Redundancy

The federal government and its workforce must be radically downsized. There are ways to do that. But it takes political commitment. A 75 percent federal workforce reduction may seem unrealistic, but talking about it is a start. Even a 7 percent reduction would be a giant step in the direction of freedom.

Michael Chapman/CATO Institute

If you have every watched the Canadian television show, “Air Disasters,” you know the primary purpose of U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigations, as well as those by counterparts in other countries, is to make sure similar incidents* do not happen again. Whether the cause is structural, mechanical or human error, the investigators’ final report includes remedial action(s) which, in most cases, are mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Consider the example of United Airlines Flight 232, which, following total loss of hydraulics, crash landed in Sioux City, Iowa on July 19, 1989, resulting in 111 fatalities and 172 injuries.

I chose this example because of the complex nature of the causes which contributed to the incident including both insufficient inspection of the plane during scheduled maintenance and design of the aircraft. Even though the mechanics followed the inspection manual and the plane already had redundant hydraulic systems (three to be exact), it was not enough to prevent a crash landing with loss of life. Following recommendations from the NTSB investigators, the FAA mandated the manual be revised to include mandatory inspections for evidence of fatigue cracks in the jet fan discs, the addition of reflectors around the engines to prevent shrapnel from compromised fan discs hitting the fuselage, and relocation of wires that provided power to the hydraulic pumps. Although the cost of refitting the entire fleet of DC-10s was steep, there has not been one similar incident in the past 36 years.

This analogy raises the question, what if the same process of investigation and mandated remedial response had taken place following the 1987 Guadalupe River flooding which resulted in the death of 10 campers? What redundancies could have been built into a flood warning system and evacuation plans which might have saved the lives of the 100+ victims of this weekend’s tragic deluge?

Which brings me back to Michael Chapman and the CATO Institute. In 2022, CATO published a report, “Cutting Federal Spending: A Handbook for Policy Makers.” Among the recommendations was “devolve FEMA activities to the states” with a projected savings of $24.5 billion dollars annually. Project 2025 contains a similar recommendation with much of the savings coming from workforce reductions.

Talk about redundancy and waste. Don’t these think tank “geniuses” at CATO and the Heritage Foundation realize the potential for even more waste in the national (not federal) emergency management system when the cuts in the OBBB kick in? Instead of one well-staffed National Weather System, each state will need its own. Instead of a national stockpile of emergency supplies (e.g. temporary shelters, potable water tank trucks) which can be moved, at a moment’s notice, to wherever the need exists, each jurisdiction will need its own emergency response inventory, which may sit idle for years. And in a major catastrophe such as the Texas floods, does it make more sense for the FEMA regional office to request and coordinate assistance from neighboring states instead of the affected state diverting staff resources from more critical needs at the crisis location.

Equally important, there is no guarantees that every American affected by national disasters will receive the same level of assistance if responsibility is “devolved to the states.” As we know from 250 years of American history, all states are not created equal. Some have natural resources which are a revenue source that increases a state’s capacity to provide public services, including emergency response, with little or no federal assistance. Other states impose higher tax rates on their residents to reduce dependency on federal resources for essential public services.

As a result of this variance in internally generated revenues, we see differences in the quality of education, health care and infrastructure across state lines. There is no better example than South Carolina, which has the lowest gas taxes in the southeast United States, and the most miles of four-lane interstate highways versus the standard six-lanes in every adjacent state. In other words, “you get exactly what you pay for.”

I am sure the families who lost loved ones in the flood would not object if the OBBB contained more money for a redundant early warning system to alert residents of a pending natural disaster instead of additional tax breaks for the wealthy or $150 billion for ICE. Maybe, just maybe, any FEMA mandated improvements, much like those following the crash of United Airlines Flight 232, would ensure another family does not suffer the same fate for the next 36 years.

Yes, Mr. Chapman. as you said, “Even a 7 percent reduction would be a giant step in the direction of freedom.” Sadly, that freedom includes a higher probability of a young child dying unnecessarily.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

*In 1997, the Department of Transportation mandated a change in terminology replacing the word “accident” with “incident,” since the former implied “an unavoidable event outside of human control or influence.”