The Federal Government Was Told To Make a List of Everything It Funds. 15 Years Later, There Still Isn't One.
A sad commentary on the sprawling size and eye-watering cost of the government.
What exactly is it that the federal government is doing around here? After well over a decade, the executive branch is still unable to provide a comprehensive answer.
"Each year, the federal government spends trillions of dollars on federal programs that support the American people and address policy goals," auditors at the Government Accountability Office (GAO) drolly reported this week. "However, it does not have a full inventory of these programs."
That's not merely a sad commentary on the sprawling size and eye-watering cost of the government. It's also a violation of federal law.
Back in 2011, Congress passed, and then-President Barack Obama signed, a law requiring the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to publish an annual list of all federal programs. As the GAO notes, that task has never been accomplished—although the auditors did hand out some faint praise for the "substantial progress" made during 2024.
In an update to the law approved in 2021, Congress gave OMB a deadline of January 2025 to complete its inventory of the roughly 2,700 federal programs. That deadline has now come and gone.
"A comprehensive listing of programs, along with related funding and performance information, would help federal decision-makers and the public better understand what the government does, what it spends, and what it achieves each year," auditors noted in the report, released Thursday. "It could also be a critical tool to help decision-makers better identify and manage fragmentation, overlap, and duplication across the federal government."
That was the intention behind the 2011 law, which was a bipartisan effort aimed at improving government transparency and accountability.
"At a time of budget deficits and almost overwhelming national debt, this legislation requires several significant steps that will make government work smarter even as it requires federal agencies to aggressively look for more ways to save taxpayer money," said Sen. Mark Warner (D–Va.) when the bill was passed in late 2010. He also noted how the law would give Congress "better data to help us identify overlapping federal programs."
In the years since, Congress has cranked up spending to unprecedented levels. After falling in the latter half of the 2010s, annual budget deficits now exceed the levels they reached in 2010 and 2011, when worries about borrowing defined much of the national political conversation.
Having a comprehensive list of all federal programs and their annual goals probably wouldn't have meaningfully changed the trajectory of spending or borrowing over the past two decades. Even so, the fact that the executive branch has failed to complete this task after 15 years speaks volumes about the status quo in Washington.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Of course not.
This is why lifting the lid on USAID was a big scandal for everyone who wasn't a bolshevik.
But remember - Boehm said it was illegal for DOGE to do so.
Well Doge didn't come up with 36 trillion in savings so it was a big waste of time. Meanwhile we have deserving illegal aliens who can't get autism counseling.
Are they trans?
No, he said that DOGE (alone) couldn't make the cuts. They could identify what needed cutting but most of it would have to actually be cut by Congress. But DOGE sure was easy to blame.
he doesnt want the cuts. he doesnt want for any reduction in federal bloat.
in his mind, massive increases in federal spending and employee count is a good, in and of itself.
Everything else he says is just dancing around that core principle of his.
He and the rest of Reason said DOGE's Big Balls didn't have the clearances - from the bureaucracy - that the bureaucracy said were necessary in order to look at what the bureaucracy were doing with the money.
They were screaming that DOGE was even looking and screaming even harder should the president use his authority to prioritize spending or even cut things that it was in his authority to cut.
Then they criticized the cuts that were made as 'not important enough to worry about'. Because if you can't go after the lowhanging fruit then you shouldn't even bother?
Every program not listed should be auto-cut to zero funding. And then start cutting the rest.
My fantasy:
Cut the federal budget to zero. Then have each department and major program make its case to the voters. Oh, and only actual tax-payers get to vote.
Nice idea, but it makes long-term planning impossible, unless you start off with zero baseline, as you want, and have the allocation good for 5 years, and then revote in 4 years but with a tweak vote, not a return to the zero baseline.
Oh, and anyone ineligible to vote because they don't pay taxes will be exempt from paying taxes when they would otherwise have to until the next vote. Obviously you'd agree with this.
>but it makes long-term planning impossible,
For who? The government? Good. Show results or you get cut off at the knees. 90% of government programs can't even identify what their core purpose is, have no clear goals, and no metrics to measure how well they are accomplishing the goals.
No, kill all the programs, lets see what breaks - start that back up again.
""The Federal Government Was Told To Make a List of Everything It Funds. 15 Years Later, There Still Isn't One.""
They are still working on it. They have made it to the "R"s.
But Doge was bad, mkay?
DOGE was bad because it was incompetently managed.
I’m certain you could do better than the guy who started and runs multiple companies worth multiple billions.
Yes. Democrats were in control of gov for 11 of those years. The answer was already given when a small portion of the total fraud was found in Blue States.
They will not self incriminate is the answer...
How can the executive have a list of what they spend on when the legislature doesn't pass a budget to base it on?