|
Federal
Register Watch by Mike Powers June
23 - July 3, 2003
The Federal
Register is the official daily publication for Rules, Proposed Rules,
and Notices of Federal agencies and organizations, as well as Executive
Orders and other Presidential Documents.
This column attempts to summarize the highlights (or lowlights)
of the Federal Register during the preceding week. Instructions
for subscribing to the Federal Register can be found at the end of the
column. JUNE
23, 2003: MANAGEMENT
AND BUDGET OFFICE – This
directive requires Federal agencies to electronically post announcements
of funding opportunities under financial assistance programs that award
discretionary grants and cooperative agreements. Giving
away other people’s money might be the one thing that the federal
government does well. http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-15800.htm JUNE
24, 2003: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CORRECTIONS – This
notice announces the availability of $150,000
for the ICI Grant, an “instrument and protocol for assessing
organizational culture in prisons.”
The grant is directed at addressing problems of “staff
sexual misconduct, excessive violence, and high staff turnover rates”
that are prevalent in the government-run prison system. Like
many government grants, this proposal includes a myriad of fancy slogans
and intellectual catch phrases that promise great results if the
guidelines are followed. This makes the program sound critical enough to
justify the spending. For
example, the three main intervention strategies of the ICI’s
“Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument” (OCAI) include
“Strategic Planning, Management and Response,” “Leading and
Sustaining Change,” and “Intensive Technical Assistance.”
Government
grant writers are experts at the art of “creating” something out of
nothing. http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-15882.htm JUNE
25, 2003: FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE – This
rule revises the Food Stamp
Program regulations to ensure that recipients can use their electronic food stamp benefits across state borders.
Federal funding (via taxpayer largesse) will pay for the
operational cost of this function, up to $500,000 annually. Actual
food stamp coupons, for the most part, have been phased out.
In order to eliminate the shame and stigma experienced by welfare
recipients, the federal government mandated that states implement electronic
benefit transfers (food stamp debit cards, if you will) by 2002. The
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) is an electronic system that allows a
recipient to authorize transfer of their government benefits from a
Federal account to a retailer account to pay for products received. Should the stigma that accompanies welfare be eliminated through systems
like EBT? Certainly not. After
all, government welfare is not a charitable contribution.
It is a benefit that depends upon coerced “contributions” by
taxpaying citizens. Welfare
recipients benefit from the economic harm that the government imposes
upon non-recipients. Perhaps
the bureaucrats should rename the program Electronic
Taxpayer Transfer. That
would be a more accurate description.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-15897.htm NATIONAL PARK SERVICE – This
rule announces the pending nominations of properties being considered
for listing in the National Register.
There are over 76,000
listings that make up the National Register, “the
Nation's official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation,”
according to the National Park Service. There
is good reason for property owners and municipalities to submit their
properties for consideration. Most revolve around taxpayer largesse.
Properties
that are listed in the National Register benefit in several ways,
including consideration in the
planning for federal or federally assisted projects; eligibility
for federal tax benefits; and qualification
for federal assistance for historic preservation. http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-15980.htm JUNE
26, 2003: COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICE (CSO) – The
Compassion Capital Fund (CCF) awards provide “experienced intermediary
organizations with funds to deliver technical assistance” to small
faith-based and community organizations.
The Administration for Children and Families will award $4.2
million in FY 2003 for the CCF program. Of
course, every government “handout” has strings attached.
According to the CSO, “a
cooperative agreement allows substantial
Federal involvement in the activities undertaken with Federal
financial support.” (Italics added.) Like
every other government program (and unlike the mutually beneficial,
voluntary free market), these awards benefit some at the expense of
others. Yet, it is ironic
that faith-based organizations are eagerly joining their secular
brethren in the quest for government goodies.
Perhaps they forgot the Seventh Commandment that decrees, “Thou
shalt not steal.” Or,
maybe they believe that the ends do, indeed, justify the means. Despite
the Compassion Capital Fund’s kindhearted moniker, little compassion
is shown for the taxpayers who involuntarily contribute to this program.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-16076.htm JULY
1, 2003: LABOR
DEPARTMENT – The
stated purpose of this grant is to “contribute
to the reduction of social
conflict and violence in Colombia by improving the ability of the
Colombian trade union movement to participate in the economic, political
and social development of the country; protect human and worker rights;
and play a positive role in the peace process.” A
specious purpose at best. For
one, this is simply an excuse to use someone else’s money to spread
the scourge of labor unions abroad.
How do unions reduce social conflict and violence?
After all, they rely on an adversarial relationship between
management and workers just to succeed.
Besides,
how do strikes reduce social conflict?
A large number of French workers, especially government
employees, are unionized, and the country experiences frequent
disruptions in basic services due to recurrent strikes by labor unions.
Hardly a vehicle for reducing social conflict.
A
second, more important point: It is hard to dispute that much
of the conflict in Colombia is due to the U.S. government’s war on
drugs and their involvement in the drug eradication efforts in Colombia.
About
90% of the cocaine that enters the U.S. comes from Colombia, and the
government has been shoveling military aid into Colombia for years in an
effort to destroy the drug production at its source.
Plan
Colombia, which began in
2000 and made Colombia the third-largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid,
is a multibillion-dollar U.S. aid program designed to assist the
Colombian government in its efforts to combat narcotrafficking. The plan
provides for 800 U.S.
advisers—half of them military—and includes programs to train
and equip Colombia’s military and police, interdict drugs, and
“encourage” poor peasants to start growing crops other than the coca
plants. A
supplement to the 2002 U.S. budget allocated $35 million in emergency counterterrorism funds for Colombia, and
President Bush has authorized Colombia to use aid previously earmarked
for anti-drug operations to directly combat the rebels. The Bush
administration also wants to spend about $100
million in 2003 to train a Colombian brigade to protect an
often-attacked oil pipeline that runs through lawless territory being
fought over by the FARC, the ELN, and the AUC. Pouring
money down the Colombian money pit while promoting the drug war at home
has been a favorite pastime of recent administrations.
There is no reason to believe that this futile exercise will
cease any time soon. http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-16545.htm TREASURY DEPARTMENT – The
Treasury Department is seeking comments on issues relating to two final
privacy regulations pursuant to the Patriot Act: Whether and under
what circumstances financial institutions should be required to retain
photocopies of identification documents relied on to verify customer
identity; and, whether there are situations when the regulations should
preclude reliance on certain forms of foreign government-issued
identification to verify customer identity. Privacy
advocates beware! http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-16562.htm JULY
2, 2003: FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION – The
purpose of this grant, according to the government transportation
planners, is to “address congestion in other modes of transportation
and/or to provide for additional alternatives to meet current and future
mobility needs.” Unfortunately
for them, as demonstrated by Amtrak, the government’s track record in
the transportation sector is abysmal.
Policy
makers vowed the government passenger rail system, created in 1971,
would be free of subsidies within a few years.
Thirty years and $25
billion taxpayer dollars later, Amtrak is still not self-sufficient. A classic example of bureaucrats repeating failed policies of the past.
If left to the government sector, “next generation high-speed
rail” will meet the same fate as its unprofitable predecessor. http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-16867.htm To
subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic
mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov
and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the
list (or change settings); then follow the instructions.
|
||
