Get Email Updates
When we launched YouCut over a year ago, we could have never imagined how enthused people were by the effort, how engaged they became, and how successful the program would be in achieving its mission of changing the culture of spending into a culture of savings. Millions of votes were cast across the country to encourage the House to cut spending, and that is exactly what we continue to do. Now, as our new majority continues to work to cut spending and grow our economy, it's time to transform YouCut to its next phase. Take a moment to review the options and vote on which spending cut you believe should be sponsored by the YouCut program.
Reduce the number of TSA agents by increasing the efficiency of airport security screening
Potential Savings: up to $1 billion over 10 years The Transportation Security Agency, created after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, establishes standards for airport security and directly hires and manages airport security screening personnel at most of the nation's airports. However, 16 of the nation's airports contract with private companies to provide airport security screening with certified inspectors operating under federal standards. These airports participate in TSA's Screening Partnership Program which was established to test whether private contractors could provide the same level of security as federal employees but at cheaper cost. The demonstration program proved to be an outstanding success. Private security screeners at the San Francisco International Airport are 65 percent more efficient than their federal counterparts at the Los Angeles International Airport, according to one study. Despite the success of the alternative program, TSA officials tried to block new airports from using contracted screeners in 2011. Critics contend that agency opposition to private screeners results from empire-building, given that TSA has more than 61,000 staff and has spent more than $2 billion on recruitment and training. Expanding the Screening Partnership Program to the Nation's 35 largest airports could potentially save up to $1 billion over the next ten years in lower TSA personnel costs if the efficiencies found at the San Francisco airport are duplicated at locations serving 75 percent of the nation's air travelers. More airports participating in the Screening Partnership Program will significantly reduce the TSA workforce. |
Dispose of excess baggage screening machines
Potential Savings: at least $20 million over 10 years The Department of Homeland Security has purchased more than 600 baggage screening machines that were not currently in use as of the end of 2011. These unused machines, which cost $150,000 each, are being stored in a warehouse in Dallas while the Department decides what to do with them. Storage costs for this cache of unused equipment are $2 million per year. The federal government could save $20 million in storage costs over the next decade by either deploying the machines where they are needed, or selling them as surplus equipment to non-federal users. Any proceeds from selling the excess equipment would be in addition to the savings achieved from ceasing to store them. |
Terminate a National Science Foundation program aimed at shaping public opinion on climate change
Potential Savings: up to $38 million over 10 years The National Science Foundation's Climate Change Education program proposes to spend $38 million over the next five years making grants to universities, zoos and scientific organizations to "educate" the public about the causes and effects of global climate change. A review of prior grants made by the program shows a repeated pattern of funding activities intended to sway public opinion on a controversial topic about which the facts remain in heated dispute. $1.2 million was awarded to one grantee to identify TV meteorologists who question the theory of man-made global warming and develop methods to get them to change their minds. Another $1 million grant to the Chicago Zoo was provided to develop a network through which "changes in public attitudes" toward global warming could be achieved. Using tax dollars to fund such propaganda campaigns on a contentious public policy issue is inappropriate and should be terminated. |
