[BqTyG9eS]

Jan 13, 2012 11:47am
R.I.P., Department of Commerce? President Obama Seeks to Consolidate Government Agencies
Email 75 Smaller Font Text Larger Text | Print

The Department of Commerce will celebrate its 109th anniversary this year, having been created in 1903. And if President Obama gets his way, the agency won’t make it much past 110.

Announcing this morning that he is seeking authority to streamline the executive branch, President Obama said he needs the same kind of “authority that every business owner has to make sure that his or her company keeps pace with the times. And let me be clear: I will only use this authority for reforms that result in more efficiency, better service, and a leaner government.”

As an example, the president wants to shut down the Department of Commerce, taking its core functions and giving them to a new agency that will also fold in the tasks of the Small Business Administration, the U.S. Trade Representative, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the Trade and Development Agency and the Export-Import Bank.

The savings the administration claims will come from this move is roughly 1/400th of the $1.2 trillion increase in the debt limit that the president formally informed Congress yesterday that he was seeking.

“Right now, there are six departments and agencies focused primarily on business and trade in the federal government,” the president said. “Six. In this case, six isn’t better than one. It’s redundant and inefficient. With the authority I am requesting today, we could consolidate them all into one department with one website, one phone number and one mission – helping American businesses succeed.”

The president added: “This is a big idea. ”

This new agency would be smaller than the sum of its previous parts by up to two thousand employees (which will be lost through attrition, the White House says), and saving $3 billion over the next decade, said Jeffrey Zients, head of management at the Office of Management and Budget.

“We live in a 21st century economy, but we’ve still got a government organized for the 20th century,” President Obama said this morning. “Our economy has fundamentally changed – as has the world – but the government has not. The needs of our citizens have fundamentally changed but their government has not. Instead, it has often grown more complex.”

The president noted that there are “five different entities dealing with housing; more than a dozen agencies involved in food safety. And my favorite example, which I mentioned in last year’s State of the Union Address. As it turns out, the Interior Department is in charge of salmon in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them in saltwater. Apparently, this all had something to do with President Nixon being unhappy with his Interior Secretary for criticizing the Vietnam War, and so he decided not to put NOAA in what would have been a more sensible place.”

The president is as of today elevating SBA Administrator Karen Mills to a cabinet-level position. However, her position would essentially disappear if Obama’s proposal is enacted as the SBA would be represented in the new Department.

The weather service provided by NOAA and housed in Commerce will become part of the Department of the Interior.

The Census Bureau, also part of Commerce, will combine with the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the National Science Foundation’s National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and be housed in this new Cabinet-level agency.

“Given the President’s record of growing government, we’re interested to learn whether this proposal represents actual relief for American businesses or just the appearance of it,” said a skeptical Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. “American small businesses are more concerned about this administration’s policies than from which building in Washington they originate. We hope the President isn’t simply proposing new packaging for the same burdensome approach. However, eliminating duplicative programs and making the federal government more simple, streamlined, and business-friendly is always an idea worth exploring. We look forward to hearing more about his proposal.”

Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said “Americans want a government that’s simpler, streamlined, and secure. So after presiding over one of the largest expansions of government in history, and a year after raising the issue in his last State of the Union, it’s interesting to see the President finally acknowledge that Washington is out of control. And while we first learned of this proposal this morning in the press, we’ll be sure to give it a careful review once the White House provides us with the details of what it is he wants to do.”

The move might help GOP presidential candidate Governor Rick Perry, who has called for the elimination of three agencies – Commerce, Education, and Energy – but has seemed to struggle with remembering more than two of them.

-Jake Tapper http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...ment-agencies/

[NerbuitW]

No matter what, I'm sure Republicans will find some way to oppose it.

[RerRoktoido]

when you owe money primarily to yourself
there's no such thing as a budget problem
its numbers on a piece of paper
only useful to those who want to steal money
like finance twits

[LeaderBiz]

Consolidating these agencies along with other related programs, thereby cutting up to 2,000 jobs through attrition, will help entrepreneurs and businesses of all sizes grow, compete, and hire, according to the White House. There would be one department with one mission: spur job creation and expand the U.S. economy. wtf kinda stupid ass nonsense is this
with 2,000 less people getting paid money, that's 2,000 less people (and their families) buying useless bullshit
the government should just pay everyone $50,000 a year for doing nothing
that way, when there are poor people, we can legitimately say its their own damn fault

also free beer and porn for everyone

[CitsMoise17]

The Cold War is over. We won it. This is just like once you've taken over the risk board you keep moving armies around to piss off the other eliminated players until they decide to punch you in the face.

[jeraveike]

Can't you write concisely? There's a lot of garbage in there meant to obfuscate that you really don't know what you're talking about. If you want to add value to the conversation, start by doing so yourself. Preferably without posting obviously biased articles of dubious accuracy. Just saying.

[movlabc]

Seriously, I've never seen anyone with such poor judgement make so many ill-informed posts with the very intent of making a judgement against others. Well, except for Ben, Hera, and Kid, but I covered that already.

[zU8KbeIU]

Can't you write concisely? There's a lot of garbage in there meant to obfuscate that you really don't know what you're talking about.

