The Founding Fathers went to enormous trouble trying to find as precise a balance of power as was humanly possible — and they succeeded. But has Congress abdicated too much authority to the Executive Branch? Or has the explosion of cabinet-level positions left the President with too little power? And what the heck are a Chief Executive’s proper duties, now that you mention it?
Listen here on Soundcloud:
No system (political or otherwise) is perfect but some systems are better than others. What we currently have in Washington is a mess and Scott’s thoughts and ideas would greatly untangle that mess and provide functioning system and a much better nation.
Make corruption transparent again!
I was the manager of communications for an international nonprofit, and presented a budget to my director each year, based on the current year expenditures — everything from salaries to postage to printing to travel. Then I would make some adjustments for inflation, and add any new costs for new initiatives planned in the coming year. But my director insisted on a 20% increase over what I estimated. It was ridiculous; we never exceeded “my” departmental budget. Then she would take credit for coming in under budget.
We need to remember what Calvin Cooledge managed to do, namely cut the government by 20%. No need for the Federal Departments of Education, Commerce, et al. No need to “constitutionally” raise the amount of money allocated to the Federal government by 7-10% a year, a number that should be frozen immediately. It’s not rocket science that you will spend anything you’re given. The spicket has run dry by 34 trillion dollars.
Melei too.
Great episode, Gentlemen! Steve mentioned that instead of fine tuning agencies and programs, we need to abolish. I would suggest re-reading and enforcing the 10th Amendment, Which essentially says, if it’s not specified in the Constitution, it’s not a federal function. Most of our federal agencies and programs are not authorized by the Constitution and should be eliminated.
Good one Scott. The process is the problem, IMHO. I’m doubtful any of this will come to pass. One third of the Republican caucus is captured, or at least enamored, by the bureaucracy, this would be true with a Republican Majority in both houses, I’d expect. Strike 1 for Freedom) One of Trump’s most significant acts was Executive Order 13771 (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/02/03/2017-02451/reducing-regulation-and-controlling-regulatory-costs). Pass a law to enact Executive Order 13771 as a law. Make it 5 to one. Strike 2 for Freedom) Vivek Ramaswamy’s idea to use the US Code to employ mass layoffs of the Federal employees is the right idea. Everyone with an odd… Read more »
I had to laugh when Steve said “We need a government run by experts…” I worked for 25 years in one of the National Laboratories. The lab was owned by the government, but operated by a contractor. Since we were not government employees, we had to have government oversight. The quality of the people that were providing the government oversight was not impressive. My department head called it “The Revenge of the D-Students”; these were not the people who did well in school.
What’s the saying? “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach. Those who can’t teach, administrate.”
As you probably already know, I still work for one of those National Laboratories, and I’ve been saying for years that this place is a perfect metaphor for all that is wrong in D.C. It’s no surprise since our unwritten mandate is to appeal to the least intelligent of those in public office in order to retain funding.
I worked in the labs for a shorter time, but that was my experience, too. Administration micro-managing labs and requiring unsafe procedures because they (the administrators) were ignorant of what they were managing.
….and those who can’t administrate run for office.
Inherent stability = stagnation of thinking/ideas as AI can mean Artificial Intelligence or Augmented Ignorance.
On your wine issue, if left to Congress it would be 6-8 months of studies/analyzation, 3-4 more months of discussion/debate on how to address the issue, 1-12 months of “considering” the wording of that address, on and on and on. Buy the time any action was actually taken the whole California wine industry would be kaput … except for that area owned and operated by who? Nancy P.
President Trump tells that wine tariff story in his current stump speech.
That’s Trump. I’m referring to how long Congress takes to get thru something – anything. Thanks for allowing me to be clear on that. God bless