- Jan 29, 2010
- 20,761
- 5,073
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I want to spend MORE money on safety need programs for the poor, and much less on the administration of those programs. I want revenue sharing not federal rules and controls.
One of the very best ways to do that is for decision-making to be moved to state and local governments (including school boards). The feds would spend less and up giving more. The administration costs would be the savings.
The idea of federal government programs should be transfer of monies from rich states to poor states, perhaps in categories such as education. By their nature, social welfare programs should be state and local
If we want a federal program to fund education and welfare programs, then fine. Negotiate the amount to be spent and the allocations by state. Very little federal administration is needed. I know that Republicans won't accept this, but here goes. Social Security is very, very efficient in the distribution of monies with a very small percentage of admin costs. That should be a model for education and welfare programs. LET THE STATES decide what specific needs are to be met with these federal funds.
No, this isn't fair in that citizens of one state will spend more than others. But it cannot be the role of the federal government to have equal social services for every citizen.
===============
TO BE CLEAR
1) Homeland Security and The Department of Defense need an administration efficiency overhaul, a technology overhaul, and a general modernization of weapons systems (both for defense and offense). The savings might be in the trillions over the next decade or two.
2) There are many responsibilities that should be that of the federal government, even if not specified in the 1700's. Examples include regulations in many fields including environment, agriculture, health, and weather mitigation efforts. We absolutely need a new focus on food, water and energy.
================
One of the very best ways to do that is for decision-making to be moved to state and local governments (including school boards). The feds would spend less and up giving more. The administration costs would be the savings.
The idea of federal government programs should be transfer of monies from rich states to poor states, perhaps in categories such as education. By their nature, social welfare programs should be state and local
If we want a federal program to fund education and welfare programs, then fine. Negotiate the amount to be spent and the allocations by state. Very little federal administration is needed. I know that Republicans won't accept this, but here goes. Social Security is very, very efficient in the distribution of monies with a very small percentage of admin costs. That should be a model for education and welfare programs. LET THE STATES decide what specific needs are to be met with these federal funds.
No, this isn't fair in that citizens of one state will spend more than others. But it cannot be the role of the federal government to have equal social services for every citizen.
===============
TO BE CLEAR
1) Homeland Security and The Department of Defense need an administration efficiency overhaul, a technology overhaul, and a general modernization of weapons systems (both for defense and offense). The savings might be in the trillions over the next decade or two.
2) There are many responsibilities that should be that of the federal government, even if not specified in the 1700's. Examples include regulations in many fields including environment, agriculture, health, and weather mitigation efforts. We absolutely need a new focus on food, water and energy.
================