Might as well list them all and respond:
1. Disarm Federal Regulatory Agencies. Agreed. We have the FBI and Federal Marshals for general police functions. Aside from the Secret Service and the Border Patrol there is no need for any "armed" regulatory agency. That includes the DEA and ATF, which IMO should be sub-departments of the FBI or Federal Marshal.
I'm not sure about this one - the DEA is law enforcement, not regulatory. Same with ATF. I guess you could move the pieces around a little bit and put them under some other agency, but it's not clear how that changes much.
2. Fire EPA Lawyers. Agreed. The Justice Dept. should handle all legal issues for the Federal government.
Every department will need lawyers, because they deal with regulations and interpreting them is what lawyers are trained to do, and every agency has to have people on staff trained to read regulations and interpret them.
3. Blockade Federal Funds for Sanctuary Cities. Agreed. Any municipality that refuses to obey Federal Immigration Law does not deserve allocations of Federal funding.
It's not really that they're refusing to "obey" immigration law, but that they prohibit officers from arresting people solely based on their immigration status. And I'm not sure what constitutes a "sanctuary city" or what they'd have to do to get off the list.
4. Cut Funding for Agency Self-Promotion. Agreed. No Federal agency should be engaging in any spending except for the work they were created to do.
I agree in part, although publicizing some aspects of an agency isn't wasteful. I deal with taxes and I don't know how the IRS efforts to publicize electronic filing would be characterized. It's a form of "PR" but serves the public by making them aware of things like where they can find forms, pay their taxes, file simple returns online, file electronically which drastically reduces errors and speeds up processing, where to find help, etc. Same with how to sign up for Medicare, or how to contact the FBI, ICE, etc.
5. Direct Small Business Funds to Small Businesses. Agreed. Federal funds should be allocated for the reasons they were designed to accomplish.
Sounds OK to me.
6. Eliminate the Export-Import Bank. Unsure. I don't know enough about this to make an informed decision.
Also unsure.
7. Reduce Federal Funding for the Ivy League. Agreed. They have adequate resources from wealthy Alumni and the high student tuition and fees they charge.
I'm guessing most or all of this "funding" is for research and I don't see any reason to cut off the schools with the best scientists from research funds.
8. Finish the Task of VA Reform. Agreed. Something that should be at the forefront of domestic policy.
I tried to find the underlying data, but I'm worried the article was a bit slanted. The VA hired X many doctors, but how many nurses, PAs, techs, and other direct healthcare providers? Not sure. Seems obvious the bureaucracy could be streamlined but that's true of any org.
9. Open the Books on Federal Employee Pensions. Agreed. If the pension is performing as it should then there is nothing to hide.
This would allow us to see the specific pension for any Jane Doe. I have family in the government sector, and their salary is public, appropriately, but I'm not sure what business it is of the public to see how much they deferred into 401(k), 403(b), etc. and how their selections have done and what they're worth now. One person I know deferred the max for 30 years or more - her "pension" would look very large, and it is, but that's because she saved like crazy and invested pretty wisely. Others who didn't would look to have less "generous" pensions but only because they did NOT defer the max starting day 1 in that job.
10. Cut Federal Funding to Municipalities Paying Lavish Salaries to Public Employees. Agreed. Salaries, benefits, and standard services should be funded entirely by the resources of the tax base being served. Federal funds should only be used for reasons specifically authorized by Congress.
Sounds good but not sure how this works. If the funding is based in part on those salaries, fine. But a road or hospital costs what it does, and I don't see a good way to tie funding for a project with a cost of $X to the amount the mayor makes. And will funding requests have a section - "How much do all these people not related at all to the cost of this project make?"
eace
