Totally agree. I guess what I had in mind was an agency that constantly re-evaluates other agencies and writes the legislation to wind down and then shut down n

Totally agree. I guess what I had in mind was an agency that constantly re-evaluates other agencies and writes the legislation to wind down and then shut down needlessly bureaucratic agencies that preserve the problems to which they are the solution. At the end of the day, an act of law needs to be passed to shut down agencies which came into existence via acts of law. The more I see how government is run, the more I see that lawmakers are commit generators that never take the time to re-factor all the code they've committed to production. Think of this agency as the ones that sit down and get their hands dirty refactoring the code and handing it off to the lawmakers for code review before being committed to the code base. I appreciate that many laws are passed to solve genuine problems. I don't appreciate the fact that they are never checked to make sure they were effective or continue to be effective. Regarding the specific military tank example, I'm certain that there must be a way to set things up so that stupid stuff like that can't pass. I honestly don't see how purchase orders for military equipment could ever be a law issue. The fact that the military can't make purchases according to their own needs and budgets is insane. The money spent on those tanks would be better off being spend on all the veteran's affairs programs that are often underfunded.