying solely on years and/or age for retirement. I cannot determine how many hours that I have to work each week. My job requires me to work between 60 and 84 hours per week, every week depending on need. I cannot elect to work fewer hours. How many hours should a person have to work in order to reach retirement? Others work 40 hours or less per week. Why should the number of years of service be the factor to determine ...more »
Stop relying solely on years and/or age for retirement. I cannot determine how many hours that I have to work each week. My job requires me to work between 60 and 84 hours per week, every week depending on need. I cannot elect to work fewer hours. How many hours should a person have to work in order to reach retirement? Others work 40 hours or less per week. Why should the number of years of service be the factor to determine when a person reaches retirement rather than the actual amount of real time spent working? Allow a person to reach retirement earlier than is presently the norm based on required hours of service. Efficiencies and effectiveness of the workforce, including health, would improve and costs diminish.
« less full details »