The recent budget bill contained a number of items that were unrelated to the budget and helped special interests. Two received the most publicity. The first was the provision that provided large banks with continued protection from the federal government (and thus taxpayers) for derivatives trading. This practice was a factor in initiating the last recession and was supposed to be eliminated by the Dodd-Frank bill. But Wall Street lobbyists convinced the powers in the House and Senate that derivatives trading had suddenly become safer, and taxpayers were back on the hook for trading that is of no benefit to the government but should escalate Wall Street bonuses.
The second provision destroyed what was left of campaign finance reform by allowing the very wealthy to increase the amount of money they can contribute to political parties by a factor of about twenty-five. From a yearly cap of $32,400, they can now give $777,600 to their favorite political party. This is doubled in the two year election cycle and doubled again for every couple who wants to contribute, reaching over $3.1 million for each election cycle. Again, this had nothing to do with the budget bill into which it was inserted, but fits well with the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions of the Supreme Court, giving affluent individuals the opportunity to control the electoral process with money at all levels. So much for democracy and campaign finance reform. Remember when McCain-Feingold was passed?
However, another provision in the budget bill that was the work of conservative Republicans was the move that cut off the government’s nose to spite its face. That was the reduction of $350 million from the IRS budget. This came after previous cuts of $1 billion that necessitated the IRS dropping 13,000 employees as its workload was increasing. Though these same conservative Republicans want smaller government, they also want a balanced budget and a decrease in the national debt. One can also assume that they would want tax cheats caught and made to pay their fair share of taxes. Though, maybe not.
But by cutting the IRS budget and having agents being fired, the agency is less likely to collect revenue for the government that would lower the budget deficits and national debt. It means that there will be fewer audits as well as less oversight of tax returns. Fewer IRS personnel also means that taxpayer questions will not be answered as quickly and that there will be delays in processing returns. Previous studies have shown that increasing IRS funding results in six times the revenue for the government that is given to the IRS.
By adding to the stress and demands on a smaller IRS workforce, the agency also becomes a less pleasant work environment. This is becoming increasingly true across the board at all government agencies at every level of government. With budget cuts, firing of personnel, less job security and more stress, it is becoming more difficult to recruit competent people for public service jobs, particularly when they can make much more in the private sector. If America wants the best and the brightest in its governments, it must hire more personnel to reduce stress and make the work environment more pleasant, make the workload more tolerable, provide job security and decent wages. This can be started by having the IRS collect more revenue for the government by giving it more funding to hire more agents and lawyers, not the opposite. The size of the government is not as important as whether it is efficient in its various roles.
Resurrecting Democracy
www.robertlevinebooks.com
image by shutterstock
Political junkie, Vietnam vet, neurologist- three books on aging and dementia. Book on health care reform in 2009- Shock Therapy for the American Health Care System. Book on the need for a centrist third party- Resurrecting Democracy- A Citizen’s Call for a Centrist Third Party published in 2011. Aging Wisely, published in August 2014 by Rowman and Littlefield. Latest book- The Uninformed Voter published May 2020