EPA’s fondness for high-end furniture costs taxpayers $92 million

[Orlong]

I don't know what the "right" amount to spend on furniture in an agency comprised of 17,000 people, so I defer to the people who actually make the decision, because that is what they are experienced at.
.

I dont know what the right amount is either, but i DO know that they DO NOT need Howard Miller Aeron chairs. IKEA and Staples sells many comfortable Office chairs for $100 and Staples is on the list of Government suppliers

[Planeshaper]

Does a single employee need over $5,000 in furniture?

Remember we are not talking overall budget, like a computer, printing paper, supplies, or other consumables.

We are talking about furniture. Just furniture.

It also includes the costs of delivery and installation. The costs of storage furniture for archival spaces (which get quite large). The costs of new furniture when moving facilities because it's cheaper than moving the furniture between facilities -- I'll point out that when this happens, private corporations typically get to purchase the old government supplies for literally pennies on the dollar...I'm sure you're outraged about that, though, no?

As for the content...

Aeron chairs are perfectly acceptable for the government. They're proven to last under many conditions and stresses, they're quite good at improving productivity, and they're comfortable.

I would rather government employs have better and more comfortable spaces than corporations do, because they ultimately perform a far more important role for society. And I am 100% supportive of corporations and the rich being the ones that pay the taxes for the government to enjoy those benefits.

So, nope -- I'm still not outraged.

And you still haven't said what your own idea of a more reasonable price is.

Not to mention that after they buy all that furniture, the next year's budget for furniture should be a small fraction of what it was this year since they just got all new furniture and shouldnt need to replace any of it, but they will likely get the same or more money the next year

The cost was the ten year cost. Not the single year cost.

This is a bullshit conservative hit piece. It's the only strategy the conservatives have. They don't have any legitimacy.

[TITAN308]

So let's get the furniture costs of those two organizations and make a valid frame of reference, instead of TITAN308 "ERMAGERD GUYZ LIBRUHLS SPENDINGZ DA MONEY"

Again, this shows the type of person you are.

I don't recall placing any blame regarding the EPA into some sort of political slant.

Government waste is a problem across all political spectrums equally.

- - - Updated - - -

This is a bullshit conservative hit piece. It's the only strategy the conservatives have. They don't have any legitimacy.

Can we come down to reality; Republican, Democratic, Liberal, Conservative.

They are all equally fully of shit. Good grief.

[Daelak]

Again, this shows the type of person you are.

I don't recall placing any blame regarding the EPA into some sort of political slant.

Government waste is a problem across all political spectrums equally.

- - - Updated - - -



Can we come down to reality; Republican, Democratic, Liberal, Conservative.

They are all equally fully of shit. Good grief.

Bullshit, this article, and your sentiment regarding any and all government spending that isn't defense related, stems from thinking anything over $1 constitutes widespread waste and fraud.

[TITAN308]

Bullshit, this article, and your sentiment regarding any and all government spending that isn't defense related, stems from thinking anything over $1 constitutes widespread waste and fraud.

Uh do you have me confused with someone else?

[Daelak]

I dont know what the right amount is either, but i DO know that they DO NOT need Howard Miller Aeron chairs. IKEA and Staples sells many comfortable Office chairs for $100 and Staples is on the list of Government suppliers

Oh so you can go bitch about how the federal government doesn't purchase furniture made in the USA? No thanks, keep your taxation is stealing and all government spending except when its for killing muslims is waste shtick up though.

[Skroe]

I don't really understand the responses here, which are a combination of, "yeah, but every agency does it" and "this source just doesn't like the EPA". Those things are basically true, but I don't know how either one is remotely a defense of spending excess, especially when some of the same posters will go back to blithely denying that the US government is wildly inefficient in other threads.

The US government isn't inefficient because it wastes $92 million on high end furniture.

The US government is inefficient because of Medicare, Medicaid, and the overall monster of overpriced private sector government contracting.

I'm going to tell you why I roll my eyes at this EPA shit. It's because Republicans and democrats alike have no balls when it comes to the issues facing the US Budget. Really. Really. They have no balls.

There is no serious conversation about government spending that doesn't start with massively slashing the costs of Medicare and Medicaid and gradually raising Social Security eligibility age to 70. And then AFTER that (or maybe along side depending on the issue), we then tackle the fleecing of taxpayers by contractors. I view going after nebulous "government waste", especially in discretionary spending, as decieitful and dishonest. People who do it are attempting to look fiscally responsible without actually being so: actually fiscally responsible people will sit down and say "let's talk medicare and medicaid".

But Republicans and Democrats don't want to do that. Republicans don't because their core constituency is dependent upon Medicare and Medicaid - tremendously popular programs - and they won't mention them by name in their crusade to cut them. Furthermore Republicans won't face facts that market forces have comprehensively failed to control costs. On the other side, Democrats view healthcare spending as something you can't pay enough for. They also do love big bureaucracies. THey have little incentive to tackle it.

So everyone gets to continue being non-serious.

