Feds Claim They Need Years To List All Government Programs

[Suzanimal]

It will take the government two years just to list all federal programs and that’s “not a way to run a government,” the Comptroller of the United States told Congress Wednesday.

It will take the government two years just to list all federal programs and that’s “not a way to run a government,” the Comptroller of the United States told Congress Wednesday.

A hint of why compiling such a list will be so time-consuming is seen in two of the seemingly unrelated subjects that came up during the hearing – voodoo dolls and federal data.

Office of Management and Budget officials were required by a law passed five years ago – the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act – but they opted instead to wait until Congress approved the Data Act. Congress did so in 2014. The Data Act requires the federal government to standardize and publish spending-related reports.

But there is still no standard definition or list of federal programs. That’s a problem, said Comptroller Gene Dodaro during the joint meeting of the information technology and government operations subcommittees of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on the Data Act.

“This is not a way to run a government,” Dodaro said. “You need to have that information.”

David Mader, the man President Obama appointed as OMB’s controller, told the committee that his office won’t even start defining federal programs until they’ve first defined all underlying federal activities, so his “sense is that that won’t be finished until after May of 2017.” Obama will no longer be president then.

Mader’s assessment drew groans from committee members.

“Whoa,” said Tim Walberg, R-Michigan. “Mr. Chairman, I guess I would say, with the Taxpayer Right to Know proposal, and with the Data Act in place now, I would encourage you to bump that up, to get those programs defined. That’s the only way we gain control, as I understand it, gain control on what the size, scope, cost and responsibility of government is.”


The Taxpayers Right to Know Act, which was approved last week by the oversight committee, clarifies the definition of a government program, something Walberg said is long overdue.

“For me, it doesn’t take two years to map that,” said Rep. William Hurd, R-Texas, who is chairman of the information technology panel.

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N. Car., said the federal government’s study of hungry and angry spouses stabbing voodoo dolls, mentioned in former Sen. Tom Coburn’s ‘Wastebook’ last year, illustrates why Congress needs to know exactly how federal agencies are spending money.

“To spend $331,000 to stick pens in a voodoo doll may be important to someone, but when we have so many unbelievable needs out there, to make an informed decision, we need data,” said Meadows, who is chairman of the oversight subcommittee.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/29/feds-claim-they-need-years-to-list-all-government-programs/#ixzz3hZBFu1xj

[tod evans]

Simplest solution is to immediately cut funding to all of it!

Cut governments purse strings for 1 year, 0 disbursements for anything, no salaries, no grants, no entitlements, no war machine and most importantly no politicians..

Let it crumble!

Better than picking at this scab.

[donnay]

Simplest solution is to immediately cut funding to all of it!

Cut governments purse strings for 1 year, 0 disbursements for anything, no salaries, no grants, no entitlements, no war machine and most importantly no politicians..

Let it crumble!

Better than picking at this scab.

Best solution ever!

[Ronin Truth]

Rank them 1-N.

Scrap the bottom half.

[Henry Rogue]

Did they create a government program to count them?

[acptulsa]

It inspires great confidence that all these programs are properly overseen, are free of corruption, are not redundant and unnecessary, and are not doing more harm than good when they announce that they have no idea how many programs they run and what they are supposed to do. Does it not?

[Suzanimal]

It inspires great confidence that all these programs are properly overseen, are free of corruption, are not redundant and unnecessary, and are not doing more harm than good when they announce that they have no idea how many programs they run and what they are supposed to do. Does it not?

They'll need a government program to determine that.

[Slave Mentality]

Did they create a government program to count them?

That's the spirit. I see private sector opportunities springing up as well.

[timosman]

Parkinson's law at work - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law

[Spikender]

No doubt the final report will resemble a work by M.C. Escher.

[acptulsa]

No doubt the final report will resemble a work by M.C. Escher.

We resemble a work by M.C. Escher, climbing a stairwell as endless as a squirrel wheel in a desperate attempt to pay for all that inefficiency and corruption.

[euphemia]

Send a bunch of angry frugal moms up there. They will get it taken care of in very short order. I'd drive that carpool.

[phill4paul]

"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance."

[Christopher A. Brown]

Simplest solution is to immediately cut funding to all of it!


Logically meaning you support a lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution).

First step is creating unity upon prime constitutional intent so we can control our states and the Article V convention that actually will have the authority defund the BS swollen unconstitutional aspects.

Thise prime intents are simply stated as questions all sincere Americans can answer in agreement.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

Please agree with and accept these prime intents and rights so we can solve this serious problem of taxation without representation.

The premise of amendment is first simple preparation assuring Americans are ready to participate meaningfully. End the abridging of the purpose of free speech, secure the vote and campaign finance reform.

[DevilsAdvocate]

How can liberals possibly believe that government programs are the best way to accomplish things? How can they possibly want to grow the government even bigger? They want to put the most inefficient organization in the entire world in charge of medicine, business...etc?

[Christopher A. Brown]

It inspires great confidence that all these programs are properly overseen, are free of corruption, are not redundant and unnecessary, and are not doing more harm than good when they announce that they have no idea how many programs they run and what they are supposed to do. Does it not?

No, it does not inspire great confidence, which is why we need a lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution).

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

[TheTexan]

The solution is pretty easy, just start a federal program to start tracking the federal programs

[tod evans]

Logically meaning you support a lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution).