Does your post help? This post specifically?
Preferably without posting obviously biased articles of dubious accuracy. Just saying. Biased in favour of whom? Or against whom?

My point is that the foreign policy generally does not benefit from vague generalities about "overseas commitments" and "nation-building." They're no substitute for thorough research and analysis. And they're not a justification for defence cuts. Justifications for defence cuts exist if the benefit (reduced spending) exceeds the risk (cost to US foreign policy priorities).

[WordofViagra]

The Cold War is over. We won it. This is just like once you've taken over the risk board you keep moving armies around to piss off the other eliminated players until they decide to punch you in the face.

It's like you've already won a Domination victory and now you're just playing more turns for no purpose. It's time to end the world already.

[fount_pirat]

Can't you write concisely? There's a lot of garbage in there meant to obfuscate that you really don't know what you're talking about. If you want to add value to the conversation, start by doing so yourself. Preferably without posting obviously biased articles of dubious accuracy. Just saying.

He's a lawyer so he's probably grown accustomed to writing a whole lot of crap that says very little. But if you skim it and respond you might get caught on some technical detail.

[77rexulceme]

He's a lawyer so he's probably grown accustomed to writing a whole lot of crap that says very little. But if you skim it and respond you might get caught on some technical detail.

I'm just surprised with how similar to Hera he is: the single-mindedness, the deafness to opposing views, the need for others engage his nonsense, the insecurity, the total lack of critical thinking and understanding of what critical thinking is.

[JohnfAclambrJA]

My point is that the foreign policy generally does not benefit from vague generalities about "overseas commitments" and "nation-building." They're no substitute for thorough research and analysis. And they're not a justification for defence cuts. Justifications for defence cuts exist if the benefit (reduced spending) exceeds the risk (cost to US foreign policy priorities).

And my point is that people need to eat in order to survive. But they can't just eat bread and water and expect to be healthy. They need protein and vitamins among other nutrients. Failure to realize this is distracting the issue. Tomorrow maybe Tuesday, but only on a Monday. But never on a Friday. Yet, some people insist posting these kinds of ideas, without considering their consequences. Once one does, it only leads to a series of problems. All of which I am nobly trying to solve here.

[SM9WI8oI]

I don't. I just get perverse pleasure from pointing it out. Really perverse. I shouldn't go further into it.

whatever floats your boat
personally, i prefer naked women
16-60 for the most part, no fatties and plez groom yourself... over 18 for legal reasons
strictly speaking, its the boobs and curves

[Indoendris]

I'm more of a legman myself. Great avatar, btw.

Legs can be nice. But below the fun parts, maybe only the feet can give me any kind of "job". So I've got other priorities. I could be happy with a dual-amputee... probably halfway up the thigh would be my limit.

Actually, I'd probably prefer that just cuz she couldn't run out on me. And if she had a motorized wheelchair, I could take out the batteries.

Although, I'd be doing most of the work. So I would have to consider the logistics. There may be some sort of rope and pulley system that could make things easier... like theater wires. But then I'd need the equivalent of stage hands. I suppose if I had maybe 3 amputee chicks, the other two could work the wires while my attention was focused on the one.

[xanaxist]

You won the Cold War: but what of Russia? Or China? Latin America? Or the web of rivalry, hatred, revolution and war in the Middle East today and in the future? These issues and threats matter to you and to your future prosperity. You may not be living in the period known as Cold War anymore but that doesn't mean you should stop thinking strategically.

It's ridiculous to propose that our increased military spending since the end of the Cold War has been justified. We went from worrying about world annihilation and the second most powerful military ever ... to worrying about some guys in caves who had already blown their wad ... and somehow came to the conclusion we needed to spend more to combat the second than we needed for the first.

[GWRIeEQp]

Can't you write concisely? There's a lot of garbage in there meant to obfuscate that you really don't know what you're talking about. If you want to add value to the conversation, start by doing so yourself. Preferably without posting obviously biased articles of dubious accuracy. Just saying.

You could try that yourself, instead of just sniping at people you disagree with.

Just saying.

[Hetgvwic]

It would be a small but positive change. I'm sure it is mostly showmanship to highlight how the Republicans will obstruct everything though; that way he can say he asked for the power to shrink the government but Republicans opposed even that. I'm positive there are indeed some large cuts to departments and organizations which can be made but I don't think he'll actually make any of them.

On the upside there are only a grand total of 13 more Federal employees today than when Obama took office so he has kept the number down.

[13spebampiliece]

You've solved what, exactly? Posting pablum on the internet did what?

It's over your head, apparently. Like most things are. You're getting too much attention.

[6ZCo3xuK]

If you say something he disagrees with he'll just repeat that the world is a complicated and every single US government policy should be evaluated on its own merits. Never mind that the US federal government is a vast institution with thousands of programs, you're not allowed to make any generalizations about its policies.

[Rurcextedutty]

Seriously, I've never seen anyone with such poor judgement make so many ill-informed posts with the very intent of making a judgement against others. Well, except for Ben, Hera, and Kid, but I covered that already.

Even when I agree with you, your spiteful tone sickens me. Ben, Hera, and Kid are stubborn and ill-informed, but I'd rather be stuck on a desert island with them for a year, than with you for a day. Smoke some ****ing weed already.