Smaller Government: Will Obama’s Latest Plan Move Us Toward a Balanced Budget?

COMMENTARY | You have probably heard the latest news about President Barack Obama’s recommendation to consolidate government agencies. The initial part of the plan would merge six organizations targeting trade and commerce into one. According to his speech, this would eliminate 1,000 to 2,000 jobs and result in a savings of $3 billion over 10 years. These jobs will be eliminated through “attrition,” or elimination of positions after the worker retires or moves on to another position.

I can’t speak for a majority of Americans, but I can put forth my somewhat conflicted beliefs on this approach. If these agencies have areas of overlap and result in wasted money every day that they exist, the elimination should happen now instead of via attrition over a ten year period. Why do I admit that my beliefs are “somewhat conflicted?” Well, this approach would basically move the money from one of Uncle Sam’s pockets to another (he has many). If these positions were to be swiftly eliminated and the percentage on unemployment increased in the same time frame that would be considered a negative result. This negative result is a possibility, but not a guarantee.

Let’s compare 10 years of unnecessary spending to less than a year spent on unemployment benefits. Keep in mind that you, as a taxpayer, are supporting both of these ventures. Sure, employers pay into the unemployment benefits system. Remember, though, that the initial period of benefits is covered by the employer (federal government). During our current jobs crisis these benefits have been extended multiple times. The actual number of extension periods and length of time will vary by state. Although the states are footing the bill for these extensions, it is still coming out of your pocket for the recipients in your state. Which of these options do you consider to be a better use of your dollars?

There is a concern that this is an election year attempt at finally moving toward a commitment to smaller government made in the January 2011 State Of The Union speech. My own analogy would refer to the ancient practice of soldiers destroying the land as they retreat from a land they had once conquered. As you can tell, my stated comparison is not as “politically correct” as the publicly stated views that you will see in the press. Considering the points made above, I agree with the approach of smaller government although I completely disagree with the proposed attrition method.


People also view

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *