RUSHTALK Digest - 5 Oct 1996 to 6 Oct 1996
Stephen A Frye
safrye at CCGATE.DP.BECKMAN.COM
Wed Oct 9 10:06:02 MDT 1996
>There should also be a formula for federal employees based on the
>amount of their budget that is returned to the treasury and the
I agree with you here, but some more fundamental government
philosophies will have to change first. Departments are encouraged
to spend their entire budget - even of they don't need it. Because
if they don't, they won't get the money next year. So they spend
it on absolutely wasteful things - just to insure the money will be
there next year.
Also - get rid of GSA completely. My wife's office wanted some
portable phones. She bought one at Target (for which she was
reimbursed) that cost $62.00. The manager was reprimanded after
authorizing the reimbursement because such purchases should be made
through GSA. Subsequent phone purchases - THE EXACT SAME MODEL -
were $250 each.
My years in the military demonstrated the exact same thing. At
least in the U. S. Navy of the 70's, the $100 hammer was no
exaggeration. And we saw exactly the same thing happening with
fuel and money allocations. Use this years fuel allocation, even
if it's totally wasted, so that we'll get it - and more - next
year. Radios, radars, tools, all thrown in the trash, because they
were over stock and hence wouldn't allow us to pass an inspection.
Would this cure the budget problems? Of course not. But across
the board of the entire government purchasing plans, I think it
would make a significant dent.
Oh well - my two cents (my $400 if I worked for the government).
More information about the Rushtalk