• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Ron Paul proposes saving $1T by scrapping five federal departments

Let's move on to NIST. Little considered, eliminating it would effect all of us. For instance, would that gallon of gas, @ $3.81 per, still remain a full gallon?
The Office of Weights and Measures promotes uniformity in U.S. weights and measures laws, regulations, and standards to achieve equity between buyers and sellers in the marketplace. This enhances consumer confidence, enables U.S. businesses to compete fairly at home and abroad, and strengthens the U.S. economy.

OWM partners with the National Conference on Weights and Measures (NCWM), an organization of State and local weights and measures officials and representatives of business, industry, consumer groups, and Federal agencies, to develop U.S. standards in the form of uniform laws, regulations, and methods of practice. OWM serves as the U.S. representative to the International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) to bring efficiency and cost savings to U.S. manufacturers and other stakeholders doing business overseas, through the promotion of harmonized international standards and regulatory practices.

OWM ensures traceability of state weights and measures standards to the SI; develops procedures for legal metrology tests and inspections, and conducts training for laboratory metrologists and weights and measures officials. OWM provides guidance on the model weights and measures laws and regulations adopted by the NCWM and coordinates the development and publication of key NCWM publications.

It is estimated that sales of products or services impacted by weights and measures laws in the United States represent approximately 50 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. Industry sectors potentially affected by the decisions of the NCWM include retail food sales, other retail sales, petroleum products, transportation, and chemicals.

Weights and Measures

The anti-regulation lobby may not appreciate it, but I when I buy a gallon, ounce or pound, of anything, I want to get what I'm buying and so do manufacturers, for that matter.
Click to expand...
 
Gina said:
Yes, I do. However there is information so critical to the welfare of our nation, like this, that we should have it under our control. Outsourcing is not always the answer.
Click to expand...

It is when there is not Constitutional mandate for the expenditure of money or power related to a particular item or issue.

Gina said:
As far as FEMA, of course it comes under the purview of the "General Welfare Clause".
Click to expand...

I assumed that's where you were going. I should know better than to ask that question of a Liberal and a woman. Obviously you have a flawed understanding of what those words "general welfare and common defense" mean, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain it to an individual who is doubly unprepared to comprehend it.

Gina said:
Look around the country this year alone. There are communities which have been devastated by storms and related natural disasters. I'm sure the first thing a person in Joplin, Missouri was thinking about was the constitutionality of national disaster relief. I have a friend who worked there for a short bit, then was pulled off to work on the flooding in North Dakota. Joplin was pretty much destroyed. Workers had to be bussed in daily because there was no place to stay in town. Destruction like that is so enormous that state funds and resources are not sufficient to deal with it.

Of course, if your community is ever severely damaged, you are free to refuse help.
Click to expand...

Gina, I work for the third largest Gas/Electric utility company in the United States. Our service territory covers a fair portion of New England, most of upstate New York, and Long Island, New York. We've had three rather unpleasant tornados and Hurricane Irene affect the area I work in since the first of June. The week of Irene, I ended up putting in 95 hours at the office. I am well aware of the devistation that these storms produce. I also know that the Constitution of the United States makes NO PROVISION for the use of Federal Funds for anything of this sort. It is a State/Local/Private issue, not a Federal one. It always has been, except that Federal politicians like to use MY money to pay for people to rebuild homes, businesses, etc... on active fault likes, inside flood plains, and in high wind activity areas because it gets them votes. If it didn't garner votes for them, it wouldn't be done. I'm sure that even you understand that.
 
Tigger said:
I assumed that's where you were going. I should know better than to ask that question of a Liberal and a woman. Obviously you have a flawed understanding of what those words "general welfare and common defense" mean, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain it to an individual who is doubly unprepared to comprehend it.
Click to expand...
Obvious troll is obvious. Maybe you wouldn't hate women so much if you got laid. Just a thought. :lamo
 
PeteEU said:
Interesting ideas but sadly he is just showing his own links to big business with this plan.

For one he does not want to dump the Department of Homeland Security.. if one agency needs removal then it is that. Talk about waste of money and more red tape. This agency was suppose to fix the issues between the 132613461 so called US intelligence agencies and has not done so. All it added was yet another layer of red tape and cost a fortune. If anything the US should cut many of their so called "intelligence" agencies who fight each other over secrets and fame..

