Rfalcon51
09-25-2011, 02:13 PM
Please feel free to send to your Senators and Congressman/Woman if you feel inclined. Or critique it.
Dear Senator _______,
I believe that decreasing the meals and incidental expense (M&IE) per diem that Federal employees get while on travel status would benefit our nation’s finances. The following website has the current rates of M&IE per day of travel: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/101518. These rates include money for both the actual food purchase and the associated tips. Even though tip money is included in these figures, the M&IE rate could be greatly reduced.
Take for example the $71 rate, which is for large urban cities. When broken down $36 of the $71 is for dinner. Is it really necessary that federal employees have about a $30 meal when on travel (and a $6 tip)? I do not believe so, and if the public found out that federal employees were having that expensive of a dinner paid for by the government there would be justifiable public outrage. Many in our nation are struggling to even provide basic meals for their families, why should federal employees be afforded such luxury? What should happen is that the M&IE rates should be reduced, and if the employee wants to supplement their M&IE rate with their own money to afford a more expensive meal they can do so. There is no way a dinner in New Orleans has to cost $30 plus tip, paying that much is a choice.
Also, if employees do not spend all of their M&IE they get to keep it. While some federal employees eat expensive meals paid for by the government while on travel status, many spend as little as possible to get a “bonus” from their travel. Reducing the M&IE rates would help prevent both from occurring.
I am sure there would be backlash against reducing the M&IE rates. I would think many within the government would argue that if M&IE rates were reduced, federal employees would be less likely to travel to conferences and educational opportunities, as they would be taking on more personal cost themselves. That is a good thing, the federal government should be trying to reduce travel as much as possible, and offering most training opportunities for its employees locally (government travel and training in general needs to be examined very closely as there is a lot of unnecessary expense). The other area that would likely produce backlash is restaurants and establishments that benefit from the lavish M&IE rates.
Both types of backlash would be overcome by no argument being able to be made to the public on why the current M&IE rates are reasonable. Also, for those within the government, if the choice were between some sort of pay or benefit cut or M&IE rates being cut they would choose M&IE cuts.
I do not know how much this could potentially save, as I am not sure how many days of travel federal employees across the nation accumulate per Fiscal Year. I would assume though that overall the amount of travel is staggering, and cutting M&IE rates would be worthwhile in regards to our nation’s budget.
Sincerely,
Rfalcon51
Dear Senator _______,
I believe that decreasing the meals and incidental expense (M&IE) per diem that Federal employees get while on travel status would benefit our nation’s finances. The following website has the current rates of M&IE per day of travel: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/101518. These rates include money for both the actual food purchase and the associated tips. Even though tip money is included in these figures, the M&IE rate could be greatly reduced.
Take for example the $71 rate, which is for large urban cities. When broken down $36 of the $71 is for dinner. Is it really necessary that federal employees have about a $30 meal when on travel (and a $6 tip)? I do not believe so, and if the public found out that federal employees were having that expensive of a dinner paid for by the government there would be justifiable public outrage. Many in our nation are struggling to even provide basic meals for their families, why should federal employees be afforded such luxury? What should happen is that the M&IE rates should be reduced, and if the employee wants to supplement their M&IE rate with their own money to afford a more expensive meal they can do so. There is no way a dinner in New Orleans has to cost $30 plus tip, paying that much is a choice.
Also, if employees do not spend all of their M&IE they get to keep it. While some federal employees eat expensive meals paid for by the government while on travel status, many spend as little as possible to get a “bonus” from their travel. Reducing the M&IE rates would help prevent both from occurring.
I am sure there would be backlash against reducing the M&IE rates. I would think many within the government would argue that if M&IE rates were reduced, federal employees would be less likely to travel to conferences and educational opportunities, as they would be taking on more personal cost themselves. That is a good thing, the federal government should be trying to reduce travel as much as possible, and offering most training opportunities for its employees locally (government travel and training in general needs to be examined very closely as there is a lot of unnecessary expense). The other area that would likely produce backlash is restaurants and establishments that benefit from the lavish M&IE rates.
Both types of backlash would be overcome by no argument being able to be made to the public on why the current M&IE rates are reasonable. Also, for those within the government, if the choice were between some sort of pay or benefit cut or M&IE rates being cut they would choose M&IE cuts.
I do not know how much this could potentially save, as I am not sure how many days of travel federal employees across the nation accumulate per Fiscal Year. I would assume though that overall the amount of travel is staggering, and cutting M&IE rates would be worthwhile in regards to our nation’s budget.
Sincerely,
Rfalcon51