Obama’s “budget cuts”
April 21, 2009
When “Slick Willie” came to town with his slack-jawed “aw shucks” hayseed demeanor and after first disbelieving he actually had been elected to our highest office, I offered the speculation that he wouldn’t last, maybe not through the first four years.
Wrong. And now comes the still wet-behind-the-ears pretender, The One, who after shocking us all with his trillions of debt dollars wants to “cut spending” by $100 million in 90 days. That was the charge given to cabinet members yesterday.
Notice that The One did not say they should cut federal programs, the core of the problem. Where are the “cuts” coming from? It’s a very old game in Washington. Here’s how it works.
Every federal department, agency or others supported by appropriations, simply looks at the president’s proposed budget and cuts “staff” and outlays from imaginary dollars. The result is that at least the paltry $100 million in “reductions” is achieved, maybe even some more.
For example, every agency has “unfilled” staff positions that are there for no more reason than to “cut” them in times like these, when the electorate becomes a bit riled. The old smoke and mirrors game played over and over.
This brings to mind a personal experience while I worked in Washington. President Lyndon Johnson was struggling in his bid to keep the presidency and his campaign was not going well. LBJ had told the Urban Renewal Administration to change their signage on every urban renewal project in the country (some 1500 of them) to include at least two large pictures of him on each project site
I pointed out with dollars and cents figures on how many more thousands of dollars this would cost taxpayers. But of course, it was the political season and the new signs went up. You rightfully could say this was an illegal use of federal funds.
But that was not the end of it. As the campaign wore on, LBJ wanted more action from all of the departments and agencies. Mayors throughout the country most of whom were Democrats were screaming for more money help from Washington.
So LBJ issued the edict that all federal agencies and departments were to cut the processing time of applications for project funding by 50%, to cut the red tape so to speak, to bolster his campaign.
I was assigned to the interagency task force covering the Urban Renewal Program. I had cut my teeth on that program in the Atlanta region and was thoroughly familiar how the flawed program worked. As a result, it was reported that the amount of paperwork reduction in the urban renewal program alone in one year amounted to two-thirds the height of the Washington Monument. Let me tell you, it would have been twice that amount if all of my recommendations had been included. Over all, it was a mere ice crystal, not even the tip of an iceberg.
But, of course, Richard Nixon won and he named George Romney to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Romney picked up on LBJ’s charge and expanded the idea of processing time reductions even more. His efforts resulted in the elimination of and entire federal program, Urban Renewal, and I count myself a major contributor to that effort.
So when the order comes down to “cut” the peanuts millions in 90 days, it’s another ho-hum task for departments and agencies. Mark my word, no one will be fired, there will not be a reduction-in-force (RIF) of any federal agency, not a single program will be eliminated and the bureaucracy goes merrily along, still in charge, still obeying orders.
I believe most Americans would much prefer a tax cut, a real cut in taxes, over a meaningless “budget cut”.
Ernest Norsworthy
emnorsworthy@earthlink.net
http://norsworthyopinion.com