Orrin Hatch introduces a bill that would downsize the federal government
Utah Senator Orrin Hatch has introduced a bill that would draw down the size of the federal government–with exceptions granted to national defense–to the 2009 level and freeze it at that level.
If we are to get our deficit under control, we need to rein in the runaway growth of our federal government,” Hatch said. “Simply put, the federal government is growing at breakneck speed and it is time to apply the brakes before it bankrupts the nation and the taxpayers. My bill is a commonsense approach to putting a halt to big government.
The bill states that:
• Three months after enactment, the head of each government agency – other than the CIA, FBI, Secret Service and Executive Office of President – will report the number of civilian employees within that agency on Feb 16, 2009, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
• If the number of employees is greater than existed on Feb 16, 2009, then each agency (except the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security) must, through attrition, reduce the number of employees to Feb. 16, 2009, levels
• Once the number of employees reaches Feb 16, 2009, levels, the head of each agency must ensure that those numbers remain the same. Thus, a hiring of a full time employee would require the reduction of another employee.
• The OMB would publicly disclose the total number of federal employees, the number of federal employees in each agency, and the salary of each federal employee.
• The Director of National Intelligence can exclude any employee from the above requirements if the director determines that such a disclosure would pose a threat to national security.
Hatch’s bill legislation is supported by the American Conservative Union, Americans for Limited Government and Americans for Tax Reform
Many Republicans have decried the growth of the federal government and many have promised in the upcoming election that they would downsize the federal government, but one thing that we have learned is that once a political party is in power they never quite live up to this promise. George W Bush is the latest example of a president who has grown the federal government with excessive spending–contrary to his stated beliefs–but Barack Obama has dwarfed the federal deficits that George W Bush created. The time is now to reign in the federal government and their irresponsible spending.
This bill–if it ever comes to a vote–will hold politicians to feet to the fire. We will know once and for all which politicians are serious about downsizing the federal government and which ones are not.
I don’t think that this bill will ever see the light of day, but even if this bill never makes it to a vote we will be able to judge which politicians brought this bill down to defeat even before it was voted on and we can act accordingly with our voices in November.
The time to cut down on “big government” is here as people all across this nation grow tired of big, bloated government bureaucracy and politicians who oppose this legislation will do so at their own peril. Orrin Hatch has produced a master stroke here and once and for all we will know the truth about politicians who claim they are for smaller government.
You are either with us or you are against us, and this bill could provide us with the platform to discover once and for all which side the various politicians fall on.
If this bill fails we will know exactly which politicians to blame due to either their actions or their inactions on this bill. Orrin Hatch summed it up best when he said:
That is almost a fifty percent increase since 2008,” Hatch said. “In 1974, former President Gerald Ford said: ‘A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.’ Today, we have an administration that seems hell bent on doing just that. That is unacceptable
Truer words have never been spoken. It is time to bring America back to the principles that she was founded on; a limited government based on the consent of the governed.
Orrin Hatch has put his money where his mouth is, it is now up to the politicians to prove to us if they are with us or if they are against us.
America's Watchtower 
This is encouraging Steve, but I’m also very aware of the fact that what they say during election time somehow morphs into something completely different. I have trust issues with the Republicans. I know they are the better choice in this environment, but I still have trust issues. Will they follow through or will they regress back to their same ole big government spending and expansion? I’m not sure what the answer is.
LikeLike
I hear you! This is probably nothing more than election year bluster, I doubt anything will come from it. It will be interesting to see how Republicans react if they gain back control.
LikeLike
LOL – if the GOP wins back control, they’ll be running around saying “Geez, where’s Senator Hatch’s bill? It was in the top drawer yesterday, dunno where it could have gotten to . . . Oh well, give us a couple of years, we’ll try to come up with a suitable replacement . . .”
I’m not certain of the employment figures, but the fact is that during President Bush’s administration, the cost of operating the national government almost doubled, leading Mr. Boortz to nail the GOP for doubling the size of government in a single administration.
Arbitrarily scaling back to this or that point doesn’t make sense – there’s an optimal level of government activity, in terms of the ratio of government spending relative to GDP, and they need to figure out how to get it down to there and keep it there. And I’m pretty sure the level is closer to the 2000 figure than the 2009 figure.
LikeLike
Let me clarify – government work, like most financial work, doesn’t create wealth. There’s no doubt that there’s a need for government, but only to the extent that it makes other things work well.
Financial work doesn’t create wealth, either. Stockbrokers and bankers simply store and manipulate wealth, and claim a significant portion of whatever passes through their hands. In terms of creating wealth, give me a unionized auto worker over a nonunion stockbroker every day of the week!
LikeLike
I agree, if Republicans get back in power they will misplace this bill. Neither side is serious about downsizing the federal government. I would vote for the 1800 figure. 🙂
LikeLike
It’s a good idea, and I applaud Hatch for it. But, I agree with GY about the apparent arbitrariness of the “2009 levels” and that there are better ways to gauge optimum size & efficiency.
I would also like to see some restrictions on creating new departments, offices, & agencies, which could otherwise be a way to get around the restrictions on current ones.
Plus, they could save some money by getting rid of (or greatly reducing and changing) certain agencies that do more harm than good, e.g., the National Endowment for the Arts. (I don’t know about you, but I don’t like the idea of my tax money funding someone to literally crap on a canvas, or any of the other garbage that passes for avant garde and “modern” art.)
LikeLike
Yeah, I am not sure why he chose 2009 as the year we should move back to, I would go well beyond that year if it was up to me.
LikeLike