Possible for Trump to move federal agencies to "flyover country"?

[Anonymous]

Great idea. And the cost of moving the agencies then all the travel to D.C. To meet with other agencies.

The states have federal agencies as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not enough ^^

How many overpaid bureaucrats at the Dept. of Ed...Pentagon...Dept. of Energy are qualified to work anywhere else for anywhere near the comp they receive? Most wouldn't have a choice but to take the offer to move.

Not quite. Many retire from civil service then work for the private sector or a lobbing firm for a ton more money. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Great idea. And the cost of moving the agencies then all the travel to D.C. To meet with other agencies.

The states have federal agencies as well.

It's 2017, not 1950. No need for flights and useless board meetings and power lunches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not enough ^^

How many overpaid bureaucrats at the Dept. of Ed...Pentagon...Dept. of Energy are qualified to work anywhere else for anywhere near the comp they receive? Most wouldn't have a choice but to take the offer to move.

Not quite. Many retire from civil service then work for the private sector or a lobbing firm for a ton more money. Try again.

So you think they'd quit before their 25 (?) years is up instead of moving?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great idea. And the cost of moving the agencies then all the travel to D.C. To meet with other agencies.

The states have federal agencies as well.

It's 2017, not 1950. No need for flights and useless board meetings and power lunches.

Are you a cabinet nominee trying crowdsourcing???

[Anonymous]

OP -- you didn't really think this through, did you? By the way, there's a LOT of hedge fund and private equity money backing charter schools. Wonder why . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With 7 of the 12 richest counties in the US surrounding DC, Trump should work on decentralizing this vulgar concentration of bureaucrat wealth by moving federal agencies to the middle of the country. Example: Dept. of Education to Betsy Devos's hometown of Grand Rapids, Mich. That alone would lock up Michigan as a red state in 2020.

The agencies can slash bloat and wages in the process (lower cost of living in flyover country), it would be a boom for non-coastal economies, and policies would likely better reflect real America versus insulated coastal elite outlook.

Umm, isn't that a prime example of pork barrel politics that Republicans hate? At the very least if you're going to move agencies you have to move them places where the heads of those agencies won't profit by the move. Tsk tsk.

Move DOE to the state with terrible test scores, like Mississippi, in the middle of a rural district. I'm sure Betty De Vos would have no problem with living in Shelby, do you?

Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security are the 3 largest agencies. Move them to Alabama, Kansas, and North Dakota. Rural areas, only. We can't have any of those urban elites profiting from bureaucratic wealth.

Will be tough getting enough contractors there, but they'll just have to move. If not I guess the government can just hire more federal employees.

Of course the influx of wealthy government bureaucrats might just change the demographics of those states, so you might be careful about what you wish for...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not enough ^^

How many overpaid bureaucrats at the Dept. of Ed...Pentagon...Dept. of Energy are qualified to work anywhere else for anywhere near the comp they receive? Most wouldn't have a choice but to take the offer to move.

Not quite. Many retire from civil service then work for the private sector or a lobbing firm for a ton more money. Try again.

So you think they'd quit before their 25 (?) years is up instead of moving?

You can retire after 20 years with full package. 10 years with most of it. I think about 80% of the government could retire right now in some way or another

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With 7 of the 12 richest counties in the US surrounding DC, Trump should work on decentralizing this vulgar concentration of bureaucrat wealth by moving federal agencies to the middle of the country. Example: Dept. of Education to Betsy Devos's hometown of Grand Rapids, Mich. That alone would lock up Michigan as a red state in 2020.

The agencies can slash bloat and wages in the process (lower cost of living in flyover country), it would be a boom for non-coastal economies, and policies would likely better reflect real America versus insulated coastal elite outlook.

Umm, isn't that a prime example of pork barrel politics that Republicans hate? At the very least if you're going to move agencies you have to move them places where the heads of those agencies won't profit by the move. Tsk tsk.

Move DOE to the state with terrible test scores, like Mississippi, in the middle of a rural district. I'm sure Betty De Vos would have no problem with living in Shelby, do you?

Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security are the 3 largest agencies. Move them to Alabama, Kansas, and North Dakota. Rural areas, only. We can't have any of those urban elites profiting from bureaucratic wealth.

Will be tough getting enough contractors there, but they'll just have to move. If not I guess the government can just hire more federal employees.

Of course the influx of wealthy government bureaucrats might just change the demographics of those states, so you might be careful about what you wish for...

It's Trumps world now. Cut up the pie and sell out off to the highest bidder. Let's screw the little people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With 7 of the 12 richest counties in the US surrounding DC, Trump should work on decentralizing this vulgar concentration of bureaucrat wealth by moving federal agencies to the middle of the country. Example: Dept. of Education to Betsy Devos's hometown of Grand Rapids, Mich. That alone would lock up Michigan as a red state in 2020.

The agencies can slash bloat and wages in the process (lower cost of living in flyover country), it would be a boom for non-coastal economies, and policies would likely better reflect real America versus insulated coastal elite outlook.

Umm, isn't that a prime example of pork barrel politics that Republicans hate? At the very least if you're going to move agencies you have to move them places where the heads of those agencies won't profit by the move. Tsk tsk.

Move DOE to the state with terrible test scores, like Mississippi, in the middle of a rural district. I'm sure Betty De Vos would have no problem with living in Shelby, do you?

Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security are the 3 largest agencies. Move them to Alabama, Kansas, and North Dakota. Rural areas, only. We can't have any of those urban elites profiting from bureaucratic wealth.

Will be tough getting enough contractors there, but they'll just have to move. If not I guess the government can just hire more federal employees.

Of course the influx of wealthy government bureaucrats might just change the demographics of those states, so you might be careful about what you wish for...

What about HUD zones?

[Anonymous]

Um, I hate to break it to you, but Michigan currently has 27,500 civilian federal employees.

The Department of Education is 4,000 jobs. Most of their budget is spent in the states in the form of grants and loans.

So your dream of enriching Michigan by moving DoE is pretty poorly thought out. Not to mention that these political footballs would get moved around with every change in power.

[Anonymous]

OP, you know most federal jobs are already outside Washington DC, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, you know most federal jobs are already outside Washington DC, right?

This. I hate to burst OP's bubble with facts but 14% of federal employees work in the entire DC region, 86% are around the world. There are nearly as many civilians in Texas or California as there are in DC. DOD civilians and VA staff account for over half of all civil servants, they are working on bases and in VA hospitals around the country and world. What remains in DC is mostly headquarters, which makes sense for any large organization to be co-located.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you know most federal jobs are already outside Washington DC, right?

This. I hate to burst OP's bubble with facts but 14% of federal employees work in the entire DC region, 86% are around the world. There are nearly as many civilians in Texas or California as there are in DC. DOD civilians and VA staff account for over half of all civil servants, they are working on bases and in VA hospitals around the country and world. What remains in DC is mostly headquarters, which makes sense for any large organization to be co-located.

Headquarters for usg. As well as the contractors that we pay to do the work and lobbiests.

[Anonymous]

Everyone would move if they had to because the only reason they work for the fed after not being able to get a job in the private sector. You really think those Pentagon contractors will have companies throwing them $180k-210k offers? Get real.