*…We cannot win the future with a government of the past.
We live and do business in the information age, but the last major reorganization of the government happened in the age of black and white TV. There are twelve different agencies that deal with exports. There are at least five different entities that deal with housing policy. Then there’s my favorite example: the Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they’re in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them in when they’re in saltwater. And I hear it gets even more complicated once they’re smoked.
Now, we have made great strides over the last two years in using technology and getting rid of waste.
Veterans can now download their electronic medical records with a click of the mouse. We’re selling acres of federal office space that hasn’t been used in years, and we will cut through red tape to get rid of more. But we need to think bigger. In the coming months, my administration will develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the federal government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America. I will submit that proposal to Congress for a vote – and we will push to get it passed…*
What, realistically and without just trying to score political points, do you think should be in that proposal?
Apparently Obama’s commitment to recycling extends to policy proposals - he is repackaging Algore’s reinvention of government.
Realistically? Probably just as much as BHO’s ideas on deregulation. It will hit some sacred cow pretty quick and go nowhere. As I mentioned elsewhere, he should try streamlining the approval process for nuclear power, or re-open the Yucca Mountain waste depository, if he wants to actually achieve something worthwhile about greenhouse gasses or reducing the cost of government or of energy. Or the Department of Education, for that matter, if he wants to reduce useless paperwork.
The State of the Union is often where Presidential ideas go to die. I suspect this is no different.
I just finished typing a rather lengthy comment on this subject in the “State of the Union; Obama seals his Fate” thread, and don’t feel like doing it again. But I would comment that this was arguably the most important proposal he made. It’s also one that should have a lot of bipartisan appeal.
SS
In general, it’s not a bad idea. The devil is in the details of course. At best, some token will be done to provide a talking point then everyone will forget about it.
I think it’s a fine idea, but like godix I’d say the devil will be in the details. And like Shodan I could see this rapidly running up against the various sacred cows and fiefs and little pocket kingdoms in the various departments and hitting a stone wall fairly rapidly. I think that it COULD get quite a bit of bi-partisan support, depending on what he actually tries to do and how realistic the change will be. Guess we’ll see.
I’m struggling to figure out what’s wrong with this. The commerce department presumably has control of the salmon in saltwater because they are in charge of commercial fishing. The interior department is in charge of them when in the rivers because the interior department is in charge of the rivers. After they are cooked, and presumably put on the market, they fall under, IIRC, the agricultural department through the FDA. It seems like a reasonable division of responsibility to me. I’d like to hear his specific proposal about who should be in charge of salmon in it’s various forms.
Hey it’s a great political jab, but in terms of being truthful it is rather far away.
I’d give the Director of National Intelligence actual budgetary and supervisory authority over the ENTIRE intelligence community. Too many cooks right now.
As far as “structure” its hard to know where to start. We have grown this structure for 235 years and to look at it and complain “It’s too complicated!” is missing the point.
Mark my words if it took around 235 years to get this, it will take 235 years to simplify.
Nice and slow, that’s the way to do it, nice and slow.
The closest thing we’ll ever see to eternal life is a government bureaucracy.
“Good Government” reformers fail to understand that government is the way it is because of the incentives built into a bureaucracy, and especially a government bureaucracy. And they fail to understand that Presidents come and go, but the bureaucrats remain. More than one politician has thrown his career against the brick wall of a bureaucracy and discovered where the real power is.
There will be no meaningful government reform. They might change a label or two here or there, fire up some commissions to look into restructuring, file reports, rearrange the deck chairs a bit, but that’s about all that will happen.
Case in point: The Rural Electrification Administration. This was supposed to be a temporary New Deal infrastructure project to provide electricity to rural areas. It was actually one of the bigger successes of the New Deal era. But eventually almost all rural areas had electricity. So the REA was wound down, right? Not on your life. Its budget increased. It started a program to provide subsidies to bring better telephone service to rural areas. Eventually, all of them had telephones. But the REA and the subsidies continued. IN 1994, the REA was brought under a larger department umbrella, but the bureaucracy continued to grow, and the subsidies continued.
Today, it still exists as part of the Rural Utilities Service, and it’s sticking its nose into local internet service, waste management, you name it. Bigger than ever, with a larger budget than it ever had - 60 years after its declared mission was completed.
The salmon thing made for good humor, but was that really the best example he could come up with?
Every president says they’re going to do this. Simplify, streamline, “re-engineer” (that was the buzzword of the 90s), or whatever. Good freakin’ luck.
But, if I actually had the power to do something… Yeah, restructure the tax code. Eliminate all deductions, phased in over time of course. Scale back the military big time. As long as we’re spending more than our biggest military rival(s), anything extra is waste. Dept of Education: buh-bye. This is a matter for the states.
That should keep 'em busy for the next 2 years. Maybe 6.
I believe restructuring the tax code would actually achieve more than pretty much anything else the government does. There are so many incentives, tax breaks, etc built into our tax code that it would actually be quite interesting if a psychological study was done on how many actions we do in our daily like are directly influenced by the tax code.