FatCratz

Americans Want Smaller Government; Politicians Don't

Dick Morris has been wrong about a lot of things. But he can read polls. His recent piece focuses on the crucial irony of today's politics: Americans are increasingly opposed to a bigger role for the federal government at precisely the moment when the federal government is growing faster and larger than at any time in its history:

• Rasmussen Poll asked voters if they wanted an economic system of complete free enterprise or preferred more government involvement in managing the economy. By 77-19, they voted against a government role, up seven points from last month.
• And in the Fox News poll — the very same survey that gave Obama a 62 percent approval rating and reported that 68 percent of voters are “satisfied” with his first hundred days — voters, by 50-38, supported a smaller government that offered fewer services over a larger government that provided more.
• By 42-8, the Fox News poll (conducted on April 22-23) found that voters felt Obama had expanded government rather than contracted it (42 percent said it was the same size) and,
• By 46-30, reported believing that big government was more of a danger to the nation than big business (Fox News).
• By 62-20, they said government spending, under Obama, was “out of control.” (Fox News)

The key driver behind the tea parties is not the taxes people are paying today. It is the sense that government is growing too big, too fast, and is involved in too many facets of our lives.

Marion Barry: "I Don't Have A Tax Issue!"

A FatCrat learns quickly the benefits of stretching the truth. Thus, Marion Barry can state that he "doesn't have a tax issue." That's the same Marion Barry who is over $277,000 in arrears on federal and DC taxes, has his wages garnished by the IRS to the tune of $2,700 a month, and by The District for $350 a month.

Barry popped up in local DC news again because he purchased an $800 opera jacket for his girlfriend at a Ritz Carlton Gala Saturday night.

A FatCrat also quickly learns the benefit of having no shame.

Questioned about the purchase, Barry was proud to have outbid Wolf Blitzer. "I started out bidding $700, then he bid $750," Barry said. "He couldn't get it at $750, so I bid higher."

Asked about the propriety of the purchase, Barry said his legal troubles shouldn't be a factor in what clothing he buys from his girlfriend. And to a certain degree, he is of course correct. The portion of his wages left after being garnished are his to spend as he pleases.

The real problem here is that he is collecting wages at all from the District while owing same district thousands of dollars. And that his "untouchable" status led federal prosecutors to back of their request for prison time.

And that he is still invited to Celebrity Galas at the Ritz.

FatCratz Speak Out on Swine Flu

President Obama's Secretary of Health and Human Services made the following startling comment on the Swine Flu:

"  "

She was responding to this earlier statement, from Obama's Director of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention:

"   "

Actually, the turnover in top positions brought about by a new presidential administration is one of the few inefficiencies of the federal government that FatCratz celebrates. It's far better to get a new batch of politically appointed FatCratz in place every four years or so than to have Health Ministers for life.

And there is of course no need to worry, as Charles E. Johnson, the Acting Secretary of HHS, has over three decades of experience. In the field of accounting.

Making Rules is More Fun Than Obeying Them

Members of Congress are good at making rules. Obeying them, not so much.

One of the key earmark reforms was additional transparency. Members would be required to post links on their websites detailing the projects for which they had requested funding:

Under a rule adopted by the committee for the first time this year, members seeking earmarks were required to post an active link on their congressional websites describing the details of their desired pet projects. The committee gave members until April 4 ... to post online links containing the same earmark request information that members submitted to the committee. ...Members who did not comply with the new rule were supposed to have their earmark requests rejected out of hand.

In Congress-speak, "rejected out of hand" means "don't worry, the deadline was meaningless":

more than 70 members missed the April 4 deadline for having active Web links... Despite the numerous late entries, the Appropriations Committee is taking a lenient approach. “We will continue work with offices to bring them into compliance,” said Appropriations Committee spokeswoman Kirstin Brost.

Debt Day

As of Sunday, the federal government is spending more money for this fiscal year's operations than it is taking in. In other words, from now until September 30th, we'll be adding (at least) $9.7 billion to our  debt each day.

That's over over five months out of the fiscal year of spending money we don't have.

Of course, we're told such deficit spending is the key to getting out of a recession. But it's our tax money, and one must wonder whether we'd have gotten more bang for our buck had we been allowed to spend it ourselves.

You're Fired! European edition...

How hard is it to fire a FatCrat? That's one of our perennial questions, and we've come up with some excellent examples from inside the beltway. However, by personal experience, I know that Europe still has us beat in the bureaucratic job security department. Maybe we're headed in this direction.

Here's an illustration from one of our faithful expat readers in Germany:

I recently heard of a colleague who was a lecturer in a German University (like a professorship, but lacking some of the rights and responsibilities). The important point is that in the German system this person is a state official, effectively a bureaucrat with a PhD (or  the German equivalent). Despite the fact that she refused to offer classes or hold lectures, she continued to receive compensation. She could only be fired for "gross negligence," but gross negligence doesn't include failing to teach classes.

In this instance, the bureaucrat/lecturer was finally fired, showing what it takes to get fired as a German state employee--stop living in Germany.

Know Your Member II: The Combination

Thanks to a new contributor, here's the second installment of Know Your Member (explained here). Like the first, this one is a little hard to believe. But I'm not sure how you could make it up, either.

I read your story about Congressman who was throwing out staplers, and had to laugh. I worked for a member who from time to time was a little paranoid, and though the following didn't happen to me, I was in the office when it occurred.

Our boss was at the airport getting ready to board his plane on the way back to the district, when he called in a panic because he had left his eyeglasses and some other personal items in his DC apartment. He wanted an assistant to run to his house, pick them up, and deliver them to the airport before the plane took off. The only problem was that the assistant didn't have keys to the place.

Fortunately, there was one of those real estate key boxes on the door with a combo lock. Here's where things get a bit surreal. The Congressman didn't want to reveal the combo over the phone. It wasn't clear whether he thought someone might be wiretapping his calls, or someone in the seat beside him might be listening in (and know who he was, and where he lived, and memorize the combo, etc.).

Solution? The Congressman asked his assistant to guess the combo. Four or five digits, one digit at a time. After each guess, he'd give hints ("higher" or "lower"). And when he got it right, he'd signal in the affirmative.

I Want That Job

We all have a little FatCrat in us... Who, after all, if offered this job, could turn it down:

The Education Department will eliminate a Bush-era "education policy attaché" based in Paris -- the one in France -- whose annual salary, housing allowance and business expenses exceed $630,000.

The good news is that the position is being cut. The bad news is that it existed in the first place.

Bureaucrats can't be trusted to be frugal with other people's money. Not because they are evil, but because they are human. It's not a question of additional review or accountability or systems. It's the question of the inherent logic of the public expenditure. Bigger budgets are a sign of bureaucratic success, and the Department of Education has gone from $14 billion in 1980 to as much as $100 billion in this decade. Even if you correct for inflation and population growth, more than double.

The good news in this article is that it seems someone at the Washington Post is reading FatCratz (see our earlier post):

The Department of Homeland Security has started buying its supplies in bulk and -- to the surprise and delight of bureaucrats -- discovered it's much cheaper that way.

We'll take that as a complement, though it could also mean our humor is so obvious that even the Post can come up with it on their own. At least we beat them to it.

Why Not Let Us Vote on Stimulus Projects?

We're seeing lots of local news stories about grants submitted for stimulus money. Like this one, to study seaweed:

Texas A&M-Corpus Christi and the City Parks and Recreation Department have applied for a $3.1 million grant to study seaweed. The federal stimulus money would be used to conduct a variety of different studies. The university, for example, would study the formation of seaweed and investigate possible new uses of seaweed, as bio-fuel for example.

We have no way of knowing whether this grant, for example, will ever be made, until after it's been made, for example. And then of course we'll have moved on, for real.

I have an idea. Why not let us vote? If we have websites dedicated to transparency, why not post incoming grant applications online for the public to review BEFORE they're funded. We can rate them, and the public rating can be one factor among many determining whether or not they are funded. Or the only factor.

Let's face it, we can't trust bureaucrats to be discriminating, particularly when they're being told to give away almost a trillion dollars, and fast. After all, it's better that the money be spent wastefully, even fraudulently, than not at all.

USDA II: Fun With Acronyms

You're Tom Vilsack, new Secretary of Agriculture. Your headquarters building has eight miles of corridors. Someone reminds you that you run the National Finance Center, a payroll service that runs a huge proportion of all government payments. Then they hand you a partial list of the operating units in the NFC. Here they are:

ABCO, ABCOINQ, ADJP, BATCHFOC, BCST, BEAR, BLCO, CADI, CAS, CETR, CFST, CLER, CRED, CULPRPT, DATADICT, DFIS, DOTSE, DPRS, EARN, EEOT, EIDS, EMIS, EPIC/HCUP, EPP, FAADS, FEDS, FEDSINQ, FESI, FFIS, FINQ, FOCUSRPT, FTSP, GVTS, HCUP, IMPF, IRIS, ISPF, LEDG, LIST, MANLOG, 13, MASC, MATS, MISC, MPOL, PACT, PAYE, PC-BLCO, PC-BRCD, PC-FEDS, PC-MISC, PCMS, PC-PEST, PC-PRCH, PC-PROP, PC-TARE, PC-TRVL, PEP51, PKI, PINE, PINQ, PLAN, PMIS, PMSO, PRCH, PRCHENT, PRCHINQ, PRES, PROP, RETM, RFQS, SAMS, SETS, SF-279, SINQ, SPIN, SPPS, STAR, TELE, TIME, TINQ, TMGT, TPIR, TRAI, 14, TRAN, TRVL, UCFE, UNAL, UTVN, VPSPRINT, WTWO, INQ

That is the sprawling beast that is one division within one cabinet-level department. Multiply that 15 executive departments, and untold divisions within each one.

Are you getting your money's worth?