The forest and the trees, the DOE, the EPA and other federal agencies.

It is true that redundancy creates waste. If one agency is covering the base, we do not need others to come over and cover the same base, but we do need them to cover others.

I am for a small focused central government and unique state’s rights and regulations. However, don’t just think that dissolving the DOE or EPA is going to cut your taxes. In fact, the amount we ALL pay in total would go up if some federal agencies were dissolved.

Why will it cost tax payers more to dissolve a federal agency than keeping it?

To answer this, you need to go back in history and find out why the DOE exists. I have moved from state to state with 3 kids to educate, we have been to public, private, charter, and magnet schools in 6 states and various districts within these states. We need an educated population more than ever, the key to many issues facing the US today revolves around educating our kids. IF the states would educate our kids at a high equal level, well that might make the case for a smaller DOE, but really this is not happening. Move from one state to another and attend schools and you will realize that there is a huge pendulum between states, what might be learned in 5th grade in one state is 3rd grade in another. This is where the federal DOE needs to provide guidance between states, educate state DOE’s on top preforming states and provide support. No, we do not need redundancy, but we do need a federal level of guidance and standards. The reason we have federal agencies is not to waste money but to allow us to stop inventing the wheel in individual states.

On the EPA (in this example) why does it exist to begin with? The EPA was established to handle issues that go beyond a single state. For example, let’s assume when Florida burns the sugar cane fields yearly (which happens) that smoke is shifted into Georgia. Who is responsible to ensure the air quality that shifts from one state to another? The EPA. Let’s say, South Dakota removes protections to the river supply and allows pollution into the river which flows into other states, who handles this? The EPA. What if the EPA is dissolved? Well every state would have to add members to their EPA to cover the copy and hire lawyers to deal with state to state issues. This cost of adding to state EPA agencies would be reflected in your state or property taxes. And if you added up all the personnel that the states added it would be much higher than the cost of those in the federal EPA.

What about redundancy? This is where we need to focus and possibly cut back to save total taxes not just federal taxes. IF the federal DOE or EPA is covering certain issues well, then the states should not need anyone to cover those issues and vice a versa. There needs to be a clear-cut policy on what issues the Federal agencies will cover and what issues the States agencies will cover. That is where money is saved and economy to scale is achieved.