62 and Counting...
Interesting stuff here that can be looked at from both points of view. What I do see is a lot of redundancy and monies for specific regions. It also appears to me that a lot of these programs should be administered at State level and integrated into their own perspective budgets. The elephant in the room is:
"lacks evidence that it is being effectively implemented."
“duplicative" of other programs”
“poorly targeted and spread thinly across thousands of districts with scant evidence of impact."
Just to name a few… The bottom line is the Government has never functioned from a business perspective. The status quo of throwing money at a program and claiming it has been fixed has been obsolete for a long time. There is never any follow up to see if the monies allocated are meeting the intended outcome and is the program being administered effectively. In business it is an easy decision; if you have a program that has consistently not produced the intended outcome it is time to re-evaluate and do what is best for the business. When you couple this with the layers of redundancy of like programs the cuts aren’t quite as bad as it seems.
When it comes to budget cuts there is always more “losers” than “winners” however; budget cuts all come down to a couple of things.
-Is the program producing measurable results that are equitable to the cost?
-Is this program being duplicated by another entity or program?
-Is the program still relevant?
-Should another entity be funding and administering the program (States)?
-Can the program be streamlined/eliminated to reduce costs with negligible impact?
At the end of the day the layers upon layers of bureaucracy, redundancy, and lack of producing intended results has to be evaluated. This coupled with the overcrowding of personnel in charge of or assigned to the plethora government agencies needs to be thinned out.
I know from personal experience the difference between working for a corporation and the government. In my “previous life”… I was employed by a private sector company that worked directly with “Big Army”. In the private sector if another task came up that needed to be accomplished there was not more money allocated or additional personnel committed. The new requirement was evaluated and somebody got to be the lucky person to make it happen. And just to caveat; in the corporate sector you either figured it out or you moved out. Conversely; the government has layers upon layers of agencies doing the exact same thing at a different level hence the dreaded mention of “Red Tape” At the risk of being Captain Obvious the government has too many layers of “leadership” and an inordinate amount of layers of agencies to complete even the smallest of tasks. This coupled with egregious mismanagement and misappropriation of funds has resulted in potentially billions of dollars that could be saved or allocated programs that are producing the desired end state. At the end of the day if you dig a little below the surface you will find that the proposed cuts do not necessarily mean an end to the services that are being looked at. What this does is put the onus on those administering the programs to provide and actionable course of action that accomplishes what the intent of the program was initially created for. This coupled with other programs that are duplicating the same efforts will have to come on line to continue to meet a measurable need.
The Bottom, Bottom Line is this; I hope that this is just the first round of assessing programs that are not demonstrating tangible result and continuing to thin out the herd…
Blog has been viewed (167) times.