Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

In the interest of reaching around the aisle and trying to understand alternative viewpoints, please recommend which of these 22 programs (if any) are worthy of having federal tax dollars spent on. Or, defend why they should be funded.


1. The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education, which donates agricultural commodities and financial assistance to carry out school feeding programs in foreign countries.

2. The Rural Business and Cooperative Service, which provides loans, grants and payments intended to increase opportunities in rural communities.

3. The Economic Development Administration, which provides federal grants to communities in support of locally-developed economic plans.

4. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which subsidizes advisory and consulting services for small and medium-size manufacturers.

5. 21st Century Community Learning Centers, which helps communities establish or expand centers to provide before- and after-school programs and summer school programs.

6. Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, an Education Department program that provides grants to support college preparation for low-income students.

7. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which researches ways to enhance the effectiveness of health services.

8. The Advanced Research Projects Agency, which provides support for Energy Department projects.

9. The National Wildlife Refuge Fund, which compensates communities for lost tax revenue when the federal government acquires their land.

10. The Global Climate Change Initiative, a proposal that reflects Trump’s decision last year to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement.

11. The NASA Office of Education, which provides grants to colleges and universities, museums and science centers. The funding would be redirected within NASA.

12. The Chemical Safety Board, which is tasked with investigating accidents at chemical facilities.

13. The Corporation for National and Community Service, which funds service opportunities, promotes volunteering and helps nonprofit organizations find volunteers.

14. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds public television and radio stations including Public Broadcasting Service and NPR.


15. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, which funds museums and libraries nationwide with grants.

16. The Legal Services Corporation, a nonprofit that provides civil legal assistance for low-income individuals.

17. The National Endowment for the Arts, which funds American artists and projects with grants.

18. The National Endowment for the Humanities, which provides grants to American humanities scholars.

19. The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, which funds community development projects nationwide.

20. The Denali Commission, the Delta Regional Authority and the Northern Border Regional Commission, which fund infrastructure and economic projects in specified areas.

21. The U.S. Trade and Development Agency, which provides U.S. goods and services for foreign projects.

22. The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a think tank focused on international affairs and foreign policy.

This talk of a reach around has me a little concerned.

Does everything on that list even account for $5 billion ? There's some stuff we could certainly do without, but this stuff is small potatoes.

In my mind, doing these things will do far more to get budget under control:

1. Get health care costs under control to lessen costs of medicare and medicaid.

2. Stop wasteful military procurement and spending.

3. Social Security changes (paying SS on all income and raising retirement age).

4. Lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes.

89Hen wrote:This talk of a reach around has me a little concerned.

Sorry, Freudian Slip

Pwns wrote:Does everything on that list even account for $5 billion ? There's some stuff we could certainly do without, but this stuff is small potatoes.

In my mind, doing these things will do far more to get budget under control:

1. Get health care costs under control to lessen costs of medicare and medicaid.

2. Stop wasteful military procurement and spending.

3. Social Security changes (paying SS on all income and raising retirement age).

4. Lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes.

I'm trying to find out how much each got over the years.

The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education

The program was first implemented in FY2003 with $100 million of Commodity Credit Corporation funds as stipulated in the 2002 farm bill. Beginning in FY2004, the authorizing statute provides for the program to be carried out with appropriated funding. The FY2004 agricultural appropriations act (P.L. 108-199) provided $50 million to carry out the program.

Subsequent funding was generally at $100 million a year.[6] There were attempts to give it more permanent funding levels during 2007 and 2008.[4] and it received an additional $80 million in 2009.[8] By 2011–2012, the funding level was around $200 million per year.[9] It was also credited with improving school attendance, especially among girls, who were more likely to be allowed to go to school if a meal was being provided.[3]

The Rural Business and Cooperative Service

$250 million/year

Pwns wrote:Does everything on that list even account for $5 billion ? There's some stuff we could certainly do without, but this stuff is small potatoes.

In my mind, doing these things will do far more to get budget under control:

1. Get health care costs under control to lessen costs of medicare and medicaid.

2. Stop wasteful military procurement and spending.

3. Social Security changes (paying SS on all income and raising retirement age).

4. Lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes.

By god we pretty much agree.

The Economic Development Administration

$250 million/year

Agree with the other poster - small potatoes. Probably does a decent amount of goodwill and is a tiny, tiny fraction of what we spend total. Focus on the big stuff, 80/20 stuff first.

The Chemical Safety Board, which is tasked with investigating accidents at chemical facilities.


$11 Million


The U.S. Chemical Safety Board is authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and became operational in January 1998. The Senate legislative history states: "The principal role of the new chemical safety board is to investigate accidents to determine the conditions and circumstances which led up to the event and to identify the cause or causes so that similar events might be prevented." Congress gave the CSB a unique statutory mission and provided in law that no other agency or executive branch official may direct the activities of the Board. Following the successful model of the National Transportation Safety Board and the Department of Transportation, Congress directed that the CSB's investigative function be completely independent of the rulemaking, inspection, and enforcement authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Congress recognized that Board investigations would identify chemical hazards that were not addressed by those agencies.[3]

http://www.stltoday.com/opinion/editori ... 55226.html

When a massive steam explosion last year at Loy Lange Box Co. near Soulard sent a steel tank rocketing through the air, killing four people, only one federal agency had the authority and expertise to enter the scene, conduct investigations and provide an expert assessment on how to prevent such future accidents. The agency was the U.S. Chemical Safety Board.

In his reckless bid to gut any agency that regulates U.S. business, President Donald Trump is trying to kill the CSB, the chemical industry’s canary in the coal mine. Trump’s 2018 budget request proposed to cut CSB funding to the point that it could no longer operate. Senior administration officials say the 2019 budget will do the same unless Congress intervenes to restore funding.

Trump’s effort couldn’t possibly be for reasons of fiscal efficiency. The CSB’s annual budget is a mere $11 million. That wouldn’t even cover a day’s worth of work on Trump’s proposed $21.6 billion border wall.

The Denali Commission, the Delta Regional Authority and the Northern Border Regional Commission

$50 Million total. Nothing about the Appalachian Regional Authority, who has a $150 Budget

These 25 Senators tried to eliminate all funding in 2016:

Barrasso (R-WY)
Coats (R-IN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daines (R-MT)
Enzi (R-WY)
Ernst (R-IA)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Gardner (R-CO)
Grassley (R-IA)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (R-WI)
Lankford (R-OK)
Lee (R-UT)
McCain (R-AZ)
Moran (R-KS)
Risch (R-ID)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sasse (R-NE)
Scott (R-SC)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)

dbackjon wrote:The Chemical Safety Board, which is tasked with investigating accidents at chemical facilities.


$11 Million


The U.S. Chemical Safety Board is authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and became operational in January 1998. The Senate legislative history states: "The principal role of the new chemical safety board is to investigate accidents to determine the conditions and circumstances which led up to the event and to identify the cause or causes so that similar events might be prevented." Congress gave the CSB a unique statutory mission and provided in law that no other agency or executive branch official may direct the activities of the Board. Following the successful model of the National Transportation Safety Board and the Department of Transportation, Congress directed that the CSB's investigative function be completely independent of the rulemaking, inspection, and enforcement authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Congress recognized that Board investigations would identify chemical hazards that were not addressed by those agencies.[3]

http://www.stltoday.com/opinion/editori ... 55226.html

When a massive steam explosion last year at Loy Lange Box Co. near Soulard sent a steel tank rocketing through the air, killing four people, only one federal agency had the authority and expertise to enter the scene, conduct investigations and provide an expert assessment on how to prevent such future accidents. The agency was the U.S. Chemical Safety Board.

In his reckless bid to gut any agency that regulates U.S. business, President Donald Trump is trying to kill the CSB, the chemical industry’s canary in the coal mine. Trump’s 2018 budget request proposed to cut CSB funding to the point that it could no longer operate. Senior administration officials say the 2019 budget will do the same unless Congress intervenes to restore funding.

Trump’s effort couldn’t possibly be for reasons of fiscal efficiency. The CSB’s annual budget is a mere $11 million. That wouldn’t even cover a day’s worth of work on Trump’s proposed $21.6 billion border wall.

Being in the chemical industry myself, I do have to ask the question as to why OSHA wouldn't be able to do the investigations that this article is saying they can't do? No offense, but a lot of these accidents aren't rocket science (unless they happen on a launch pad, then they are rocket science). Workplace safety has come a long way since Bhopal in '84, and really, even well before '98 the field of workplace safety and accident investigations, including in the chemical industry, were well developed. It does seem odd that there are multiple agencies with a fair amount of cross-over in terms of their responsibilities. But then again, some people will snicker that that is government.

dbackjon wrote:In the interest of reaching around the aisle and trying to understand alternative viewpoints, please recommend which of these 22 programs (if any) are worthy of having federal tax dollars spent on. Or, defend why they should be funded.

