Cutting Government Waste
One of the biggest complaints I have about government, and the politicians/bureaucrats who run it, is the difficulty it has running efficiently. When you’re spending someone else’s money, the inherent bias toward wiser economic decisions is missing. When growth of an organization increases your power, there is a built-in tendency is to expand its scope. All this is at odds with those who pay the bills: tax payers.
So, I couldn’t help but shake my head at the irony in this article about the North Carolina state legislature. In an attempt to find ways to eliminate waste, “it created a new division within its permanent staff, hiring a group of analysts whose sole job is to determine whether state programs are still useful and fulfilling their intended purpose.”
This is the kind of government mentality that is pervasive throughout all levels of government. Even when they have the right goal in mind, they often go about it in a way that conflicts with the stated purpose. Does that make any sense?
Government entities should be smaller and more efficient. We’re talking about dollars and employees. Since the vast majority of dollars spent is for employees (vs. goods and services), that is where most of the focus should be… especially since there is an added benefit to gains made in this area. Obviously, effort should be spent ensuring only goods and services actually needed are purchased… and that good value is received in that process… but reducing the number of “government-paid” employees is far more important.
Here’s why:
- Obviously, no salary is necessary for each position eliminated.
- No employee, no employee benefits to be paid… and some government positions have very nice (to the employee) health and retirement plans.
- No infrastructure for that employee: no phone, desk and computer, office space, supplies, file cabinets… no electricity… no parking space… and the list goes on and on.
- No additional expenses for that employee: no substitute when sick or on vacation, no job-related travel (airfare, hotel, meals, etc.), no vehicle (for some jobs), …
- One less person biased toward justifying their position or the department/agency they work for.
- The reduction in government expenses equates to a lower need for taxes, placing more money in the hands of citizens which will be spent in other areas, promoting business growth.
- A person who is dropped from the government payroll will find a job in the private sector at whatever competitive rate the market sets for the services they provide… and that job will become available since people will have more money to spend and business opportunities will be created. Instead of being a drain on the economy, they will become a producer.
I am not advocating a slash and burn strategy in reducing the size of government… such decisions should be thoughtful. I do suggest, however, that government has expanded into certain areas that it should not be involved in, so related departments/agencies/programs should go first. Within EVERY area of government, though, every position should be RATIONALLY justified. And that is the real challenge. WHO makes that judgment?
If it requires an external, unbiased, temporary group of analysts to make the call, I suppose that’s an option. In the private sector, though, this type of efficiency drive usually comes from the top. Objective decisions are made on a larger scale and mandates passed down the management chain where, at each level, more detailed decisions are made by people with greater knowledge of where people are really needed and not. Since entire organizations might be eliminated, however, decisions MUST start at the highest level… there’s no point in struggling over whether a clerk in some remote branch is needed if the entire division will be shut down.
Obviously, this would take some time. Nor would it be good to dump thousands of employees on the job market all at once. It should be a transitional effort so the savings will be felt by taxpayers and business activity will have a chance to be stimulated, thereby creating new job opportunities. It will take time and dedication to accomplish the overall goal, but it CAN be done… WE just need to INSIST on it.
Envision a 10 year program to reduce the size of government (in terms of employees) by, say, 30%… accompanied by a similar effort to reduce other spending, starting with “pork barrel projects” but including general, overall spending. Think of what all those dollars saved could accomplish when returned to us tax payers and unleashed into the economy based on smarter, consumer decisions!
