I was asked last week which entitlement program is most deserving of reform.
While acknowledging that Social Security and Medicare also are in desperate need of modernization, I wrote that Medicaid reform should be the first priority.
But I’d be happy if we made progress on any type of entitlement reform, so I don’t think there are right or wrong answers to this kind of question.
We have the same type of question this week. A reader sent an email to ask “Which federal department should be abolished first?”
I guess this is what is meant when people talk about a target-rich environment.
We have an abundance of candidates, including the Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce, Department of Transportation, etc.
But if I have to choose, I think the Department of Housing and Urban Development should be first on the chopping block.
Raze the building and put a layer of salt over the earth to make sure it can never spring back to life
I’ve already argued that there should be no federal government involvement in the housing sector and made the same argument on TV. And I’ve also shared some horror stories about HUD waste and incompetence.
- HUD engages in racism and social engineering.
- Urban renewal projects destroy neighborhoods and foment corruption.
- HUD subsidies are grotesquely wasteful.
- There are epidemic levels of waste, fraud, and abuse at HUD.
Heck, I even made HUD the background image for my video on the bloated and overpaid bureaucracy in Washington.
It’s also worth noting that there’s nothing about housing in Article I, Section VIII, of the Constitution. For those of us who have old-fashioned values about playing by the rules, that means much of what takes place in Washington – including housing handouts – is unconstitutional.
Simply stated, there is no legitimate argument for HUD. And I think there would be the least political resistance.
As with the answer to the question about entitlements, this is a judgment call. I’d be happy to be proven wrong if it meant that politicians were aggressively going after another department. Anything that reduces the burden of government spending is a step in the right direction.
In all due respect, HUD only f*cks up our communities, the Department of Education f*cks up our future by orchestrating the dumbing-down of our children, which will ultimately result in the final destruction of our Constitutional Republic. Communities can always be rebuilt. How do you rebuild dumbed-down adults who consistently vote for the crypto-Communists who will ensure that America as we formerly knew it is erased from memory and that HUD will never be abolished?
HUD is an excellent choice. EPA is tops on my list because of all the regulations they put forth without any congressional oversight. Our property and liberty are severely curtailed and costs thousands of dollars and years of our time to fight to keep what is rightfully ours.
With no permanent appointees heading Commerce or Labor, the two should be reunited after having be split up one century ago. That being done, the number of overlapping bureaus should be pruned thoroughly while NOAA and its components should be taken out of Commerce and transferred to Interior where it properly belongs with other environment/nature-related programs.
Agriculture should be broken up to become an interstate agency operating under the aegis of an Interstate Compact adopted under Article I, Section 10. This would be an act of devolution from being a federal instrumentality. Transportation should be devolved in that way as well in addition to Education.
I agree. Delete HUD then Education.
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
My vote would be for Labor to get the ax, first, but HUD makes a very worthy choice.
I agree with Education and HUD, but let’s not forget the US International Trade Commission, which raises prices for American consumers of foreign made goods through anti-dumping cases that protect inefficient American companies. I worked there for a short while. The economic theories used to justify raising prices (through increased duties) are a shambles.
Dept of Homeland Security should be high on the list.
Social security has nothing to do with the deficit…
[...] via Question of the Week: Which Department of the Federal Government Should Be the First to Be Abolished…. [...]
Unfortunately the real question is what is going to be the next organization to be started?
Education is the most horrendous, since a government-run education teaches our kids what to think rather than how to think. Then they can be more easily indoctrinated. It’s also not one of the enumerated powers. For more on the government failure in education, see http://www.lifestrategies.net/education/ (if you like it, and have Google +1…)
If anyone ever saw the waste at the Department of Energy labs it would be a very easy question. You have no idea how much money has gone to China, Russia, and others instead of U.S. corporations – millions upon millions…shameful.
actually it would more efficient to name which departments should stay…Defense……ya, can’t really think of any others that pull their weight..sorry.
I agree with Tom. The dept of transportation doesn’t make any sense! The states should be able to tax fuel as they see fit and maintain their own roads. No reason for the federal government to be involved.
In a way, it doesn’t matter. If we can find a way to limit spending to a reasonable level, the matter will take care of itself. Starve Leviathan.
Why should we limit the deletions to one department? Good arguments are out there for Many….
Whichever one owns the EPA.
I would like everyone to realize that Social Security is not an entitlement. It is a commitment made by the government to pay retirees on a monthly basis a portion of the taxes the government collected from them and the retirees’ employer(s) over their working years.
It has only recently been referred to an an entitlement program by the politicos and their dupes, the news media. The reason for the new definition is to make it easier for the government to renege in the next few years.
Lets make it clear. If social security is killed, so goes the government.
[...] of the Week: Which Department of the Federal Government Should Be the First to Be Abolished? My vote goes to Dept. of Education. Not a federal [...]
In order: SBA, EPA, HUD. Education provides funds for special needs (Gallaudet University) and indian tribal schools. Energy provides supervision of national labs that perform basic research including nuclear energy.
SBA loans money – gov should not be borrowing to lend
EPA responsibilities are part of all programs, it is over-reaching
HUD as indicated, not responsible to house people – it does provide some tribal housing but that can be handled by interiors bureau of indian affairs
This should be put to vote. The American people know what is needed and the programs that are wasteful. Regardless of the fact that the government thinks they know what we the people need or even want, I think we would be the best judge of what is wasteful
[...] As part of my “Question of the Week” series, I had to decide which department of the federal government was most deserving of abolition. [...]
[...] want to shut down useless and counterproductive parts of Leviathan, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, the [...]
[...] As part of my “Question of the Week” series, I had to decide which department of the federal government was most deserving of abolition. [...]
[...] I’ve already said on TV that we should dump Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the Potomac River. And I’ve argued that the entire Department of Housing and Urban Development should be razed to the ground. [...]
[...] I’ve already said on TV that we should dump Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the Potomac River. And I’ve argued that the entire Department of Housing and Urban Development should be razed to the ground. [...]
[...] say in the interview that the government should get out of the housing business – both on the spending side of the budget and the revenue side of the budget. And it goes without saying that I also explain the need to [...]
[...] of the domestic discretionary category. Should there be a federal Department of Transportation? A federal Department of Housing and Urban Development? A federal Department of [...]
[...] of the domestic discretionary category. Should there be a federal Department of Transportation? A federal Department of Housing and Urban Development? A federal Department of [...]
[...] size of government than I am about the pay levels of bureaucrats. I’d much rather focus on shutting down the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for instance, instead of simply trying to reduce the pay of HUD [...]
[...] size of government than I am about the pay levels of bureaucrats. I’d much rather focus on shutting down the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for instance, instead of simply trying to reduce the pay of HUD [...]
[…] that’s exactly what’s happening, thanks to some bureaucrats at a Department that shouldn’t exist. Here are some blurbs from the Wall Street Journal about a new breakthrough in human […]