Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

62 Cuts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 62 Cuts

    62 agencies and programs Trump wants to eliminate

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...5tr?li=BBnbcA1
    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

  • #2
    It's a nice 'conservative wish list' but it will never happen, even with a GOP congress.
    “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
    “To talk of many things:
    Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
    Of cabbages—and kings—
    And why the sea is boiling hot—
    And whether pigs have wings.”
    ― Lewis Carroll

    Comment


    • #3
      http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...ol-hill-236146

      GOP members:

      “Not our starting point.” “Not something that will fly around here politically.” “Congress will do its own budget.”
      The Presidents Budget is nothing more than a "this is how I see it." Has no standing nor status.

      And key GOP lawmakers in both the House and Senate are already signaling they won’t move forward with Trump’s proposal.
      President Trump is about to discover that fact......

      Rep. Hal Rogers, former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and still a senior member of the panel, said he plans to make a personal pitch to the White House in support of a long list of programs that have “proved themselves worthy.”

      The Kentucky Republican vowed to fight for agencies that help create jobs, such as the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Economic Development Association, as well as grants that focus on community development, all of which the White House has proposed eliminating. Rogers also pointed to infrastructure programs like Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, or TIGER, grants, and another initiative that benefits rural airports.

      Some of the things that a poor district like mine have come to depend upon, I’m obligated to fight for,” Rogers said. “Those are the areas that need help the most.”
      He's not a left leaning GOP Representative.

      From the Presidents OBM Director:

      “We’re always dealing with special interests from back home, we’re always dealing with lobbyists back home. The president is dealing with none of that,” Mulvaney added, in describing his own experience as a lawmaker. “He certainly didn’t focus on how these programs might impact a certain congressional district.”
      He'll learn quickly....

      "I think the president's proposal is not our starting point," said Rep. Steve Stivers (Ohio), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, which is tasked with safeguarding the House majority. "A $54 billion trade from domestic to defense spending — and I consider myself a defense hawk — I think that some of the cuts are a little drastic in certain places."

      "I've been here 22 years. I've seen a whole bunch of presidential budgets submitted," said Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.). "It's still the House and Senate Budget committees that decide, and ultimately it's the Appropriations Committee and whatever happens in the fall that decides."
      Lucas added, "I respect the president for making tough choices. But I need my county [Farm Service Agency] offices, and I need to make sure we have the ability to feed ourselves and make sure nobody goes hungry."

      For many Republicans, one of the most onerous cuts proposed by Trump was a $5.8 billion reduction to the National Institutes of Health, amounting to nearly one-fifth of the agency's budget.
      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
      “To talk of many things:
      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
      Of cabbages—and kings—
      And why the sea is boiling hot—
      And whether pigs have wings.”
      ― Lewis Carroll

      Comment


      • #4
        Not enough. But, it's a start...

        The problem with Congress is that most of those in the Republican party there are just "Business as usual" politicians and bureaucrats that don't want to upset the apple cart at all.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
          It's a nice 'conservative wish list' but it will never happen, even with a GOP congress.
          Agreed.

          Though, reading through at least the partial list, many of them are 'eliminate because it's duplicate'. In those situations, I'd say that there's some chance for elimination or combining (which would cut down on overhead). If they just combined all the duplicates, there's probably a couple thousand federal jobs that could be written out of the budget. Then eliminated 10 programs outright and that's 'Uge' savings right there.
          Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
            Not enough. But, it's a start...

            The problem with Congress is that most of those in the Republican party there are just "Business as usual" politicians and bureaucrats that don't want to upset the apple cart at all.
            All politics is local...,

            Wise saying when it comes to Congress.
            “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
            “To talk of many things:
            Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
            Of cabbages—and kings—
            And why the sea is boiling hot—
            And whether pigs have wings.”
            ― Lewis Carroll

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
              Agreed.