He also "only" puts a spending freeze at the Department of War.. err Defence. Seriously? If there is one place you can cut waste by the bucket load it is the DOD. No a toilet seat does not have to cost 40000 dollars (yes taken from Independence Day). Interior is part of the 100 year land grabbed by the federal govt. I think Nevada has about a 100 sq miles left of itself minus everything the fed owns. It's a crime that someone should hang for. Let's not missed the fact that you were able to blame Bush for something again, boy you're all over the map today. Afterall everything is Bush's fault, even your worthless opinions. You think Paul won't cut defense, don't kid yourself. He'll pull all troops back to American soil.

And then he wants to eliminate Departments of Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior and Education.... his priorities are clear that is for sure... deluded to say the least but very clear. I expect that education standards in the US will get much much worse and very segregated under President Paul. And considering that one of the biggest problems of the US is energy independence, he suddenly wants to get rid of the Department leading that chase? And he wants more homeless.. no worries his buddy Bush fixed that for him. And I understadn why he wants to get rid of the Department of Commerce,... being an isolationist as he is, then there is no need to promote US products to people outside the US.. after they are non Christian freaks right?.. And then there is the Department of Interior.. seriously? So in other words he wants to sell off all federal land and what..finish of the American Indian genocide once and for all?

Now I understand that you can merge some of these departments into others and so on, but out right getting rid of what they do... gezz. Why not get rid of the DOD and leave US security to the private sector?
Click to expand...
You should be glad to know that you and none of your family will be affected by any of this. Frankly we don't mind, because education standards have been dropping anyway, so the department is useless. HUD isn't doing anything that couldn't be done at the state level. Funny, I don't hear you bitching about NASA putting $19M into a space toilet for the ISS.

$19 million funneled into space toilet - Technology & science - Space - Human spaceflight - msnbc.com

I'd appreciate it if future Spanish astronauts would kindly hold it in for the duration of the mission. As for your last comment, please read the Constitution.
 
Kandahar said:
For one thing, this plan would immediately cause our GDP to shrink by 7%, merely due to the fact that all that government demand suddenly dried up. And that's not really a matter of opinion, anyone with basic math skills should be able to calculate the same figure. And this is before we even take into account all the other consequences...with that many government workers suddenly laid off, unemployment will skyrocket, the average consumer will have less money to spend on private goods, and the economy will contract further.

Combine this with Ron Paul's asinine suggestions about eliminating the social safety net (which would further reduce aggregate demand as consumers struggled just to meet their living expenses), and abolishing the Fed / bringing back the gold standard (which would shrink the money supply by a huge amount), and we could easily see the economy contract by 50% or more if Ron Paul had his way. :roll:

Fortunately this raving lunatic will never be anywhere close to the White House.
Click to expand...
I dont know of anyone that talks cuts that has proposed an overnight kill switch. There would by necessity in ANY restructuring be a 5-7 year transition. Many of the people in those jobs would be offered retirment or early retirement, many (as fed employees) would be given opportunites to fill other fed vacancies, some of those jobs would by necessity by transferred to state agencies. Your doomsday thinking is the kind of crap that keeps the fed government the bloated pig that it is.
 
Kandahar said:
For one thing, this plan would immediately cause our GDP to shrink by 7%, merely due to the fact that all that government demand suddenly dried up. And that's not really a matter of opinion, anyone with basic math skills should be able to calculate the same figure. And this is before we even take into account all the other consequences...with that many government workers suddenly laid off, unemployment will skyrocket, the average consumer will have less money to spend on private goods, and the economy will contract further.

Combine this with Ron Paul's asinine suggestions about eliminating the social safety net (which would further reduce aggregate demand as consumers struggled just to meet their living expenses), and abolishing the Fed / bringing back the gold standard (which would shrink the money supply by a huge amount), and we could easily see the economy contract by 50% or more if Ron Paul had his way. :roll:

Fortunately this raving lunatic will never be anywhere close to the White House.
Click to expand...