[Spectral]

So let's get the furniture costs of those two organizations and make a valid frame of reference, instead of TITAN308 "ERMAGERD GUYZ LIBRUHLS SPENDINGZ DA MONEY"

Here's the FDA's budget for recent fiscal years (that's the agency I mentioned working for). Importantly:

The FY 2014 budget request for White Oak Consolidation is $61,922,000. This amount is
an increase of $17,941,000 above the FY 2012 Enacted level. The White Oak
Consolidation increase includes $17,658,000 in Budget Authority and $283,000 in User
Fees. The total request includes $58,044,000 in Budget Authority and $3,878,000 in
User Fees.
The budget request allows FDA to fund furniture, commissioning and equipment
outfitting, and decommissioning related to the Life Sciences-Biodefense Complex,
including above GSA-standard costs such as specialized equipment and associated
386 infrastructure, e.g., reinforced floors for equipment and special ventilation systems for the
BSL-3. It will also include the installation, testing, commissioning, and functioning of the
specialized equipment including: building automation operation and monitoring, HEPA
filter tests, air sensors, primary bio-containment device effectiveness, and room
pressurization control and power tests.
The request will fund security, communications network, information technology and
telecommunications equipment and infrastructure, AV equipment, and security equipment
and cabling. The consolidation and operation of the safety program at White Oak to
support the critical Bio-Safety Laboratories including infrastructure requirements is also
included in the request.
There are currently 5,768 employees on Campus and as construction proceeds and the
consolidation expands, that number will increase to 8,268 by FY 2014. The request will
fund security equipment and communications networks for: the Auxiliary Support
Facilities; expanded support services, such as the expansion of the Central Utility Plant,
additional infrastructure to support the employees in the new laboratories and office
complexes; labor and loading dock services and a centralized safety program, that was
provided by NIH in the space FDA occupied on their Campus before the move. The
request also provides funds for operational and logistical functions on the White Oak
Campus including those vital to support the LSCB, such as specialized equipment
maintenance.

In short, the FDA spent about $61 million for these ~8,000 employees, but that's not just on furniture - it's on an entire operation to move and equip to a new facility (the White Oak consolidation moved research and regulatory branches from the NIH campus to Silver Spring, Maryland), including decommissioning BSL3 facilities and installing equipment for new ones, installing security and network equipment, and all sorts of other non-trivial operations.

To me, that throws the money the EPA spent on furniture into stark relief - either they have some pretty crazy furniture need or the FDA does a lot better at managing its resources.

[I Push Buttons]

$92 million over 10 years lol? Why is this even newsworthy? The federal budget over the last ten years combined has been like $32.3 trillion.

And every federal government sector has exquisite furniture? Do you think the President and Congress are sitting around in fold out chairs and plastic tables...?

[Daelak]

Here's the FDA's budget for recent fiscal years (that's the agency I mentioned working for). Importantly:


In short, the FDA spent about $61 million for these ~8,000 employees, but that's not just on furniture - it's on an entire operation to move and equip to a new facility (the White Oak consolidation moved research and regulatory branches from the NIH campus to Silver Spring, Maryland), including decommissioning BSL3 facilities and installing equipment for new ones, installing security and network equipment, and all sorts of other non-trivial operations.

To me, that throws the money the EPA spent on furniture into stark relief - either they have some pretty crazy furniture need or the FDA does a lot better at managing its resources.

And that $61,000,000 was just for one operation in the FDA!

[Spectral]

The US government isn't inefficient because it wastes $92 million on high end furniture.

The US government is inefficient because of Medicare, Medicaid, and the overall monster of overpriced private sector government contracting.

I don't think I have to pick either/or here. Granted that the majority of waste is in the programs you mention, but this doesn't really justify chucking tons of money at something as frivilous as expensive furniture.

I'm going to tell you why I roll my eyes at this EPA shit. It's because Republicans and democrats alike have no balls when it comes to the issues facing the US Budget. Really. Really. They have no balls.

There is no serious conversation about government spending that doesn't start with massively slashing the costs of Medicare and Medicaid and gradually raising Social Security eligibility age to 70. And then AFTER that (or maybe along side depending on the issue), we then tackle the fleecing of taxpayers by contractors. I view going after nebulous "government waste", especially in discretionary spending, as decieitful and dishonest. People who do it are attempting to look fiscally responsible without actually being so: actually fiscally responsible people will sit down and say "let's talk medicare and medicaid".

But Republicans and Democrats don't want to do that. Republicans don't because their core constituency is dependent upon Medicare and Medicaid - tremendously popular programs - and they won't mention them by name in their crusade to cut them. Furthermore Republicans won't face facts that market forces have comprehensively failed to control costs. On the other side, Democrats view healthcare spending as something you can't pay enough for. They also do love big bureaucracies. THey have little incentive to tackle it.

So everyone gets to continue being non-serious.

I don't disagree with any of this in the slightest. I also don't personally have the power to have any noticeable impact, so I can safely critique both the massive unnecessary spending and the much smaller unnecessary spending. It doesn't take much political capital to type a couple paragraphs...

- - - Updated - - -

$92 million over 10 years lol? ...