              Though, reading through at least the partial list, many of them are 'eliminate because it's duplicate'. In those situations, I'd say that there's some chance for elimination or combining (which would cut down on overhead). If they just combined all the duplicates, there's probably a couple thousand federal jobs that could be written out of the budget. Then eliminated 10 programs outright and that's 'Uge' savings right there.
              I agree with you, and there is Trump's business sense and (our Congress doesn't have any) that's why it won't happen, a lot of these departments and agencies essentially do the same thing and should be consolidated and the redundant ones scrapped, but it will not happen, CE is right, "politics start at the local level"!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                All politics is local...,

                Wise saying when it comes to Congress.
                And, that is a big part of the problem here. The other big part is that some Congressman facing the loss of millions in his district from budget cuts doesn't see any potential in those cuts being replaced by other jobs or income to his district. That is, he acts like a manager.

                We don't need a ton of management in Washington, we need a ton of leadership.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                  ...We don't need a ton of management in Washington, we need a ton of leadership...
                  Unfortunately, we're not getting it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by III Corps View Post
                    Unfortunately, we're not getting it.
                    Actually we are.
                    You may not like what he did or the way he does it, but this budget proposal shows a level of leadership that is unprecedented in Washington.
                    He is actually trying to address an enormous problem rather than just kicking it down the road like so many of our recent presidents.


                    None of it may happen, but he has now set the bar that the GOP is going to be measured against. That may put some pressure on them to actually deliver on their promises.
                    Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                    Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      We won't anywhere near the entire list, but we will get some. It is hard to defend redundant Federal jobs in a tough economy.
                      Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                        Actually we are.
                        You may not like what he did or the way he does it, but this budget proposal shows a level of leadership that is unprecedented in Washington.
                        He is actually trying to address an enormous problem rather than just kicking it down the road like so many of our recent presidents.


                        None of it may happen, but he has now set the bar that the GOP is going to be measured against. That may put some pressure on them to actually deliver on their promises.
                        This is what I'm seeing. Trump may spout off nonsense regularly but where the rubber meets the road he's moving forward. He's exhibiting leadership in trying to pare down government. That's one of the big reasons he's getting so much pushback. All the bureaucrats, managers, and vested interests don't want to see their gravy train disappear.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                          This is what I'm seeing. Trump may spout off nonsense regularly but where the rubber meets the road he's moving forward. He's exhibiting leadership in trying to pare down government. That's one of the big reasons he's getting so much pushback. All the bureaucrats, managers, and vested interests don't want to see their gravy train disappear.
                          He's going to learn you can't dump the people that voter for you. This budget does that. Luckily for him it will go no where.
                          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                          “To talk of many things:
                          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                          Of cabbages—and kings—
                          And why the sea is boiling hot—
                          And whether pigs have wings.”
                          ― Lewis Carroll

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            We found with reforms over here that in the end its the voters that stop many cuts and rationalisations. Take our example of hospital casualty departments. A good deal of people recognise the logic of having a smaller number of Accident and Emergency units but much larger well equipped with lots of specialist trauma staff on hand rather than many small units none of them very good at dealing with complicated cases quickly and with out dated equipment etc and therefore some of the old fashioned ones will have to close to allow concentration of the leading edge ones. Everyone recognises this but they don't want the one in their town to be one of the ones that closes and will fight tooth and nail to keep it even to the point of kicking out the sitting MP if he disagrees and electing one who will oppose closure. As a result any reform becomes impossible. And I suspect you will find similar sorts of reaction in the USA to a great many rationalisations whether they make sense or not
                            Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                            Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                              We found with reforms over here that in the end its the voters that stop many cuts and rationalisations. Take our example of hospital casualty departments. A good deal of people recognise the logic of having a smaller number of Accident and Emergency units but much larger well equipped with lots of specialist trauma staff on hand rather than many small units none of them very good at dealing with complicated cases quickly and with out dated equipment etc and therefore some of the old fashioned ones will have to close to allow concentration of the leading edge ones. Everyone recognises this but they don't want the one in their town to be one of the ones that closes and will fight tooth and nail to keep it even to the point of kicking out the sitting MP if he disagrees and electing one who will oppose closure. As a result any reform becomes impossible. And I suspect you will find similar sorts of reaction in the USA to a great many rationalisations whether they make sense or not
                              You would be wrong.

                              Few of the positions cut impact Americans in the manner you suggest. It is State jobs that could create the situation you describe.
                              Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X