ACCA+Important+dates+and+fee+june+2011.png


The cuts are done by attrition (in case anybody needs to know what attrition means (#3)). The staff can be re-purposed for other departments, but most of the savings will be by not implementing failed/unconstitutional programs. Some constitutional tasks and other projects that need to be phased out will be transferred to other departments. They all won't be dropped out at once, it will take a process of several years if not longer.

Next. He won't abolish the fed but allow competing currencies (gold & silver as legal tender). He'll get a full audit and appoint someone who won't print money inflating our currency. His position is similar to Friedrich Hayek - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
I dont know of anyone that talks cuts that has proposed an overnight kill switch. There would by necessity in ANY restructuring be a 5-7 year transition. Many of the people in those jobs would be offered retirment or early retirement, many (as fed employees) would be given opportunites to fill other fed vacancies, some of those jobs would by necessity by transferred to state agencies. Your doomsday thinking is the kind of crap that keeps the fed government the bloated pig that it is.
Click to expand...
\
All these department kills have to go through Congress of course. They decide where tax dollars go.
 
Tigger said:
I assumed that's where you were going. I should know better than to ask that question of a Liberal and a woman.
Click to expand...

If you can't get past my gender (I'm not even surprised about that) one of the weakest arguments ever, we have nothing to discuss. Buh-bye!
 
While many of Paul's ideas merit consideration, this isn't one of them for the reasons already mentioned.
 
Gina said:
If you can't get past my gender (I'm not even surprised about that) one of the weakest arguments ever, we have nothing to discuss. Buh-bye!
Click to expand...
Politics aside, the female gender is a good thing. :thumbs:
 
Gina said:
Let's move on to NIST. Little considered, eliminating it would effect all of us. For instance, would that gallon of gas, @ $3.81 per, still remain a full gallon?
Click to expand...
Gina, every federal and state agency has these kinds of mission statements they use to justify their existence. Every one of them claims they are mission critical and every one overstates dramatically their actual role. It is typical for someone at one of these agencies to make a phone call or two, discuss a few things with a contracting rep or other agency, and bang...you have a bullet statement that reads "While supporting Operation Enduring Freedom, coordinated multi-organization communications process that resulted in the savings of $327,000,000,000.00 and saved lives in Afghanistan"

All of these programs should be up for review. Heck, every federal office including the military should be up for review. Typical private sector tech refresh is done on a quarterly basis. In the civilian sector it is usually every two years but often it is annually depending on how much fallout end of the year money the RMs get. In the day of networking there is no reason for every desktop computer to have its own printer and many do network, but most? Nope...which means paper, toner, replacement costs. trainings and conferences are usually a waste, yet they are mandatory and cost millions and milllions...conservatively. Every time someone sneezes we have a new agency created...the soldier support center, the familiy support center, the soldier family fitness center...and each of these requires not just oersonnel but also regional and pentagon level supervision. We have military mental health services, social work services, military family life consultants, and Family Advocacy, now family resiliency programs...etc...all performing similar but slightly different roles. Each one is a 'mission critical' assett and is responsible for end result savings of dollars and lives.

Its the way of the fed. Needed agencies shouldnt be shut down, but just because someones mission statement says they "serve as the U.S. representative to the International Organization of Legal Metrology" to what end? What gain? Do we need the department or can this departments mission be ansorbed or absorb other agencies? When you walk into a fed building in DC and they have an A-U, 1-30 space cube farm, each cube has an occupant and at any given time half arent there, half are jerking around on the internet and only a handful are gainfully employed...you MIGHT have too many federal employees.
 
American said:
\
All these department kills have to go through Congress of course. They decide where tax dollars go.
Click to expand...
Which is why we have a 1.3-1.6 trillion annual deficit and 15.5 trillion and counting debt...
 
