Want to Save Real Money in D.C.?
Males do not have any offices of men’s health in the Department of Health and Human Services. But females have five offices of women’s health strategically located at the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, the Health Resources and Services Administration, and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.
So if women wish to be paragons of gender equality, I’m certain taxpayers will applaud this $4 billion savings.
The Republican Study Committee needs to take a close, hard look at these programs, as well:
1. Office of Child Support Enforcement (no proof of the program’s effectiveness, except for putting destitute dads behind bars) — $4 billion
2. Violence Against Women Act (no evidence this Clinton-era hold-over has done anything other than break up families) — $1 billion
3. Perkins Vocational Education Act, which trains women to become car mechanics, welders, and lumberjacks (yes, really!) — $100 million
4. TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) Family Violence Option (bon-bons for aspiring Welfare Queens) — $63 million
Then we need to rid ourselves of the various and sundry women’s advisory committees such as the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS). (Not to be confused with the now-defunct gender advisory commission aptly named LACK-O-WITS.)
And let’s not forget the hulking monstrosity that lurks on the East River, sometimes referred to as the United Nations. Referring to it as a “beast,” House Foreign Affairs chair Ileana Ros-Lehtinen recently proposed eliminating funding from the UN Human Rights Council.
And why not make it a clean sweep? Take out the UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, the Women’s Development Fund (UNIFEM), and other UN gender-agenda programs, too.
And for the squeamish and chivalrous in our midst, keep this fact in mind: There is no such thing as a sensible feminist. Just when you think you’ve come up with a happy meeting of the minds, she’ll come forth with yet another tale of downtrodden women.
And no doubt you’ll end up feeling like a quisling of the impious patriarchy.
“1.U.S. Agency for International Development; 2.Legal Services Corporation; 3.Title X Family Planning; 4.Women’s Educational Equity Act of 2001.”
Come on, be honest. How many of you out there knew that any, ANY, of these programs actually existed? I’d also like to know some hard numbers on how many people actually are helped or take advantage of these programs? The Federal Government is literally filled with programs like these and I think that if they all went away tomorrow, most Americans wouldn’t even notice the change.
And, whatever happened to personal responsibility? Does the Federal Government have to try and protect every aspect of your life? Oh, I forgot, this is the Obama administration we’re talking about, the one that gave you ObamaCare. When are people going to stop playing the victim and stop asking the government to do everything for them? Never, as long as socialists like Obama have anything to say about it.
Not too long ago the SocSecAdmin gave out the data that
87 cents of each dollar received came from men, and
84 cents of each dollar payed out was to women.
The feminists at the time railed for more “gender equality” programs and told the SocSecAdmin to shut up.
The problem isn’t the butchie femmes, it’s the pansy American men that won’t stand up to the pandering pols.
If you want to save the government real money, and greatly increase the amount of infrastructure work that can be done, it is essential that two actions be taken…Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act, and prohibit any entity receiving federal funds from imposing a “prevailing wage act” mandating wage rates on any project. The effect of the current laws far outweighs the cost of the programs you have noted, although their impact is also substantial.
Excellent points. Quite likely most Americans are unaware of this the real “minimum wage”. Carpenters on Washington State public works projects are paid about $33 per hur plus $13 per hour in benefits. By contrast carpenters outside this prevailing wage orb earn about $28 per hour, total package, or about 60% of DB rate. This subsidy is akin to the agg subsidies in America and equally unjustifiable. I am sure there are many other middle class subsidies equally unjustifiable. I too imagine construction activity would increase tremendously upon repeal of htis act.
I strongly oppose all set aside contract and admission programs for women and minorities.
However, the whining over enforcing child support is shameful. We should have more enforcement of child support payments for both women and men — as the law is already actually written, for the record. You make ‘em, then grow all the way up yourself and don’t make me pay for ‘em.
This isn’t government intrusion in our lives. This is keeping the government from intruding on my pocketbook to support the children you refuse to raise.
Your claims about health studies are insupportable. Do a breakdown that recognizes studies of health issues such as reproduction (you know, the thing only women do, but the source of, you know, children, including male children), and you’ll see that, overall, with the exception of breast cancer, scientific research dollars are spent with parity – not the case just a few years ago, when women were routinely excluded from cancer and heart disease investigations for no good reason at all. When men can have babies, I’m sure we’ll include them in pre-natal research.
So are you mad at the breast cancer folks? Go tell them. Mad at the AIDS industry, which also receives far, far more than its share, and now type-2 diabetes research, the really politicized fields? You see, it’s quite complicated.
