No. of Recommendations: 21
My comment,
Here is something that liberals don't understand, tax payer dollars are finding their way to fund programs that make no sense to main street,,
was not meant to be specific to the NIH but rather at the nature of the democrat response to the waste, fraud and abuse identified so far, transcending multiple agencies, by President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency.
So far as I am aware, the “waste, fraud, and abuse identified so far” exists only on some 20 year old’s etch-a-sketch, not in the public domain where the rest of us might be able to evaluate it. It appears to me that most of what is being identified is “things I don’t like”, not “things that are waste.”
USAID is the most prominent of those (I’m sure others will come along.) These are funds that have been appropriated by Congress. By Republicans as well as Democrats. The agency exists because the US government, Constitutionally created it in 1961, and has repeatedly funded it since. Shutting it down is extra-constitutional at best. (If it is to be shut down, then there is a way to do that, not for a single person to walk in and declare it so.)
But I rarely hear Democrats acknowledge, let along defend, the underlying WFA, that was reported by DOGE.
There is no shortage of Democrats - or Republicans - concerned about waste and fraud. I recall Senator Proxmire’s Golden Fleece awards in the 1970’s. Al Gore had a “Reinventing Government” initiative in 1993 which addressed some of this. For some reason you think that the only way to address it is to have an unelected billionaire rampage through government with a team of 20-somethings (some actually convicted of fraud and waste of their own) and do so without oversight of any kind, including, apparently, public disclosure.
And in my opinion Main Street can easily recognize WFA without getting into scientific research at all
Sure. I only focused on scientific research because it’s easy to see. A message board doesn’t lend itself to such things as “Should government fund the arts?” or other, less clearly defined fields such as education or the social sciences.
I’m sure DOGE will find NPR and PBS useless and stop all funding. I happen to think there should be at least one channel, out of the 1000 available, that doesn’t rely entirely on the approval of McDonald’s and Ford to exist, but that’s just me. Government has funded art through the ages (Michaelangelo was funded by patrons and the church, the de-facto government of the time. More contemporary examples include DeKooning, Jackson Pollack, even J.K. Rowling, in a backhanded way.) It’s worth a few pennies to me to the sake of “civilization”, but again that’s just me.
Again I have no problem finding waste, or especially corruption (the upper levels of this administration offer the most target rich environment in history, but I doubt we’ll start there, eh?) but I do have to question “WHO” we charge to find it and what the criteria are for it. In the current environment it’s clear that it’s more about political opportunism and retribution than anything.
You’re welcome.
