How come we never read about bills in Congress -- from either party -- to eliminate federal agencies? The answer is simple: Neither the R's nor the D's has ever shown any interest in decreasing the reach of government once they assume power.

 

In recent years, the greatest percentage increase of federal workers came during the Ronald Reagan administration.

It appears that in your world, administrators at the federal level are good & smart, while administrators at the state & local level are bad & ignorant.

 

THAT is the true Hogwash.

 

No, but at least the feds can operate as a check against some of the stupid things that go on at the local level. Like Texas and its schoolbooks.

To end slavery they passed an ammendment . There is no power the Federal government has to control education. So the work around was a complete manipulation of the system, by black mailing states with its citizens tax dollars. I trust local governments much more to do what's right for their kids than the federal government one size fits all approach.

 

Why would you care how a school district a thousand miles away teaches it students ? Why is that any of your business ?

 

I believe in the concept of equality for all. I do care that there are some places where crummy local officials would sacrifice their children's education to balance a budget. There are still lots of places in this country where folks "don't see no sense in any book-larnin'." We, as a country, should care about that. Instead, we are a country that has a mean streak of anti-intellectualism, and that streak goes across many racial/ethnic lines.

 

To the bolded, I don't. When you winnow it down to the local level, the talent pool for capable elected officials thins out quite a bit, and you end up with some really dumb people in positions of high power, simply because they had the gumption to run for office and were decent salesmen.

I believe in the concept of equality for all. I do care that there are some places where crummy local officials would sacrifice their children's education to balance a budget. There are still lots of places in this country where folks "don't see no sense in any book-larnin'." We, as a country, should care about that. Instead, we are a country that has a mean streak of anti-intellectualism, and that streak goes across many racial/ethnic lines.

 

To the bolded, I don't. When you winnow it down to the local level, the talent pool for capable elected officials thins out quite a bit, and you end up with some really dumb people in positions of high power, simply because they had the gumption to run for office and were decent salesmen.

 

Not really a good argument to make with who is running for president this year.

 

I don't abide by your concept of the federal government knows best. That mindset has led to all the troubles we have. It's serfdom.

 

I don't buy that voters in New York should have any say on how parents in Texas want to run a school.

IRS, it's not on the list but needs to go bye bye or at least a major thinning of the herd.

 

THIS! A thousand times, THIS!

I could possibly agree with states having the ability to do so, but I have horror stories of dealing with a local board of education. It stems from local officials not having the background in various disciplines, resulting in them not understanding curriculum. "We didn't have to learn that when I was in school, so kids now don't need it either."

 

Is is unfortunate that there are some bad choices elected to school boards. Yet, over the span of our nation's history, we have been able to develope a nation that has brought a better way of life to world, with inventions, medical advancements, scientific advancements and new ways of doing business. We have often beat up ourselves over how we are educating the youth of America, but we still manage to educate our youth to get the job done. We do get some help from well educated immigrants, who see great opportunities by coming to America to work. It is sad that some believe the average American is to stupid to run their own lives. I will put my faith in the individual citizen to make America a better place, not some government official or bureaucrat.

THIS! A thousand times, THIS!

 

 

Flat tax would eliminate 99% of the IRS bureaucracy.

A real smart person told me “by constitutional law, originally education of children was defined as a state responsibility. Only when federal handouts and grants were given did they gain control. DOE was never conceived of originally.” Liberals, or their ideology, have been in control of the DOE for quite a while now. How’s that going? The fact that the majority of the BGP poll voters are picking Department of Education should say something. Maybe things need to go in a different direction regarding the DOE.

Does anybody realize that for every dollar invested in IRS it produces 6?

 

Nobody is a fan but...death and taxes.

Added, along with a "none of the above" choice.

 

I just checked every box.

IRS, it's not on the list but needs to go bye bye or at least a major thinning of the herd.

 

THIS! A thousand times, THIS!

 

Flat tax would eliminate 99% of the IRS bureaucracy.

 

In order to do this you would have to get rid of Congress first, as the IRS just enforces rules put in place by congress.

IRS, it's not on the list but needs to go bye bye or at least a major thinning of the herd.

 

THIS! A thousand times, THIS!

 

Flat tax would eliminate 99% of the IRS bureaucracy.

 

I would prefer the Fair Tax. FairTax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I just checked every box.

Whatever floats your boat.

In order to do this you would have to get rid of Congress first, as the IRS just enforces rules put in place by congress.

 

We need to have Congress to pass a law changing the tax code. But Congress then would a lot of its power over the citizens of America.

I think all, or most, are necessary, but I think the redundancy is what needs to be fixed. For example, and I am only using this example because I had to write a paper on this subject, the USDA, FDA and EPA all have jurisdiction over the use, testing and administering of GMO's. All get federal funding for their particular role, so tax money spent is multiplied by three. None of them want to lose their federal funding, so they make sure to use all money that they are granted, resulting in the wasting of tax money. In my opinion, you designate one department to addressing GMO's, and provide only that department with funding.

 

I realize that this is just one example, and an oddly specific one at that, but like I said I am relatively familiar with this particular issue so I feel as if I can offer at least a little insight. I am also fairly certain that redundancy issues are quite common throughout all departments.

 

Shore up department responsibilities as to avoid multiple departments from having overlapping responsibilities and provide federal funding to departments for only those specifically defined responsibilities, instead of giving multiple departments money for all doing essentially the same thing.