5. 21st Century Community Learning Centers, which helps communities establish or expand centers to provide before- and after-school programs and summer school programs.

6. Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, an Education Department program that provides grants to support college preparation for low-income students.

12. The Chemical Safety Board, which is tasked with investigating accidents at chemical facilities.

14. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds public television and radio stations including Public Broadcasting Service and NPR.

15. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, which funds museums and libraries nationwide with grants.

16. The Legal Services Corporation, a nonprofit that provides civil legal assistance for low-income individuals.

19. The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, which funds community development projects nationwide.

These are the ones I'd keep. No idea what most of the others do...

GannonFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:The Chemical Safety Board, which is tasked with investigating accidents at chemical facilities.


$11 Million


The U.S. Chemical Safety Board is authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and became operational in January 1998. The Senate legislative history states: "The principal role of the new chemical safety board is to investigate accidents to determine the conditions and circumstances which led up to the event and to identify the cause or causes so that similar events might be prevented." Congress gave the CSB a unique statutory mission and provided in law that no other agency or executive branch official may direct the activities of the Board. Following the successful model of the National Transportation Safety Board and the Department of Transportation, Congress directed that the CSB's investigative function be completely independent of the rulemaking, inspection, and enforcement authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Congress recognized that Board investigations would identify chemical hazards that were not addressed by those agencies.[3]

http://www.stltoday.com/opinion/editori ... 55226.html

When a massive steam explosion last year at Loy Lange Box Co. near Soulard sent a steel tank rocketing through the air, killing four people, only one federal agency had the authority and expertise to enter the scene, conduct investigations and provide an expert assessment on how to prevent such future accidents. The agency was the U.S. Chemical Safety Board.

In his reckless bid to gut any agency that regulates U.S. business, President Donald Trump is trying to kill the CSB, the chemical industry’s canary in the coal mine. Trump’s 2018 budget request proposed to cut CSB funding to the point that it could no longer operate. Senior administration officials say the 2019 budget will do the same unless Congress intervenes to restore funding.

Trump’s effort couldn’t possibly be for reasons of fiscal efficiency. The CSB’s annual budget is a mere $11 million. That wouldn’t even cover a day’s worth of work on Trump’s proposed $21.6 billion border wall.

Being in the chemical industry myself, I do have to ask the question as to why OSHA wouldn't be able to do the investigations that this article is saying they can't do? No offense, but a lot of these accidents aren't rocket science (unless they happen on a launch pad, then they are rocket science). Workplace safety has come a long way since Bhopal in '84, and really, even well before '98 the field of workplace safety and accident investigations, including in the chemical industry, were well developed. It does seem odd that there are multiple agencies with a fair amount of cross-over in terms of their responsibilities. But then again, some people will snicker that that is government.

It was set up to be an independent, specialized agency, just like the NTSB investigates Transportation accidents. OSHA may not have the specific expertise to do a chemical accident.

And the point was to eliminate the spillover - by consolidating it all in one agency.

Pretty good write-up here at that left-wing anti-business rag, Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/samlemonic ... b79923da32

Pwns wrote:Does everything on that list even account for $5 billion ? There's some stuff we could certainly do without, but this stuff is small potatoes.

In my mind, doing these things will do far more to get budget under control:

1. Get health care costs under control to lessen costs of medicare and medicaid.

2. Stop wasteful military procurement and spending.

3. Social Security changes (paying SS on all income and raising retirement age).

4. Lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes.

Nonstarter, pal. Let me opt the fuck out of the system first. Let me stop paying RIGHT NOW, keep the money I've paid in...your solution would be a huuuuuuuge tax on me.

Then again, If they'd just stop taking money from SS to pay for other shit, the program would be solvent as it stands.

dbackjon wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Being in the chemical industry myself, I do have to ask the question as to why OSHA wouldn't be able to do the investigations that this article is saying they can't do? No offense, but a lot of these accidents aren't rocket science (unless they happen on a launch pad, then they are rocket science). Workplace safety has come a long way since Bhopal in '84, and really, even well before '98 the field of workplace safety and accident investigations, including in the chemical industry, were well developed. It does seem odd that there are multiple agencies with a fair amount of cross-over in terms of their responsibilities. But then again, some people will snicker that that is government.

