Rep. Jason Chaffetz Suggests Dispersing Federal Agencies Across the Country

[Frodo]

Not such a bad idea, actually:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WashPo

[ApatheticAustrian]

positive...this would share the wealth and the trust into federal agencies, which are concentrated in the VA/MD/DC area, with poorer and more "fly-over"-ish regions of the country.

negative...i am pretty sure, one would lose synergie effects like that and create higher costs for everyone.

[Cashew]

positive...this would share the wealth and the trust into federal agencies, which are concentrated in the VA/MD/DC area, with poorer and more "fly-over"-ish regions of the country.

negative...i am pretty sure, one would lose synergie effects like that and create higher costs for everyone.

I wonder about the support though, considering it could just wind up creating more liberal enclaves in (atlas) blue states.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There's already some of this.  For instance Social Security is headquartered in the Baltimore metro area.  That said, this is largely symbolic.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There's already some of this.  For instance Social Security is headquartered in the Baltimore metro area.  That said, this is largely symbolic.

It's the same Combined Statistical Area as DC, though.

[Blue3]

I'm ok with this.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Just think how many different federal agencies could end up paying Trump rent...

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yeah, I think it's actually a good idea. Distance is not an issue for communication anymore in this day and age.

[Brittain33]

Matt Yglesias has an excellent piece about this:

http://www.vox.com/new-money/2016/12/9/13881712/move-government-to-midwest

Some agencies have synergies and need to be close together, but many don't. Clearly the concentration of power and jobs in the Washington DC metro area has gotten ridiculous.  

[The Ex-Factor]

I remember that from 08-10 the unemployment rate in D.C. was significantly lower than in the rest of the country. Probably an illustration of how geographic location shapes policy.

[Gass3268]

This is stupid and as long as DC isn't a state should never happen.

[JA]

This is a good idea. Washington, DC has been largely sheltered from the economy experienced by the rest of the country thanks to the influence the federal government and its agencies have on the local economy. It's unnecessary for all these agencies to be so centrally located today, so why not redistribute them across the country? That could help revitalize some struggling local economies. I'd say send most of them to the Great Lakes and the poorer parts of the South.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'd like to suggest dispersing what little remains of Chaffetz's brain cells across the country... which probably wouldn't cover even one state. Sad!

[Simfan34]

I don't see fault with this: not when Yglesias first proposed it and not now. The DMV has grown to be, what, the fourth or fifth largest metro in the country? I don't see the Federal Reserve moving (at least anywhere other than possibly New York), but for Trump this is an easy way to kill multiple campaign pledges with one stone, although the long-term political effects of moving thousands of highly educated federal employees into the Midwest are unlikely to work in the Republicans' advantage.

That said, the agencies themselves are likely to resist this fiercely, on the grounds that proximity equals access equals influence-- and the thought of having to move to places like, say, Detroit or Columbus. But as Averroes said, the inefficiencies this'll produce are bearable.

[Frodo]

This is a good idea. Washington, DC has been largely sheltered from the economy experienced by the rest of the country thanks to the influence the federal government and its agencies have on the local economy. It's unnecessary for all these agencies to be so centrally located today, so why not redistribute them across the country? That could help revitalize some struggling local economies. I'd say send most of them to the Great Lakes and the poorer parts of the South.

To a limited extent, this dispersal has already begun -decades ago in fact, with the War (now Defense) Department moving across the Potomac to Arlington County, the CIA moving to Langley in Virginia, the National Security Agency to Fort Meade in Maryland, and we have the prospect of the FBI moving to Greenbelt.  And that's just off the top of my head.  Though we could certainly have more federal agencies moving out of the DC area entirely -the bulk of them, actually.  On top of other reasons mentioned here, dispersal makes sense from a national security standpoint.  You don't want to have the prospect of a weapon of mass destruction (either from a state or non-state actor) destroying the machinery of government in one fell swoop. Never leave all your eggs in one basket, in other words.



 

[Tintrlvr]

I'm okay with this on a limited basis, but I am highly concerned that spreading different departments out across the country would make interest group capture even easier (much easier to capture the Agriculture Department when its headquarters is in Des Moines and half of its employees' spouses, families and friends work in agriculture-related businesses, e.g., or to capture the SEC when its headquarters is in New York City, etc.) and strengthen interest group-based voting patterns among the states.

I am also concerned that doing this makes it harder for individuals trained in working in government to move from department to department in a value-maximizing way, though I'm not actually sure how often that happens.

Also, if you do this on a grand scale, you obviously have to either give DC statehood or at least retrocede the vast majority of it to Maryland because you would wreck the DC economy, and it will need either the voting power at the federal level to fight for its interests or a larger state to support it.

[7,052,770]

Support, but don't just put them in  the Midwest. A state like Mississippi could benefit the most from an infusion of highly-educated talented people moving in.

[Wiz in Wis]

I mean, this does make a good amount of sense.

Move:
Agriculture to Des Moines
Commerce to Detroit
(NOAA to Kansas City)
Justice to Chicago (Including FBI, ATF)
Interior to Denver
Education to Milwaukee
Energy to Atlanta
Health and Human Services to Nashville
HUD to Los Angeles
Treasury to Cleveland
Transportation to Little Rock
Homeland Security to Houston
Veterans Affairs to Charleston W.Va.
Labor to Las Vegas
Defense can stay in Virginia

I mean... its 2017, Cabinet officers can have two offices, one in DC, one at headquarters... the rest of the staff doesn't have to fly that often.
 

[Santander]

I kind of like the corruption and power games that result from having so much government in one place.

[Simfan34]

I mean, this does make a good amount of sense.

Move:
Agriculture to Des Moines
Commerce to Detroit
(NOAA to Kansas City)
Justice to Chicago (Including FBI, ATF)
Interior to Denver
Education to Milwaukee
Energy to Atlanta
Health and Human Services to Nashville
HUD to Los Angeles
Treasury to Cleveland
Transportation to Little Rock
Homeland Security to Houston
Veterans Affairs to Charleston W.Va.
Labor to Las Vegas
Defense can stay in Virginia

I mean... its 2017, Cabinet officers can have two offices, one in DC, one at headquarters... the rest of the staff doesn't have to fly that often.
 

This doesn't make sense.  Moving cabinet departments out of DC would be extraordinarily wasteful and only encourage further consolidation of power in the White House Office and weaker accountability. Moving subsidiary agencies is what makes sense.