VanceMack said:
Gina, every federal and state agency has these kinds of mission statements they use to justify their existence. Every one of them claims they are mission critical and every one overstates dramatically their actual role. It is typical for someone at one of these agencies to make a phone call or two, discuss a few things with a contracting rep or other agency, and bang...you have a bullet statement that reads "While supporting Operation Enduring Freedom, coordinated multi-organization communications process that resulted in the savings of $327,000,000,000.00 and saved lives in Afghanistan"

All of these programs should be up for review. Heck, every federal office including the military should be up for review. Typical private sector tech refresh is done on a quarterly basis. In the civilian sector it is usually every two years but often it is annually depending on how much fallout end of the year money the RMs get. In the day of networking there is no reason for every desktop computer to have its own printer and many do network, but most? Nope...which means paper, toner, replacement costs. trainings and conferences are usually a waste, yet they are mandatory and cost millions and milllions...conservatively. Every time someone sneezes we have a new agency created...the soldier support center, the familiy support center, the soldier family fitness center...and each of these requires not just oersonnel but also regional and pentagon level supervision. We have military mental health services, social work services, military family life consultants, and Family Advocacy, now family resiliency programs...etc...all performing similar but slightly different roles. Each one is a 'mission critical' assett and is responsible for end result savings of dollars and lives.

Its the way of the fed. Needed agencies shouldnt be shut down, but just because someones mission statement says they "serve as the U.S. representative to the International Organization of Legal Metrology" to what end? What gain? Do we need the department or can this departments mission be ansorbed or absorb other agencies? When you walk into a fed building in DC and they have an A-U, 1-30 space cube farm, each cube has an occupant and at any given time half arent there, half are jerking around on the internet and only a handful are gainfully employed...you MIGHT have too many federal employees.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying. I agree there is a lot of waste in the federal government, but to chuck out entire branches as Paul is suggesting, is flippant and unserious.

Uniformity of weights and measures has some serious applications. For example, it's important that a scope or thermometer in use in a factory process reads the same as every other scope or thermometer across the supply chain of those devices. If they are off, even in the tiniest fraction, during a process involving, say, heat or chemicals, it can result, at best, in loss of product, at worst, death in those operating that piece of equipment. You may argue that a company will police itself in its own self-interest, and make accurate instruments of measure, but against what standard? Federally enforced standards assure accuracy and safety.
 
Lets hope that Romney gets the GOP nomination and Paul finally grows a pair and runs as a Libertarian on that party ticket. He can use this latest pronouncement as part of his platform.
 
Tigger said:
No. I mean that the Presidential Order to disband those five departments would face a SCOTUS challenge. If written properly, the PO would force the case to look at whether those departments (and many more) have any Constitutional standing, and if not whether they are legal and legitimate powers and expenditures of the Federal Government. Assuming the PO was upheld, it would be the first step in a return to LIMITED Federal Governance.
Click to expand...
I can't cite all the legal ins-and-outs, but I think it would be a huge fail. For two possible reasons. 1) SCOTUS, for the most part, LIKES big government, and has even taken part in expanding government throughout our nation's history, and 2) Most of these entities were created with the cooperation of Congress. I'm speculating on this one, but I suspect the SCOTUS would be reluctant to say that it's ok for a single person (the president) to "undo the work of the people". That's what checks-and-balances are supposed to be for.

At first glance, my two points seem inconsistent, but if government and the courts are anything, they are consistently inconsistent.


jasonxe said:
The cuts are done by attrition (in case anybody needs to know what attrition means (#3)). The staff can be re-purposed for other departments, but most of the savings will be by not implementing failed/unconstitutional programs. Some constitutional tasks and other projects that need to be phased out will be transferred to other departments. They all won't be dropped out at once, it will take a process of several years if not longer.
Click to expand...
If so, then it would take far longer than the 8 years he would have available to him (presuming he is re-elected), which means it's still more of a talking point than a serious proposal.
 
Gina said:
I get what you are saying. I agree there is a lot of waste in the federal government, but to chuck out entire branches as Paul is suggesting, is flippant and unserious.

Uniformity of weights and measures has some serious applications. For example, it's important that a scope or thermometer in use in a factory process reads the same as every other scope or thermometer across the supply chain of those devices. If they are off, even in the tiniest fraction, during a process involving, say, heat or chemicals, it can result, at best, in loss of product, at worst, death in those operating that piece of equipment. You may argue that a company will police itself in its own self-interest, and make accurate instruments of measure, but against what standard? Federally enforced standards assure accuracy and safety.
Click to expand...
I believe entire departments like the Dept of Transp, Education, etc can and should be eliminated. In most cases the states have redundant departments and can manage them better. We can absolutely kill off every Czar and return those responsibilities back to the Secretaries. That doesnt mean we just haphazardly elimiate everything. We just have to do things smarter. Eventually...we dont change...We are Greece.
 
mike2810 said:
It is a bold approuch with many questions.
One of his recommendations is to do away with Interior. Does he understand Interior has the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Fish and Wildlife Service?
Without information on how he would propose protecting and managmement of our national parks and monuments, public lands, and wildlife refuges, not to mention our obligations to Native Americans by doing away with Interior, I can't say I can buy into all of his plan.
Click to expand...