You want to fix TANF? God knows I do. But to do that, you have to confront all of those “destitute daddies” that pull your heartstrings here. You fix TANF only by holding them responsible, not by whimpering over their alleged oppression.
I agree a lot of money is wasted in violence programs, particularly the “outreach” and ‘education” arms, which are also politicized and the source of some pretty ugly male-bashing. But they also pay for DNA testing that prevents crimes like murder and rape. And the police, among others, very much appreciate the dollars that go to creating policies and resources that protect them when they walk into DV situations — and enable them to force people to appear before a judge at the cop’s discretion instead of situations escalating until cops are endangered. This is a money-saving improvement that arose from DV funding.
So clean up these programs, by all means. But whining about their being nothing more than oppression of men is simply silly.
Please. Get over yourself. Women are more likely to be “deadbeat” and not pay child support than men. Women are more likely to have a boyfriend or new husband who violates their children from the previous marriage than men are to have a new girlfriend or wife who violates the children. (Thanks a lot, Snow White and Cinderella!)
There are plenty of men who are paying child support for children who are not theirs.
They also frequently don’t respect court-ordered parental rights for the father of their children. Many a man has found that when it came time to get his kids, his wife wouldn’t turn them over and the police would help him–even if he had a court order in his hand.
Women like Tina also don’t appreciate the fact that the laws, as written, also make it nearly impossible for a man to stop child support payment if he is the victim of paternity fraud.
I’m glad that somebody finally came out and said all of this.
With the legal system being the way it is, I am surprised that any heterosexual male in America is willing to get married these days.
Cooperation between men and women is essential to the survival of the human race. Thanks to the feminists, the US government has been turning that into an adversarial relationship.
Ms. Trent -
“when women were routinely excluded from cancer and heart disease investigations for no good reason at all.”
You simply don’t know what you’re talking about. As early as 1991, 57% of participants in cancer research were female — see Sex, trials, and datatapes. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83: 16-17, Table 1.
Yeah, you’re right. That’s why we all see all those blue ribons in all those ads for the Steven G. Common Prostate Cancer foundation.
Find me one, just one, foundation pleading for funds for an exclusively male problem and get back to me, OK?
Didn’t you know it’s Prostate Cancer Awareness Month? What? You weren’t “aware” of that? That’s why all the players at the Super Bowl will be wearing blue shoes and gloves. Keep an eye out for it.
Holy shish kabob! I was going to say these exact same things and then I decided I wouldn’t. LOL. I totally agree. I even had to look up the month, which is September, and was going to comment on why the NFL doesn’t have blue trimmed uniform items like the pink ones in October. Awesome that someone else realizes this huge disparagement.
” when women were routinely excluded from cancer and heart disease investigations for no good reason at all. ”
huh? Are you kidding me? For no good reason or because men were seen as better guinea pigs whose test results could be used for women too, you know, with the thinking that men and women are no different except for some plumbing and slight hormonal differences.
“Do a breakdown that recognizes studies of health issues such as reproduction (you know, the thing only women do”
only women do? Look up some issues facing male reproductive health on the net and how rarely are they brought up in the current milieu.
“However, the whining over enforcing child support is shameful.”
What’s shameful is that a man has to pay child support even when he has been completely removed from their lives because his ex-wife was not in love anymore or even if the children aren’t his.
“However, the whining over enforcing child support is shameful.”
What, pray tell, is “shameful” about wanting the federal government to obey the law of the land?
The Constitution gives NO authority to the fed.gov to involve itself in such matters. All such programs are ILLEGAL.
“How would Americans like it if some foreign power tried to foist a neo-Marxist initiative on our unsuspecting citizens?”
You mean like a Kenyan Communist as President?
Good points, Mr. Roberts.
Tina Trent who wants “more enforcement” of child support clearly does not understand how the child-support machinery works. In her ignorance, she assumes it must be somewhat fair. She talks about “the law as written” when there are 50 states with 50 laws on child support. They all vary a lot, the enforcement tools vary a lot, and the culture of “more enforcement” no matter what the facts are (which she promotes) has in reality resulted in our prisons being full of men whose only problem is they are out of money. These are debtors’ prisons, and men are thrown into them without trial. Debtors prisons are unconstitutional, but there they are.
Ms. Trent needs to learn much more about the child support enforcement machinery (I was going to say “child-support Gulag” because in some states it is that) before telling us “just do more enforcement.”
