Obama doubles down in advocating active government, as GOP warns of excess

• 

A passage in President Obama's recent commencement address at Ohio State University has highlighted the stark contrast between his view of the role of government and that of his Republican opponents, and it may portend tough political clashes for the remainder of his term.

"Unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems," Obama told graduates. "Some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works. They'll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices."

Critics point out the fear of government tyranny was also a prime motivator of the founding fathers as they crafted the Constitution.

"I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive," Thomas Jefferson said.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety," Ben Franklin said.

But Obama follows "a different tradition," Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute said. "He comes from the tradition of Woodrow Wilson and the so-called progressive movement that sees government as a wonderful, good thing that is supposed to take care of us."

Jefferson might be dismayed at just how "energetic" our government has become. Measured per household, the federal government is spending more than at any time in its history. Data compiled by the Heritage Foundation shows that since 1965 spending has grown by 152 percent, from $11,900 to $30,015 per household in 2012. Spending is expected to rise to $34,602 per household by 2022.

Many fear the U.S., burdened by high taxes, deficit spending and unprecedented debt, is edging toward a European style economy. "If we become more like Europe, and that's basically what president Obama was implying we should be like in his Ohio state address, we're going to have the exact same problems," Mitchell said, "a very stifling tax burden that discourages productive behavior while at the same time having an excessive public sector that lures people's into unproductive activity."

Lorelei Kelly of the New America Foundation disagrees. She thinks the president's Ohio State address was tailored to the talents of a tech savvy younger generation. She hopes their skills will one day  transform bureaucratic inefficiencies into effective, responsive governance.

"At the end of the day, everybody wants traffic signals that work, schools for their kids to go to that are safe and an economy that's connected," she said.

"Young people have a tremendous role to play in a very positive sense, because they understand their whole world view is connected," she said. "Everybody loves to beat up on the government and sound like we can do more with less, but the truth is what we need to start thinking about is how to update, modernize and reform our government."

Even so, after Saturday's ceremony, graduates at Ohio State and hundreds of other colleges around the U.S. will step into a world marked by the harsh realities of scarce jobs, aging parents and the looming costs of entitlements -- all challenges that will test their faith in government as few generations have been tested.

View the original article here

What to Cut: Excess federal property costing taxpayers billions

• 

A prime example of how slowly the federal government moves is a piece of prime real estate in Washington's tony Georgetown neighborhood -- an old steam-generating plant with a spectacular view of the Potomac waterfront. 

The government-owned building was finally sold to a private developer for $19.5 million this month. But it sat there for 10 years -- off the  market and vacant -- while taxpayers footed the bill for its upkeep. 

A for-sale sign only went up the day before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform dragged General Services Administration officials into the musty structure for a hearing last summer. Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., berated a bewildered GSA official at that hearing, saying: "You can't get your job done! I don't care if it's a Republican or Democratic administration, the job is not getting done!" 

Congressional frustration may be warranted. The federal government owns or leases between 55,000 and 77,000 vacant properties. But it's impossible to tell exactly how many. No precise inventory has been kept. 

Selling them off, though, could save taxpayers between $3 billion and $8 billion a year, according to various analysts. That's nothing to scoff at as the government grapples with a mounting debt and sequester-tied spending cuts. 

"These properties could be used first to consolidate agencies that now are in leased buildings," D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton told Fox News. 

Tom Schatz, of Citizens Against Government Waste said: "This is a problem that has been identified for years, and every time someone in the White House says 'let's sell property,' the red tape is simply too much for this process." 

In 1987, amid media coverage of the nation's persistent homeless problem, Congress passed a law that said unused government properties first had to be offered to other federal agencies, then to state agencies, and, as a last resort, for use as homeless shelters before they could be put on the market. 

"We spend about 8 billion dollars a year maintaining properties that we have no use for. Now that 8 billion dollars is just thrown down the drain because we can't get past the homeless lobby to get a common-sense way to take care of their problems and also us to unload properties," Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., told Fox News. 

Former Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., notes that Congress is full of people who've never held private-sector jobs."There is nothing wrong with that. But it means they have never really been in the position of running something, of making hard decisions, of having scarce resources and having to set priorities." 

Schatz echoes that sentiment -- noting the way the government handles the excess properties is counter to common sense. "Rather than having the government get the first choice, the first choice should be to sell and then go back down the line. There are plenty of places for homeless shelters," he said. 

Legislation to require the federal government to expedite the sale of underused properties died in the last Congress. It was resurrected this year in Republican Rep. Paul Ryan's proposed budget, which the Senate voted down this month. 

But Norton has hopes Congress will begin to remedy the problem this year."The Oversight and Government Reform committee has just passed again its bill which I think has a good chance of getting all the way to the Senate," she said. 

Still, if Congress does pass a bill to sell excess properties, inventorying all of them would be a daunting undertaking given that they're spread across all government agencies.

View the original article here

What to Cut: Excess federal property costing taxpayers billions

A prime example of how slowly the federal government moves is a piece of prime real estate in Washington's tony Georgetown neighborhood -- an old steam-generating plant with a spectacular view of the Potomac waterfront. 

The government-owned building was finally sold to a private developer for $19.5 million this month. But it sat there for 10 years -- off the  market and vacant -- while taxpayers footed the bill for its upkeep. 

A for-sale sign only went up the day before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform dragged General Services Administration officials into the musty structure for a hearing last summer. Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., berated a bewildered GSA official at that hearing, saying: "You can't get your job done! I don't care if it's a Republican or Democratic administration, the job is not getting done!" 

Congressional frustration may be warranted. The federal government owns or leases between 55,000 and 77,000 vacant properties. But it's impossible to tell exactly how many. No precise inventory has been kept. 

Selling them off, though, could save taxpayers between $3 billion and $8 billion a year, according to various analysts. That's nothing to scoff at as the government grapples with a mounting debt and sequester-tied spending cuts. 

"These properties could be used first to consolidate agencies that now are in leased buildings," D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton told Fox News. 

Tom Schatz, of Citizens Against Government Waste said: "This is a problem that has been identified for years, and every time someone in the White House says 'let's sell property,' the red tape is simply too much for this process." 

In 1987, amid media coverage of the nation's persistent homeless problem, Congress passed a law that said unused government properties first had to be offered to other federal agencies, then to state agencies, and, as a last resort, for use as homeless shelters before they could be put on the market. 

"We spend about 8 billion dollars a year maintaining properties that we have no use for. Now that 8 billion dollars is just thrown down the drain because we can't get past the homeless lobby to get a common-sense way to take care of their problems and also us to unload properties," Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., told Fox News. 

Former Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., notes that Congress is full of people who've never held private-sector jobs."There is nothing wrong with that. But it means they have never really been in the position of running something, of making hard decisions, of having scarce resources and having to set priorities." 

Schatz echoes that sentiment -- noting the way the government handles the excess properties is counter to common sense. "Rather than having the government get the first choice, the first choice should be to sell and then go back down the line. There are plenty of places for homeless shelters," he said. 

Legislation to require the federal government to expedite the sale of underused properties died in the last Congress. It was resurrected this year in Republican Rep. Paul Ryan's proposed budget, which the Senate voted down this month. 

But Norton has hopes Congress will begin to remedy the problem this year."The Oversight and Government Reform committee has just passed again its bill which I think has a good chance of getting all the way to the Senate," she said. 

Still, if Congress does pass a bill to sell excess properties, inventorying all of them would be a daunting undertaking given that they're spread across all government agencies.

View the original article here