Couldn't evertyhing but NA programs be covered by the EPA, which already has a hand in all of those areas?

And as far as "National Monuments" go...kind of a large waste of money for the large part. With the exception of the Smithsonian system and military cemetaries I see no reason to maintain a bunch of statues which serve no practical purpose.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Lets hope that Romney gets the GOP nomination and Paul finally grows a pair and runs as a Libertarian on that party ticket. He can use this latest pronouncement as part of his platform.
Click to expand...
WOnt happen. Wayne Root will be the Libertarian candidate. I know that it would break your heart to see paul split off votes from the GOP though...little wonder why so many diehard libs back him. It damn sure isnt because they like his policies on smaller government.
 
radcen said:
I can't cite all the legal ins-and-outs, but I think it would be a huge fail. For two possible reasons. 1) SCOTUS, for the most part, LIKES big government, and has even taken part in expanding government throughout our nation's history, and 2) Most of these entities were created with the cooperation of Congress. I'm speculating on this one, but I suspect the SCOTUS would be reluctant to say that it's ok for a single person (the president) to "undo the work of the people". That's what checks-and-balances are supposed to be for.

At first glance, my two points seem inconsistent, but if government and the courts are anything, they are consistently inconsistent.
Click to expand...

I can understand and see both arguements. Of course assuming that's the way things went, then it would simply be time to remove all of them from office, and I don't mean via the ballot box.
 
VanceMack said:
I believe entire departments like the Dept of Transp, Education, etc can and should be eliminated. In most cases the states have redundant departments and can manage them better. We can absolutely kill off every Czar and return those responsibilities back to the Secretaries. That doesnt mean we just haphazardly elimiate everything. We just have to do things smarter. Eventually...we dont change...We are Greece.
Click to expand...

Sorry, departments, not branches.

Again, smarter is better, but wholesale shuttering is not the answer. I disagree with eliminating the DOT. Safety is my primary concern, again.

As one of ten agencies within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), PHMSA works to protect the American public and the environment by ensuring the safe and secure movement of hazardous materials to industry and consumers by all transportation modes, including the nation's pipelines. PHMSA was created under the Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs Improvement Act (P.L. 108-426) of 2004. which was signed into law by President Bush on November 20, 2004. The creation of PHMSA provides the Department a modal administration focused solely on its pipeline and hazardous materials transportation programs. Through PHMSA, the Department develops and enforces regulations for the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the nation's 2.3 million mile pipeline transportation system and the nearly 1 million daily shipments of hazardous materials by land, sea, and air.
Click to expand...

PHMSA - About the Agency

As these products are transported over state lines, there has to be uniformity in standards of transport. Left to the states, there would be a race to the bottom in standards pushed by lobbyists in petro-chemical industries. One state's minimal regulations could easily endanger the citizens of another state.

Comb through each department and examine where redundancies and waste occur. Cut or consolidate accordingly.
 
VanceMack said:
WOnt happen. Wayne Root will be the Libertarian candidate. I know that it would break your heart to see paul split off votes from the GOP though...little wonder why so many diehard libs back him. It damn sure isnt because they like his policies on smaller government.
Click to expand...

I have little doubt that the Libertarian Party would feel right at home with a Las Vegas con man and entertainer at the head of their ticket. And Root and the Libs can sruggle mightilly towards breaking tht one-half of one percent of the national popular vote threshold.

Or, it Romney is the GOP nominee, they can go with Paul providing he gives up his run at another House seat and actually getsome real attention. I suspect with Paul at the top of the ticket the Libertarian Party can actually flirt with a full one percent of the national vote. That would be tremendous progress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom