Writing Waste

about : contact : TCS home : donate Writing Waste Volume XVI No. 46: November 18, 2011   Finally! It's been two years since the last spending bills were considered in (semi) regular order. It wasn't procedurally perfect---three bills jammed together nearly two months after the start of fiscal year 2012---but hey, you have to start somewhere. That means there are nine more spending bills to go. So Congress needs to pick up the pace. Most of the year was dithered away by Congress as they jockeyed for position on the debt ceiling increase and the great budgetary spectacle that is the Super Committee (aka Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction). Tasked with finding at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction, next week we'll know whether they pulled a rabbit out of a hat or laid a turkey on the American taxpayer. Believe it or not, the Super Committee is largely irrelevant to the deliberations on this fiscal year's spending bills. These twelve bills will fund the government for FY12, which will probably be over by the time any deficit reduction prescribed by the Super Committee takes effect. They are on separate tracks. Even if the Super Committee flops big next week, the minibus package of bills Congress passed yesterday already extended temporary funding for the rest of government until December 16. So instead of letting a post-Thanksgiving tryptophan stupor set in, lawmakers need to scramble and get the Defense, Health & Human Services, Veterans, Energy, Homeland Security, Interior, and the rest of government's spending in place. A closer look at the three bills---Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Transportation-Housing and Urban Development---that were passed yesterday is instructive. Overall budget levels were slightly down compared to fiscal year 2011 and cut even more compared to fiscal year 2010. Another interesting difference between those three bills in FY10 and in FY12: in FY10 those bills contained 3,569 in disclosed lawmaker earmarks worth $2.3 billion. In FY12....<crickets>. The facts belie the old canard that cutting earmarks wouldn't save any money. For example, the "special research grants" at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture received $105.2 million in FY10, which included 169 earmarks worth $88 million. In the FY12 bill, "special research grants" received $4 million. Guess they were only "special" when lawmakers could direct the funding to their pet projects. But that's not the end of the story. We always realized that "eliminating" earmarks would be like squeezing a balloon. Congressional interest in pursuing funding for parochial projects will simply be squeezed into other forms. Rather than earmark, in some cases lawmakers will instead pick up the phone to call agencies to argue for funding for their interests: phonemarking. In other cases they send letters: lettermarking. While we certainly recognize every lawmakers constitutional right to petition their government, there is no guarantee of privacy--each and every one of the letters are subject to the Freedom of Information Act and can be obtained by the public. A memo from the first days of the administration said anything that could be FOIA'ed should be pre-emptively disclosed. In addition, a Bush era Executive Order directs agencies to disclose these lettermarks and not give them any deference in decision-making. A recent draft memo from the Obama administration also directs disclosure. So what's the hold up?! Disclosure of lettermarks is absolutely the right thing to do. We have called for this since the earmark moratorium was established. The purpose of the moratorium was to bring spending decisions into the light. End runs like lettermarking and phonemarking are disappointing but predictable responses. We have to keep up the pressure to get to point where the American public can review clear and transparent metrics and criteria that lead to spending decisions based on merit, competition, or formulas. It isn't all about Congressional decision-making either. To further increase budgetary transparency, lawmakers should embrace lettermarking transparency and turn around and demand the Executive branch to open up what is too often black box budgeting and let the public see how spending decisions are made.   ###     Let us know what you think.   To keep up with the latest TCS news, follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/taxpayers Facebook: facebook.com/taxpayers and Youtube: youtube.com/taxpayersvideo Learn how the "Super Committee" can exceed $1.5 trillion in cuts! Contribute by mail with this Printer-Friendly Form   Going on at Taxpayer.net This Week   TCS Testifies on Royalties before House Natural Resources Subcommittee Speaker's "Drilling for Transportation Dollars" Proposal: A Dead End for Taxpayers Analyzing Transportation Provisions in Mini-Bus Appropriations Bill A Legacy for Earmarks (updated 11/14/2011) DOE Loan Guarantees: Overview, Risks, and More     TCS Earmark Databases TCS Preliminary Earmark Analysis for FY 2011 Download FY2010 Earmark Database Earmark Frequently Asked Questions TCS in the News TCS was cited in dozens of stories this past week. Check them all out in the Headlines About TCS section of our website.   We Need Your Support! TCS needs you to help us fight government waste Click here to Join Today! Current Action Items   Tell the Super Committee to Cut the Deficit not Protect Subsidies    GO »      End All Wasteful Energy Subsidies    GO »    Notable Quote     "In the last week, each side has busted through a wall. Democrats are talking about entitlement reform, curbing the increase in spending on mandatory programs like Medicare. Republicans have broken through the wall on tax revenue increases. Now they have to figure out if they can meet each other somewhere in the middle."    - Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Independent of Connecticut (The New York Times)     Got a quote or article about  wasteful spending you think should be featured in the wastebasket? Send us your ideas and comments

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

Nuke Numbers Game

about : contact : TCS home : donate Nuke Numbers Game Volume XVI No. 45: November 10, 2011  When a high-stakes budget fight erupts in Washington, nearly every discussion devolves into a numbers game. Politicos on either side of an issue will pull figures out of a study or report, throw them together, and stir until they get the thickness they hope will stick in the minds of their colleagues. One of these budgetary food fights is throwing some needed light on a particularly confusing area of the budget: nuclear weapons. Last month, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) wrote a letter to the Super Committee saying the hundreds of billions the United States plans to spend on nuclear weapons over the next decade is unnecessary and can be trimmed. Congressman Michael Turner (R-OH), chairman of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee and from a district that includes Wright Patterson Air Force Base, followed with a letter discounting Markey's figures and placing them much lower. Who is right? This would seem an easy question to answer: Just look up the annual budget for the National Nuclear Security Agency (NSSA), the office within the Department of Energy that oversees our nuclear weapons "complex." But as it turns out, nuclear weapons functions are spread across multiple agencies, and no one in the government has ever added them up in one place. A 2009 study on nuclear security spending (to which TCS contributed) found that annual operations and maintenance costs for nuclear weapons exceeded $29 billion per year, not including classified funding. That constitutes 67 percent of the DOE budget and 7 percent of the DOD budget. If you include all weapons-related spending, i.e. costs that would not exist if it were not for nuclear weapons, that number jumps upwards of $50 billion. These costs include funding for nonproliferation programs and cleaning up environmental waste resulting from weapons development. No President or Congress has ever attempted to create a unified, comprehensive nuclear weapons budget, however. The closest we have is the annual budget for NNSA and what the Defense Department calls a "major force program," which neglects many overhead, support, and research costs plus all costs for tactical nuclear weapons. Whether or not you think we should have more or less nuclear weapons, you need to know how much we spend. Resources are always part of strategy, and you can't figure out your strategy without knowing how much you spend and where. It's hard to ride herd over any government function if you don't really know what you spend on it. A deeper problem is the amount of tax dollars wasted in our nuclear weapons complex. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has included DOE on its list of "high-risk" programs for more than 20 years due to financial mismanagement. NNSA has been singled out as particularly problematic, with the GAO stating that the agency "struggle(s) to develop credible and reliable cost estimates, meet cost and schedule goals on projects, and overcome other related project management challenges." Cost overruns on NNSA and environmental management projects reviewed by the GAO in 2007 totaled $14 billion. Exhibit A of this syndrome is the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) facility currently under construction at Los Alamos Laboratory in New Mexico, which is only half finished but its price tag has already increased to $6 billion--more than ten times its original estimate. Or take the Mixed-Oxide Fuel Fabrication (MOX) facility in South Carolina, toward which taxpayers have already paid $3 billion of its total $5 billion cost even though no customers exist for the recycled plutonium fuel it is supposed to sell. There's no excuse for this kind of waste, national security or no. Demanding fiscal accountability from our government won't harm our security -- indeed, it will make us safer by ensuring that high-priority projects are finished on time and on budget and by getting unnecessary programs off our books. ###   Let us know what you think.   To keep up with the latest TCS news, follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/taxpayers Facebook: facebook.com/taxpayers and Youtube: youtube.com/taxpayersvideo Learn how the "Super Committee" can exceed $1.5 trillion in cuts! Contribute by mail with this Printer-Friendly Form   Going on at Taxpayer.net This Week TCS Mourns the Loss of Rob Stuart, One of Our Founding Board Members A Legacy for Earmarks Cashing In: Biofuels Industry Buys Congress's Continued Support -- TCS Report Just Say No to Stillwater Bridge TCS Earmark Databases TCS Preliminary Earmark Analysis for FY 2011 Download FY2010 Earmark Database Earmark Frequently Asked Questions TCS in the News TCS was cited in dozens of stories this past week. Check them all out in the Headlines About TCS section of our website. We Need Your Support! TCS needs you to help us fight government waste Click here to Join Today! Current Action Items Tell the Super Committee to Cut the Deficit not Protect Subsidies    GO »    End All Wasteful Energy Subsidies    GO »  Notable Quote     "The fact of the matter is, you can't do this with just reducing spending, you can't do it with just reforming entitlements, and you can't just do it on the revenue side. It takes a combination of all three."  - Saxby Chambliss, (R-GA) (Government Executive)     Got a quote or article about  wasteful spending you think should be featured in the wastebasket? Send us your ideas and comments

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

Get Over Yourselves

about : contact : TCS home : donate Get Over Yourselves Volume XVI No. 44: November 4, 2011 Do your job. That's all we're asking. Being picked for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction wasn't a plum assignment to be sure. But here these twelve lawmakers are. Six Senators and six Representatives. Six Democrats and six Republicans. And after countless hours of public meetings, closed door meetings, and party only meetings, it's time to deliver. T minus 19 days and counting until the legally-mandated November 23rd deadline. We did not need a new committee to tackle this task: 535 lawmakers representing 300 million Americans is a "super committee" and Congress has all the authority they need to reduce our deficit and start taming our debt. But here we are. Get over yourselves. The job is to find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction. Just do it. Here's our plan that yields more than $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction before you even get to most of the entitlement programs which would drive that number far higher. If we can do it, the members of the Super Committee certainly should be able to. Spreading the pain is critical. As 100 members of the House - 40 Republicans and 60 Democrats - wrote "To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table." In other words everyone's ox must be gored. For revenues, tax loopholes and breaks must be eliminated and the tax code made to be flatter, simpler, and fairer. Which means, yes, some people and corporations will pay more taxes than they do under the current byzantine system. Mandatory spending must be curtailed, and that means benefits will change. Agriculture has been living high off the hog on the public dole for too long. Medicare has been underwater in revenue for years with costs growing far faster than revenue, and Social Security has just started to go underwater, too. And despite the caterwauling you hear from the Armed Service committee, we can afford to make further cuts to the defense budget, the largest component of our discretionary spending. What we cannot afford to do is line the pockets of private contractors who charge a premium for government services, or continue to throw money at weapons systems that are outdated. Spreading the pain is important politically and substantively, but so is how, where, and when you cut. The $1.2 trillion target is for deficit reduction over ten years. If changes to entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare protect current beneficiaries, the savings are going to be slight in terms of deficit reduction in the near-term but could be important in terms of long term management of the debt. Cuts in discretionary spending can yield short and long term savings, and eliminating wasteful tax expenditures can result in immediate revenue as well. Many of the critics of the Super Committee have valid points. The fragile state of the economy also can't be ignored. There is a balancing act between making real and legitimate savings to reduce the deficit without cutting essential or important services and support in a weak economy. On the other side, figuring out what government should and should not be doing is an important element of reducing our deficit. Just because government was once involved in an activity doesn't mean we should continue. Smart, targeted cuts that serve to prioritize government spending will make the government work better down the road. But there is no reason these concerns should impede the Committee's process. The tired kabuki dance around lines drawn in the sand over policy positions must be discarded. We all dug this hole -- Congress, the Executive Branch, and the American people who elected them. It's time to take the strong fiscal medicine and not just stop digging, but start filling the hole in.   ###   Let us know what you think.     To keep up with the latest TCS news, follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/taxpayers Facebook: facebook.com/taxpayers and Youtube: youtube.com/taxpayersvideo Learn how the "Super Committee" can exceed $1.5 trillion in cuts! Contribute by mail with this Printer-Friendly Form   Going on at Taxpayer.net This Week   California's Rail Project Costs More Than Double: Are Federal Taxpayers on the Hook for More? Coalition Letter Opposing Passing Farm Bill Through Super Committee Uranium Loan Guarantee Is Bad Bet November 2, 5:24 PM--The Latest on the Deficit Cutting Super Committee TCS Mourns the Loss of Rob Stuart, One of Our Founding Board Members TCS Earmark Databases TCS Preliminary Earmark Analysis for FY 2011 Download FY2010 Earmark Database Earmark Frequently Asked Questions TCS in the News TCS was cited in dozens of stories this past week. Check them all out in the Headlines About TCS section of our website.   We Need Your Support! TCS needs you to help us fight government waste Click here to Join Today! Current Action Items   Tell the Super Committee to Cut the Deficit not Protect Subsidies    GO »      End All Wasteful Energy Subsidies    GO »    Notable Quote     "If you spend a buck and borrow 42 cents of it, you're stupid."    - former U.S. Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming (Roll Call)     Got a quote or article about  wasteful spending you think should be featured in the wastebasket? Send us your ideas and comments

