Quote:As to the first bolded point, I see that in action almost frequently. My wife works in an academic lab that gets lots of government contracts. If they don't spend every last penny of the grants they get, they have to provide a detailed accounting of where every penny went. If they spend it all, there's no oversight. As a result, her lab gets new furniture, new equipment, a new coffeemaker, even new computers if the grant allows for it, at the end of every project. In what world does it make sense to hold a lab accountable for grant money only if they don't spend it all?

 

To your second point, we agree completely. I've long been a supporter of the idea that the fairest way to tax Americans is to place a high, flat consumption tax on every item purchased, new or used, and eliminate income tax entirely. Income tax is certainly one of the government programs most susceptible to fraud, and to be frank, in my experience it's the middle class that gets squeezed by fraud committed by the wealthy and the poor. A certain amount of that consumption tax can be returned at the end of the year to account for children, college tuition, etc., but only if the person claiming it can prove through receipts and bank statements that they actually spent all of that money. No more, "Here's $3,000 for claiming your neighbor's kid as your own dependent."

 

The next logical step would be to go after welfare, but that's going to be an uphill battle as long as the Democratic Party seeks to cater to the lowest common denominator.