I missed this and now feel silly. Feel free to disregard previous comments of mine in the thread - $9 million/year sounds about right. Perhaps a shade steep, but nothing particularly outlandish.

[PosPosPos]

Do you buy recycled molded plastic chairs?

Here's an idea-- you're arguing against a strawman conservative fantasy version of the EPA. The REAL EPA is for managing resources so that we can use the resources for our benefit-- including making nice furniture.

Yeah, at the expense of taxpayers' money.

Ikea not good enough for the likes of them apparently?

[Orlong]

$92 million over 10 years lol? Why is this even newsworthy? The federal budget over the last ten years combined has been like $32.3 trillion.

And every federal government sector has exquisite furniture? Do you think the President and Congress are sitting around in fold out chairs and plastic tables...?

They SHOULD be. We dont elect them to live in the lap of luxury

[Fugus]

They SHOULD be. We dont elect them to live in the lap of luxury

One problem with that logic, you give them the cheap crap and you end up spending more in the long run replacing it over and over again along with the bureaucracy around it to fill the order.

Now, while I think they don't need to be getting the absolute best by any stretch, they need to get decent stuff that is comfortable to work on and around and sturdy enough to last a decade or more.

I would honestly be more concerned about with forcing accountability on them than the cost of their chair.

[Skroe]

I don't think I have to pick either/or here. Granted that the majority of waste is in the programs you mention, but this doesn't really justify chucking tons of money at something as frivilous as expensive furniture.

I don't disagree with any of this in the slightest. I also don't personally have the power to have any noticeable impact, so I can safely critique both the massive unnecessary spending and the much smaller unnecessary spending. It doesn't take much political capital to type a couple paragraphs...

- - - Updated - - -


I missed this and now feel silly. Feel free to disregard previous comments of mine in the thread - $9 million/year sounds about right. Perhaps a shade steep, but nothing particularly outlandish.

The problem is that diversions like this suck the oxygen out of the room. It is totally diversionary from the real spending issues. Or let me put it this way: by saying "we don't have to choose which is worse", it gives liscence to politicians to go for the easier, softer target, which is EPA Furnature or whatever else that is so tiny in nature. They then resolve that - witness the budget deal from a few years back - and say "yeah we cut spending".

Meanwhile the big 3 entitlement programs keep eating larger and larger shares of the budget.

Right now there is zero political momentum to tackle the big three. Politicians who try get treated with scorn or treated like crazy people. Baby boomers refuse to accept they promised themselves way more than their country can pay for if the cost of services is unchanged.

These diversions give "fiscally minded" people an easy out. A very easy out. The diversion needs to go away. We fiscally minded Americans should be HAPPY to talk about what the EPA spends on furnature.... after spending (NOT SERVICES... the issue is prices and the failure of the market to control them) on Medicare and Medicaid are massively cut / reformed, and the DoD is audited. Until then... I mean just wait for the Debt Showdown in October. Disaster will be averted, because Congress will agree to $150 billion in cuts over 10 years spread out across all of discretionary spending... and we'll just continue to ignore the great beast of entitlements because an easy out will be open.

The result is going to be, paradoxically, a government of Entitlement programs, defense and nothing else.

[Planeshaper]

Again, this shows the type of person you are.

I don't recall placing any blame regarding the EPA into some sort of political slant.

Government waste is a problem across all political spectrums equally.

Can we come down to reality; Republican, Democratic, Liberal, Conservative.

They are all equally fully of shit. Good grief.

Translation:
"Oh damn, the obviously conservatively-biased hit piece I linked didn't go over well because people here are thinking with too many facts and too much logic. Hey, guys! Everyone's concerned about wasteful government spending, not just me! It's a problem for all political spectrums. Also, all political spectrums are equally full of shit!"

So, basically, I guess it's time for you to roll out the false equivalence portion of your debate now, eh?

The current US conservative and liberal movements are not equal.

[IIamaKing]

If only there were a way to gut the entirety of the government, and start over with like mules or goats. It would be cheaper, and proly get as much done.

[TITAN308]

Translation:
"Oh damn, the obviously conservatively-biased hit piece I linked didn't go over well because people here are thinking with too many facts and too much logic. Hey, guys! Everyone's concerned about wasteful government spending, not just me! It's a problem for all political spectrums. Also, all political spectrums are equally full of shit!"

So, basically, I guess it's time for you to roll out the false equivalence portion of your debate now, eh?

The current US conservative and liberal movements are not equal.

I had no idea that it was "conservatively-biased" - it was just a random article I read.

All else aside, comments like yours are extremely ironic. If you can't figure out why then thats OK too.

Believe it or not, not everyone is politically motivated. Here is your tin foil hat back champ.

[Hooked]

Hopefully trump will disband the epa, after the animus river fiasco there is no reason they should be allowed to continue destroying our environment and ruining our economy.

[Skroe]

Hopefully trump will disband the epa, after the animus river fiasco there is no reason they should be allowed to continue destroying our environment and ruining our economy.

... ruining our economy?

Have you been paying attention to current events? The global economy in 2015 has one engine: the United States.

The economy is fine and to suggest the EPA is going to destroy it is just ridiculous.