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

Tell your representatives to end all wasteful energy subsidies!

Dear Fellow Taxpayer, The fifth in our six-week series of action alerts leading up to the deadline for the so-called Super Committee focuses on the billions of dollars of taxpayer money that’s being used to prop up the energy industry. As we have said before, there are lots of ways Congress can save taxpayer money. It is time to end the wasteful tradition of subsidizing the energy industry! It’s time to let the energy industry stand on its own. For decades the government has been subsidizing multiple forms of energy, most of which have been tried, tested, and proved profitable on their own. With our massive debt and deficit, we cannot afford to give away taxpayer money to the profitable energy industry. Tell your members of Congress to end wasteful energy subsidies HERE.   Every year, taxpayers shell out $15.6 billion in tax breaks and other handouts to the oil and gas industry. This is on top of tens of billions of taxpayer dollars in subsidies to the mature nuclear, coal, and biofuels industries.  All the while, these companies are thriving.  In the third quarter of this year alone, six of the largest oil companies recorded $36.8 billion in profits, bringing the year-to-date total up to $115.1 billion. These are industries that do not need taxpayer-funded handouts. This is a time of tough decisions, both for the federal government and for individual Americans. We all have to prioritize how we spend our money, and funding the energy industry first as taxpayers and again as consumers should not be anywhere close to the top of the list. Americans are not going to stop needing oil or electricity, so why should we have to pay for it twice? Tell your members of Congress to repeal all wasteful energy subsidies because the government shouldn’t force taxpayers to pay for energy twice. CONTACT CONGRESS HERE Sincerely, Ms. Ryan Alexander President Taxpayers for Common Sense is a 501(c)(3) organization and donations are tax-deductible as allowed by law. Donate today to help us make government work for taxpayers. Follow Us: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube   Contribute by mail with this Printer-Friendly Form   Taxpayers for Common Sense 651 Pennsylvania Ave. SE Washington, DC 20003 (202) 546-8500

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

Farm Bill Fiasco

about : contact : TCS home : donate Farm Bill Fiasco Volume XVI No. 43: October 28, 2011 Never let a crisis go to waste. Agriculture Committee leaders are following that old maxim, asking the "Super Committee" charged with reducing the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion, to lock in high levels of farm spending for the next five years at the same time. Aggies clearly recognize that cuts are coming and they want to make sure that they don't both cut now and again later when the current farm bill expires in 2012. While the bi-partisan and bi-cameral Agriculture Committee leadership is trying to grab all they can, most of the country is increasingly aware of the need to rein in deficits and have proposed trillions of dollars in savings. President Obama proposed $33 billion worth of savings from agriculture, Republican House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) found $30 billion, and TCS chronicled $90 billion. The leadership of the Agriculture Committees came up with a mere $23 billion over the next 10 years. But even more galling, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Lucas (R-OK) is leading the charge to circle the wagons and protect their sacred cows stating he "would hope that that $23 billion cut would reflect a commitment from leadership in Congress that ag's done its part for the next five years." And he goes on to raise the specter of using the Super Committee to "tie down the resources that are available for a farm bill for the next five years." Trying to get the Super Committee to include the Farm Bill in their package takes some chutzpah and more than a little contempt for the 523 lawmakers not on the Super Committee, as well as the American public. The Farm Bill is a massive piece of legislation Congress passes about every five years to create, continue, or modify hundreds of programs relating to agriculture. It covers programs supporting agriculture producers, conservation spending, research, trade, nutrition, and is the vehicle that governs school lunch programs and food stamps. Any legislation that comes out of the Super Committee will receive little debate and can't be amended. It's untouchable; take it or leave it. The Farm Bill is too important to rush through a quick process without a fully engaged public. The Farm Bill affects everyone, so everyone needs to be involved. The Super Committee needs to stay focused on its job---reducing the deficit---and savings from mandatory spending programs like agriculture should be part of it. But, laying the groundwork for the next five or ten years of agriculture policy (or transportation policy, water resources, etc.) is better left to the committee process and open floor debate. Perhaps agriculture leaders see the writing on the wall: House consideration of the FY12 Agriculture appropriations revealed a legislative interest in cutting farm programs, like paying millions in bribes to Brazil so that we could continue our wasteful and illegal subsidies to cotton producers. This kind of taxpayer victory won't happen if the special interest provisions are baked in behind closed doors. Setting agriculture policy under regular order in no way limits the Super Committee from finding significant savings by weeding out wasteful, outdated, or unnecessary spending. There is near consensus that direct payments -- cash given to land owners simply because the land used to be farmed --need to be eliminated. Billions can be cut from crop insurance where taxpayers foot the bill for an average 60% of the farmer's insurance premium, and reimburse insurance companies for all their administrative expenses, all while insuring the insurance companies against their losses. There are tens of billions worth of low hanging agriculture fruit. The Super Committee should implement these cuts rather than spend their time crafting a backdoor way to pass contentious legislation. The Farm Bill is one of the sacred cows in Washington. It's filled with many programs that no longer meet the reality of farming in the 21st century. The Super Committee is going to have a hard enough time finishing everything that's already on its plate. Crafting long term agriculture policy is better left to those of us with a hunger to make government work for taxpayers, rather than special interests.     ###   Let us know what you think.     To keep up with the latest TCS news, follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/taxpayers Facebook: facebook.com/taxpayers and Youtube: youtube.com/taxpayersvideo Learn how the "Super Committee" can exceed $1.5 trillion in cuts! Contribute by mail with this Printer-Friendly Form   Going on at Taxpayer.net This Week   October 28, 10:29 PM--The Latest on the Deficit Cutting Super Committee Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Loan Program: Program Expansion Must Not Erode Taxpayer Protections Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program: Uranium Enrichment Congressmen Support Common Sense Cuts to Wasteful Ag Spending Press Release: Taxpayers for Common Sense Targets Oil and Gas Tax Breaks TCS Earmark Databases TCS Preliminary Earmark Analysis for FY 2011 Download FY2010 Earmark Database Earmark Frequently Asked Questions TCS in the News TCS was cited in dozens of stories this past week. Check them all out in the Headlines About TCS section of our website.   We Need Your Support! TCS needs you to help us fight government waste Click here to Join Today! Current Action Items   Tell the Super Committee to Cut the Deficit not Protect Subsidies    GO »      Disclose Super Committee Lobbyists    GO »    Notable Quote     "It is unjustifiable to spend billions each year on a program that pays farmers for no other reason than because they chose to grow one of six commodity crops, for which they are already receiving record market prices."    - Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) (Oregon Live)     Got a quote or article about  wasteful spending you think should be featured in the wastebasket? Send us your ideas and comments

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

Tending the Budgetary Harvest

about : contact : TCS home : donate Tending the Budgetary Harvest Volume XVI No. 42: October 21, 2011 Like growing a healthy garden, managing the budget takes a lot of maintenance. You have to weed out the unwanted, prune the suckers, and sow new seeds. At the moment, Congress is focused on weeding out the overgrowth in the federal budget. Pruning the many tax expenditures, including those in the energy sector, has been a recommendation of ours and others, as well. At the same time, the government should also reap revenue rightfully owed to the taxpayer. This needs to come from royalty payments from oil and gas on public lands and waters, but also from the fertile ground of renewable energy development – such as wind and solar – on public lands.   The potential for renewable energy generation on public lands in the United States is enormous, and very aggressive targets have already been set to promote its expansion. But Congress lacks a statutory framework designed to allow renewable development to take root. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a goal of 10,000 megawatts of non-hydropower renewable energy projects on the public lands by 2015, but left the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in charge of approving renewable energy projects through rights of way authorizations originally established by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) for locating power lines, pipelines, and communications towers and lines on federal land.   The more appropriate framework for conveying authorizations for commercial development of wind and solar power generation on public land is a system of competitive leasing and royalties, similar to development of other energy sources on public lands – and what renewable energy developers now find on private land. Not only would this create a more fertile environment for private investment by providing a permanent, predictable system, it would ensure taxpayers are enjoying the fruits of this investment.   Revenues from the collection of rents, royalties, and bonus bids for access to publicly held energy resources represent one of the largest non-tax income sources for the federal government. Fair and accurate collection is necessary to ensure taxpayers are receiving what they are rightfully owed. In the recent past, however, the oil and gas royalty collection system has lacked accountability, transparency, and accuracy in charging, collecting, and auditing payments to the federal treasury. For renewables, BLM’s existing “rental fees” for wind and solar projects on public land attempt to account for the value of renewable energy inputs – wind and solar – but cannot charge per unit of power produced, which is the better method of capturing a fair return for taxpayers. And not only do we need to ensure that revenue collection is accountable and clear, but development decisions must consider potential long term liabilities.   Even before revenue from rents and royalties from new energy development has been captured, some in Congress are trying to spend it on infrastructure projects, state aid, you name it. So while one Congressional hand created the Super Committee to cut spending, the other is counting, promising, and trading the chicks before they hatch are even laid.   Efforts to increase domestic energy production are popular on both sides of the aisle. But experience shows that cutting corners in oil and gas leasing hampers accurate royalty collection, and the risk of Solyndra’s collapse was missed in part because of the Administration’s effort to fast-track renewable energy development. Instead of acting like a venture capitalist, the government should focus on building a rich bed in which private investment in renewable energy development can grow.   As the Super Committee comes up with a way to clean up the federal budget garden, they should direct lawmakers to tend to the budding revenue from our public assets. Most importantly, that revenue needs to go to feeding deficit reduction, not to lawmakers hungry for pet projects back home. ### Let us know what you think.     To keep up with the latest TCS news, follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/taxpayers Facebook: facebook.com/taxpayers and Youtube: youtube.com/taxpayersvideo Learn how the "Super Committee" can exceed $1.5 trillion in cuts! Contribute by mail with this Printer-Friendly Form   Going on at Taxpayer.net This Week   Congressmen Support Common Sense Cuts to Wasteful Ag Spending Press Release: Taxpayers for Common Sense Targets Oil and Gas Tax Breaks     TCS Earmark Databases TCS Preliminary Earmark Analysis for FY 2011 Download FY2010 Earmark Database Earmark Frequently Asked Questions TCS in the News TCS was cited in dozens of stories this past week. Check them all out in the Headlines About TCS section of our website.   We Need Your Support! TCS needs you to help us fight government waste Click here to Join Today! Current Action Items     End Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program    GO » Disclose Super Committee Lobbyists    GO »    Notable Quote     "There is no doubt there are scandalous cost overruns associated with it. The first trillion-dollar weapons system in history."    -Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), speaking about the troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter project. (Forbes)     Got a quote or article about  wasteful spending you think should be featured in the wastebasket? Send us your ideas and comments

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.