February 23, 2009
Breaking up DSHS
Rep. Mike Armstrong's bill to split DSHS into four separate agencies might be the biggest under-the-radar issue of this legislative session, yet with substantial implications for the administration of state government. His bill is moving out of committee. Here's a release and coverage of the topic.
It's an open question, however, how far the bill will go toward landing on the Governor's desk for a potential signature.
Posted by Eric Earling at February 23, 2009
08:45 AM | Email This
1. We don't need to break up government programs, we need to shut them down altogether. There's this failed belief that we need all of these regulatory minutia, etc. Much of the bureaucracy exists solely to preserve itself, and not for any useful function. We should pass a law that forces the government to contract if the the private sector contracts.
2. Olympia will never break up DSHS, as it's easier to hide waste and incompetence in huge, bloated, faceless bureaucracies
3. Has anybody heard of Accountability? What is needed is Accountability in the system not, a breakup into more pieces that will allow each piece to grow larger and increase the overall more rapid growth of Government. This is a Win, Win game-play for further Growth of Big Government and a further loss to the Tax Payer. What is needed is an independent investigative committee with the Power of Law to indite, prosecute, fine, fire, incarcerate any department head or employee within the system of DSHS. This investigative committee and others should be an ongoing Institution, investigating all complaints throughout Government. By doing so, Government would go from a Bloated Liberty destroying Cancer to a much smaller, affordable, effective to the needs and less cost to the Tax Payer.
Politicians as a whole, want to grow Government not, shrink it. They want to grow Government, further empower and enrich themselves at the same time all, at the expense and the peril of Liberty, the health of the Economy, the Tax Payer and the Nation. Mike Armstrong whether, he is a Dem or a Republican, is just another run of the mill politician.....He's a Craphead!
4. Funny how this Armstrong clown thinks that breaking up this, 'pander to parasites' outfit into smaller outfits instead of dumping this complete waste of EXTORTED tax dollars...
5. I don't understand how moving the programs into other agencies -- making the existing agencies bigger -- will improve anything. If there are problems, they should be addressed directly.
6. Locke for Sec. of Commerce?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0209/Locke_in_Commerce_mix.html
I'm actually OK with that. Locke was decent for a D on business issues.
Seems better then others he's likely to appoint. And Locke won't be instinctively anti-trade.
(Prediction: Lew Rockwell folks drop in and say Locke will sell us to the Chinese because he's of Chinese ancestry or something like that.)
7. I think Armstrong is being practical. DSHS is such a mess...it's like having a birdsnest in your fishing reel.
Armstrong knows you cannot start chopping until you can isolate some of the cost centers.
Hopefully seperating is merely PHASE 1.
8. DSHS is a dysfunctional institution. I support the breaking apart of the organization. Maybe that will solve some of the leadership problems.
9. Yes... let's eliminate DSHS! I mean, those abused kids deserve what they get, right?
Sheesh.
10. demo--
The solution is not to eliminate...it's to right-size, which means pretty much eliminate.
Why don't YOU take care of all those abused kids you are so concerned with demo??
Easier to obfuscate that responsibility to the incompetent, ineffective government than actually put your own money where your piehole is.
Like all LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS, anytime someone questions the guv'mint service and cost of provided it, you go batshit screaming kids will suffer & die.
No sale around here you KLOWN.
11. @10: "Right size" an overstretched department? You really are crazy.
12. Mere re-shuffle. DSHS was originally created by COMBINING a bunch of different agencies. Splitting it up is just Back to the Future.