3 ms·
Also important: money is fungible. To block funding for a particular activity is to say that Congress appropriates money per activity. I don’t think that’s the
by mwsherman 13y ago
Also important: money is fungible. To block funding for a particular activity is to say that Congress appropriates money per activity. I don’t think that’s the case, but would happily be corrected.
So a law that states ‘here’s your money, but you’re not allowed to use it for x’ seems toothless in the extreme. It’s words on a page.
Keep in mind also that the NSA is close to lawless, so any room for interpretation will gut the intent. If it’s words on a page, it’s room for interpretation.
The only actual solution is to actually reduce the NSA’s budget, substantially. Is that in this bill?
- dllthomas 13y agoI don't know. If we say "Here is your money; you can't use it for X" and the next whistleblower shows that they are nonetheless using it for X means they're misappropriating government funds, and people can go to jail for that.
- mpyne 13y agoThis is already thought about. You are hardly the first one to realize that funds can be spent on things other than what they were appropriated for. Look up the Anti-Deficiency Act.
- meepmorp 13y ago> Also important: money is fungible. Yes and no. Congress can specifically prevent agencies from spending money on given activities with riders on budget bills. Evading such a ban would be a bigger deal than the current story, if only because congress would have explicitly stated tha such activities may not be conducted with congressionally provided funds. Assuming word of the program got out.