That is a nasty linkbait-y retitling. As far as the Helium Privatisation Act goes, the government was being accused of "waste" in 1996 when it was sitting on a

That is a nasty linkbait-y retitling. As far as the Helium Privatisation Act goes, the government was being accused of "waste" in 1996 when it was sitting on a vast stockpile of helium (from prior military uses.) It decided to sell it off over a controlled period so as to not depress the price excessively and put private suppliers out of business. They gave themselves the deadline of 2015 to have it all sold, presumabley so as to reduce the government debt in a reasonable time frame. [1] Now it seems that helium is much more valuable but the price is depressed because this stockpile has to be sold by 2015. So something that made sense at the time now doesn't, and a new act is needed to say they can take longer to sell the helium. Government fail? Only if they don't change the policy. Oh, and the HPA almost unanimously approved by Congress (411-10, with 12 not voting.) [2] EDIT TO ADD: I am grumpy about this because titles like that generally go with the articles along the lines of "nasty government interfering with the market." But in this case, the report wants the government to be the government, to act strategically, not to sell at the market price but above it, and generally to interfere. The 1996 Act stopped the government doing its job in order to cut perceived waste and debt. The act should never have passed congress in the first place, or at least not in such a fixed way, but it did because it fitted people's stupid, prejudiced narrative that the government is too "big". [1] http://www.helium.com/items/874929-understanding-the-helium-privitization-act-of-1996 http://www.helium.com/items/874929-understanding-the-helium-... [2] http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/104/house/2/votes/137/ http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/104/house/2/vote...