Politics

Obama administration boosts bureaucracy for 1970s-era liberal programs, say stimulus critics

Photo of Gautham Nagesh
Gautham Nagesh
Contributor
  • See All Articles
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Bio

      Gautham Nagesh

      Gautham Nagesh covers politics and the federal government for The Daily Caller. Prior to joining the DC he covered technology, oversight and procurement in the executive branch for Government Executive magazine and Nextgov.com. His writing has also been featured by The Atlantic, National Journal and the official web site of the Detroit Pistons. He attended Cornell University and hails from Jackson, Michigan.

      <em><a href="mailto:gn@dailycaller.com">E-mail Gautham</a> and <a href="http://twitter.com/gnagesh">follow him on Twitter</a></em>

Democrats initially sold the Recovery Act as an attempt to resuscitate an economy on the brink of collapse. But a year later critics contend a large slice of the bill’s $500 billion in spending has been used to bolster federal programs that appeal to liberal interest groups.

Along with significantly increasing funding for established federal programs such as Pell Grants and providing financial aid to states and municipalities, the stimulus pumped resources into a number of smaller programs and agencies while assigning them much greater responsibility. Agencies dealing with education, energy and telecommunications saw some of the largest increases in their bureaucratic footprints.

For example the Office of Electricity Delivery, a moderately sized office in the Department of Energy, was slated to receive $100 million in its budget for fiscal 2009 before the stimulus tasked the staff with distributing an additional $4.5 billion in grants aimed at modernizing the electric grid. Similarly, the Office of Environmental Management received double its annual budget ($6 billion) via the Recovery Act while the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy was given $16.8 billion, more than eight times its annual budget.

“These programs show that the administration and Congress intended to use the economic ‘crisis’ as an excuse to fund pet big government programs to a degree that they wouldn’t have been able to through the traditional appropriations process,” said Tad DeHaven, a budget analyst at the Cato Institute.

With so much of the stimulus money being distributed in the form of grants, awarding them has created a backlog of work for staff in agencies designed to operate on a much smaller scale. In the fall an employee with the Energy Department called distributing the money a daunting task for most offices.

The alternative energy industry was probably the biggest winner among liberal causes, as the stimulus not only establishes billions in research grants and loan guarantees but also significantly expands the number of agencies concerned with “green” causes. The stimulus included $5 billion for the weatherization of modest income homes, a program that previously received $300 million per year. Two billion more will go to grants for battery research and NASA received billions to research climate change.

Ben Lieberman, a senior policy analyst for energy at the Heritage Foundation, said most of the programs funded in the stimulus, such as weatherization and green jobs, originated in the 1970s. “They’re reviving old ideas but throwing a lot more money at them,” Lieberman said, adding that other agencies are latching onto global warming in order to maintain their funding levels. “NASA’s interest in global warming is increasing because the taste for expensive space exploration has declined. ”

Conservatives are concerned that by creating or expanding so many programs related to liberal causes the Obama administration has created a powerful bureaucratic infrastructure that will be difficult to eliminate or pare back even after the initial goals are met.

  • thebigodoopedu2

    Does this surprise anyone? what can we expect from a peanut framer mentality such as what we are seeing from Obama. Nothing new here just old idea with new faces attached.

  • banjo

    The average federal salary is now $73,000 with heaps of benefits. The average private sector salary is $42,000 (when you can find a job). The federal workforce is growing as the private diminishes. You don’t have to be a genius to know what party benefits from this.

  • elyriaohio

    ” Agencies dealing with education, energy and telecommunications saw some of the largest increases in their bureaucratic footprints.”
    How dare they support these frivolous necessities!

    • desmo1121

      This is where the government gets in the way of innovation and growth of the private sector by making them a government bureaucracy. There is no reason to have government agencies in education, energy and telecommunications. They screw up enough.

      Let the private sector run things right and get the government out of our lives.

      • richardhead

        OK wipe out all government money going to nuclear, oil, coal, wind, solar, biofuel, thermal, tidal and any others that I may have over looked. That should include the use of government land, leases, and military support, diplomatic support and so forth. Do that and you will get support from the green movement and a lot of liberals.

        • thephranc

          Why leases? If some one is paying to lease land then the government is getting money not spending it. But yes all subsidies should be cut.

          • richardhead

            Undervaluing leases is another way to tilt the playing field. Its just a form of corruption that could be policed if government had the will.

    • sandra3dee

      Fantastic, a local library got a $350,000 grant and set up a program to check out laptops. Really? How about books?

  • Pingback: $500 billion in spending has been used to bolster federal programs that appeal to liberal interest groups : USACTION NEWS