You have indirectly hit upon why the Left so hates Sarah Palin. She is a successful woman, mother and wife who became a powerful Governor in a state that is probably the most manly state in the Union. All without the help of one single gender based government program. It puts the lie to 40+ years of nagging by the feminists.
While we are at it, get rid of Head Start. A recent study that there was just one (1) out of 40-some positive effects of Head Start which were still detectable a year after the child entered school. Let the parents take care of their children. Put out a pamphlet telling parents how to teach their children to count to 10, recognize their letters, their name, and how to color with crayons, and read to their children. Seems we need to bring back orphanages. We have school breakfast programs, school lunch programs, after school meal programs, and a back-pack program to feed the children over the weekend. If we, the taxpayers are paying for all these meals to feed the children, why are we giving the moms so much in welfare?
Since women dominate education in this country, and the Department of Education doesn’t actually educate anybody, let’s dump that waste of money.
Early in the AIDS quandary,ten times as much was spent on AIDS research per individual with the disease as was spent on breast cancer research. At the same time ten times as much was spent on breast cancer research as research on carcinoma of the prostate. I never heard a male physician complain. All had mothers, sisters, wives and female friends. Now carcinoma of the prostate claims more lives per year than does carcinoma of the breast. I call that success. As to the statement that women live five years longer than men, I remember when the figure was women lived eight years longer than men. Last year more women died of lung cancer than men. Societal evolution has been interesting. You have come a long way baby. Congratulations.
I managed to become a female chemical engineer without the help of the
“Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering” program. Never heard of it. Probably only available to shrill, ugly, dyke feminazis. I wouldn’t have qualified.
I’m amazed that Pajamas Media is stating the facts, that so many government programs benefit women, exist solely for women, and harm men.
You go, boy.
Forget it!! Gender set-asides and racial preferences will be with us for the next fifty years if not longer. For the grievance industry these are like or cities or territory captured from an enemy power. They are monuments to the success of the struggle regardless of how irrelevant or harmful they become. As Stalin supposedly said when asked when he would evacuate eastern Europe after WWII – “What we have, We keep.”
Yes, they will, if we continue to attack them piecemeal, on their merits, instead of on principle.
These programs are illegal. When we start insisting that the federal government obey the law (A.K.A. the Constitution), all these programs will be history.
I think what USAID does is a little different from the rest of this list. Most of the developing world doesn’t have issues with an overabundance of “female empowerment.” USAID’s meager budget gets a lot more national security progress for the buck than a dollar spent in the defense budget, and I think you’d be hard pressed to find a serious national security policy expert on either side of the aisle who would disagree.
If the public ever saw a list of agencies, aligned with budgets, headcount and what they actually do, there would be a revolution.
the existence of such programs leads to the logical…albiet politicaly incorrect …conclusion that women are incapable of competing on a level playing field…i personaly dont believe this but obviously it has never been tried…just sayin
I was just thinking,IF, every Congress and Senate passed say 20 laws that work for the betterment of Women.Then each year,the Pres made Exec Orders to the tune of 3,000 (average).IMAGINE how many laws are on the books that don’t do anything except spend money.???? Thats NOT including PORK, which accounts for the payoffs a polli has to make to stay in the game.
I said the magic word….GAME,thats all it is to most politicians,but with YOUR money.
If anyone wants to expose feminism for the hate cult that it is, this is how to do so quickly and easily.
Misandry is the new Jim Crow.
How about giving the dept of Agriculture the death penalty, as punishment for years of institutional racism as established by Pigford .
Certainly the Framers were familiar with the concept, and they gave the federal government no authority to regulate agriculture. Accordingly, all federal government regulation of agriculture is unconstitutional. Even if Sinclair Lewis did write a fictional book.
Everyone needs to read ‘The Misandry Bubble’ to get a full idea of how extreme feminism has gotten.
Feminism is the new Jim Crow. That is not an exaggeration.
Tina Trent is an evil monster.
It is usually the father who puts the child’s interest before his own.
It is usually the mother who uses children as pawns for her own financial gain.
If women really cared about the well-being of children, women would not separate children from their fathers for financial gain.
As Carey Roberts said, there is no such thing as a reasonable feminist. You might as well debate with an Al Qaeda jihadi.
Tina Trent is a superb example of how a society collapses exactly 100 years after women are allowed to vote.
If you disagree, check back with me on the state of America in 2019 (which is 100 years after women starting voting in the US).
I don’t know if that is true or not, but I’ve always thought it odd that the same congress passed prohibition, and gave women the right to vote.
“At the Department of Ed, the Title IX apparatchiks will need to find a new job.”
“Apparatchiks” is exactly right.