It was set up to be an independent, specialized agency, just like the NTSB investigates Transportation accidents. OSHA may not have the specific expertise to do a chemical accident.

And the point was to eliminate the spillover - by consolidating it all in one agency.

Pretty good write-up here at that left-wing anti-business rag, Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/samlemonic ... b79923da32

OSHA has plenty of access to expertise - heck, even in the article you linked there are at least three different professional agencies (one of which I belong to) that already provide that kind of expertise to the CSB. And OSHA does already investigate the same things that the CSB investigates. I agree, they do diverge at some point and serve different needs, but maybe that's where we should be asking the question on why they do and see if we can be more efficient in how we do it. The CSB has been around for 20 years, OSHA has been around for much longer - nothing wrong with reviewing if we're doing it the best way we can be doing it.

An overly simplistic way to look at this critical issue...

Which program(s) have lived up to their initial expectations...which have exceeded...which are money pits???

Which ones best serve the taxpayers of the United States???

Which are part of the Constitutionally outlined federal responsibilities???

Lots more info needed to make a decision that is not just knee-jerk...

89Hen wrote:This talk of a reach around has me a little concerned.

Just got here and was thinking the same thing! Stupid autocorrect!

Hey look - the recently popular Jeff Flake voted to axe all this stuff

Somebody call CNN they need to revoke his knighthood

Pwns wrote:Does everything on that list even account for $5 billion ? There's some stuff we could certainly do without, but this stuff is small potatoes.

In my mind, doing these things will do far more to get budget under control:

1. Get health care costs under control to lessen costs of medicare and medicaid.

2. Stop wasteful military procurement and spending.

3. Social Security changes (paying SS on all income and raising retirement age).

4. Lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes.

That wouldn’t accomplish anything because what you receive is based on what you pay in. If you remove the income cap, then you remove the benefit cap.

Better yet, as AZ already said, give people the option of opting out.

BDKJMU wrote:

Pwns wrote:Does everything on that list even account for $5 billion ? There's some stuff we could certainly do without, but this stuff is small potatoes.

In my mind, doing these things will do far more to get budget under control:

1. Get health care costs under control to lessen costs of medicare and medicaid.

2. Stop wasteful military procurement and spending.

3. Social Security changes (paying SS on all income and raising retirement age).

4. Lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes.

That wouldn’t accomplish anything because what you receive is based on what you pay in. If you remove the income cap, then you remove the benefit cap.

Better yet, as AZ already said, give people the option of opting out.

THe other side of that - people won't do anything or do enough for retirement and the public will be on the hook for helping them out. SS is a lose/lose situation.

Ibanez wrote:

BDKJMU wrote: That wouldn’t accomplish anything because what you receive is based on what you pay in. If you remove the income cap, then you remove the benefit cap.

Better yet, as AZ already said, give people the option of opting out.

THe other side of that - people won't do anything or do enough for retirement and the public will be on the hook for helping them out. SS is a lose/lose situation.

Great and realistic point. They’d probably spend it all buying the useless shit that drives the economy now.

kalm wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
THe other side of that - people won't do anything or do enough for retirement and the public will be on the hook for helping them out. SS is a lose/lose situation.

Great and realistic point. They’d probably spend it all buying the useless shit that drives the economy now.

Dick. You know what i'm saying. The same poverty conditions that existed before SS, exist today will
continue to exist and without the forced safety net the situation will only be exacerbated.

Thankfully - the Presidents budget (any president) is essentially DOA when it arrives at Congress. Thankfully both parties see how terrible his budget is.

Ibanez wrote:

kalm wrote:
Great and realistic point. They’d probably spend it all buying the useless shit that drives the economy now.

Dick. You know what i'm saying. The same poverty conditions that existed before SS, exist today will
continue to exist and without the forced safety net the situation will only be exacerbated.

Thankfully - the Presidents budget (any president) is essentially DOA when it arrives at Congress. Thankfully both parties see how terrible his budget is.

I honestly wasn't trying to be a dick. I agree with you. My second comment was semi-satirical but also agrees with your sentiment that they'll spend it rather than save it and then still need government assistance in the end. The satire comes from the fact we have companies and a greater economy that need them to spend rather than to save in order to maintain our cushy standard of living.

Government social programs don't just enable the recipients, they help drive consumption.