Congressional spending on USIP isnt cost-effective

Congressional spending on USIP isn't cost-effective SupportiveArgument1 #99097 Congressional funding of the USIP is not cost-effective compared to competing forms of public expenditure.
Congressmen Jason Chaffetz and Anthony Weiner, writing in the Wall St Journal, argued that: The USIP is a "a case study in how government waste thrives. The idea began during the Cold War as a modest proposal with $4 million in seed money. But the organization received government funding year after year essentially because it had been funded the year before—and because it had important allies.." "...the level of taxpayer support that this private organization receives is excessive. Since 1985, taxpayers have forked over more than $720 million (inflation adjusted). That has included support for a gleaming new 150,000 square foot office building...."
Edit details		Page view
Show >>Citations¹Comments⁰HistoryInfo<< Hide

CitationsAdd new citationList by: CiterankMap

Link[1]

Author: Jason Chaffetz, Anthony Weiner
Cited by: David Price 4:51 PM 27 March 2011 GMT
Citerank: (2) 99085, 99094
URL:

http://on.wsj.com/gcswGV

Excerpt / Summary

The USIP is a "a case study in how government waste thrives. The idea began during the Cold War as a modest proposal with $4 million in seed money. But the organization received government funding year after year essentially because it had been funded the year before—and because it had important allies.."

"...the level of taxpayer support that this private organization receives is excessive. Since 1985, taxpayers have forked over more than $720 million (inflation adjusted). That has included support for a gleaming new 150,000 square foot office building...."

« Show large formatExpand

Get more messages New comment Show followed

No meetings are scheduled at present