First step is creating unity upon prime constitutional intent so we can control our states and the Article V convention that actually will have the authority defund the BS swollen unconstitutional aspects.

Thise prime intents are simply stated as questions all sincere Americans can answer in agreement.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

Please agree with and accept these prime intents and rights so we can solve this serious problem of taxation without representation.

The premise of amendment is first simple preparation assuring Americans are ready to participate meaningfully. End the abridging of the purpose of free speech, secure the vote and campaign finance reform.

//


Look you fruitcake!

Stop quoting me and then attempting to get me to subscribe to your insanity. :mad:

This government isn't going anywhere peacefully no matter how often you spam this board with your tripe...

I don't report people or give neg-rep but for heavens sake you're one obnoxious SOB ....

Listen carefully;

I don't support your efforts!

They won't work!

If you believe otherwise you're delusional!

[Christopher A. Brown]

Look you fruitcake!

Stop quoting me and then attempting to get me to subscribe to your insanity. :mad:

This government isn't going anywhere peacefully no matter how often you spam this board with your tripe...

I don't report people or give neg-rep but for heavens sake you're one obnoxious SOB ....

Listen carefully;

I don't support your efforts!

They won't work!

If you believe otherwise you're delusional!

Accountability is everything and this is a very important matter. If you won't subscribe to these methods proven by logic, then to be supportive of our unalienable rights and law, you need to be accountable or you are worse than insane.

You have not explained why these methods of unity by agreement upon prime constitutional intent will not work. The framers basically imply them in the framing documents.

Why do you fail and deny the American perogetive to derive intent from implication after it is made clear the direct statement made to not provide enough definition to make their intent clear?

What is the great sacrifice in agreeing and accepting that the framers intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our rights?

What is the sacrifice so great as to prevent you from agreeing and accepting that IF the framers intended for us to alter or abolish gov destructive to unalienable rights THEN they intended for us to have power adequate to do so?

Logically that power can only come from our unity and the only thing that can serve the purpose of enabling that unity is freedom of speech.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Because Article V is law, the framers intent of law is that we have the power to alter or abolish is clear.

Absent any accountability for your position, If you think this strategy won't work, it is because you do not want it to work.

Or is it because you want violent revolution, or you have a mind too feeble to comprehend the framers intent. Or, you are not a sincere American.

What shall it be?

[Aspie Minarcho-Capitalist]

Is it any wonder why the US since the reagan era is in trillions of debt? Of course; however, nanny interventionist apologists will still succumb themselves for the fractional reserve kool-aid by printing enumerated amounts of paper money.

[tod evans]

Accountability is everything and this is a very important matter. If you won't subscribe to these methods proven by logic, then to be supportive of our unalienable rights and law, you need to be accountable or you are worse than insane.
Absent any accountability for your position, If you think this strategy won't work, it is because you do not want it to work.

Or is it because you want violent revolution, or you have a mind too feeble to comprehend the framers intent. Or, you are not a sincere American.

What shall it be?

//


Look you fruitcake!

Stop quoting me and then attempting to get me to subscribe to your insanity. :mad:

This government isn't going anywhere peacefully no matter how often you spam this board with your tripe...

I don't report people or give neg-rep but for heavens sake you're one obnoxious SOB ....

Listen carefully;

I don't support your efforts!

They won't work!

If you believe otherwise you're delusional!

[Ronin Truth]

Just Google that S(tuff)!

[Suzanimal]

Nobody Knows How Many Federal Agencies Exist


As bureaucracy sprawls, nobody can say with complete authority exactly how many federal agencies exist.

The twice-annual Unified Agenda of Federal Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions, which compiles agency regulatory plans in the federal pipeline, listed 60 agencies in the Spring 2015 edition, a count that can vary slightly from report to report. The Fall 2014 edition that also contained many agencies’ Regulatory Plan also listed 60.

The Administrative Conference of the United States lists 115 agencies in the appendix of its “Sourcebook of United States Executive Agencies, but notes:

[T]here is no authoritative list of government agencies. For example, FOIA.gov [maintained by the Department of Justice] lists 78 independent executive agencies and 174 components of the executive departments as units that comply with the Freedom of Information Act requirements imposed on every federal agency. This appears to be on the conservative end of the range of possible agency definitions. The United States Government Manual lists 96 independent executive units and 220 components of the executive departments. An even more inclusive listing comes from USA.gov, which lists 137 independent executive agencies and 268 units in the Cabinet.

In a 2015 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, one senator noted that “The Federal Register indicates there are over 430 departments, agencies, and sub-agencies in the federal government.” The online Federal Register Index depicts 257. The list below summarizes various tallies.

How Many Federal Agencies Exist?

Unified Agenda: 60

Administrative Conference of the United States: 115

FOIA.gov (at Department of Justice): 252

United States Government Manual: 316

Federal Register Index: 257

Regulations.gov: 89

If nobody knows how many agencies exist whose decrees we must abide, that means we don’t know how many people work for the government (let alone contractors making a living from taxpayers) nor know how many rules there are. But even when we isolate a given, knowable agency, the rise of “regulatory dark matter” may make it hard to tell exactly what is and is not a rule.

The sprawling bureaucracy, plus growing concern that issuing a rule may not even be necessary for agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to impose their will on the public calls out for congressional response.

https://cei.org/blog/nobody-knows-how-many-federal-agencies-exist