Posted on Aug 6, 2016
VA spends $20 million on art, $670,000 for the blind
5.1K
33
17
14
14
0
You just can't make this shi** Up!
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the leading taxpayer watchdog in Congress, revealed Friday that the Veterans Administration has spent $20 million on art since 2004 — $16 million during the Obama years — even as it was cutting services to war veterans.
@SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas , Capt Christopher Mueller , CPT (Join to see) , COL Mikel J. Burroughs , Sgt Joe LaBranche , SSgt (Join to see), TSgt Hunter Logan Capt Seid Waddell SrA Christopher Wright LTC Stephen F. PO2 Ed C. PO2 Mark Saffell MSG Tom Earley PVT James Strait Alan K. @po1 william "chip" PO1 William "Chip" Nagel @SGT John McConnell SGT John " Mac " McConnell
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the leading taxpayer watchdog in Congress, revealed Friday that the Veterans Administration has spent $20 million on art since 2004 — $16 million during the Obama years — even as it was cutting services to war veterans.
@SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas , Capt Christopher Mueller , CPT (Join to see) , COL Mikel J. Burroughs , Sgt Joe LaBranche , SSgt (Join to see), TSgt Hunter Logan Capt Seid Waddell SrA Christopher Wright LTC Stephen F. PO2 Ed C. PO2 Mark Saffell MSG Tom Earley PVT James Strait Alan K. @po1 william "chip" PO1 William "Chip" Nagel @SGT John McConnell SGT John " Mac " McConnell
VA spends $20 million on art, $670,000 for the blind
Posted from washingtonexaminer.com
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Art
Budget
Money
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 14
4
4
0
3
3
0
Waste, fraud and abuse has long plagued the Federal government. This seems like it falls in the waste category SP5 Mark Kuzinski
While the dollar value is what was considered POM-dust in DoD Budget calculations, the bigger issue is whose money is the Federal, government wasting. It is taxpayer and tax revenue which funds the mammoth Federal-government Yet far too many in Washington, DC Federal government agencies and the Executive mansion and the halls of Congress seem to think it there funding.
I think Sen. Chuck Grassley is correct to surface issues of waste, fraud or abuse to Federal Agency executives to notify them and give them a chance to correct the problems.
While the dollar value is what was considered POM-dust in DoD Budget calculations, the bigger issue is whose money is the Federal, government wasting. It is taxpayer and tax revenue which funds the mammoth Federal-government Yet far too many in Washington, DC Federal government agencies and the Executive mansion and the halls of Congress seem to think it there funding.
I think Sen. Chuck Grassley is correct to surface issues of waste, fraud or abuse to Federal Agency executives to notify them and give them a chance to correct the problems.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
Why can't we just wire up LARGE flatscreen TV's and "rotate" through the collected art collection of the Smithsonian?
A 55" TV is less than $1000 (we can get small monitors for $150).
Do we really need the "actual" art, or just a "license" so we can display the images? Keep them on constant rotation everywhere. We have thousands of pieces of art already in our collection, including items that are in storage that will likely never be displayed otherwise.
A 55" TV is less than $1000 (we can get small monitors for $150).
Do we really need the "actual" art, or just a "license" so we can display the images? Keep them on constant rotation everywhere. We have thousands of pieces of art already in our collection, including items that are in storage that will likely never be displayed otherwise.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
MAJ Carl Ballinger - Generally speaking I think the $20M in "minimal" in the grand scheme of things. It's estimated that we have 20-25M vets with 6-9M "enrolled" vets in the system. So cost per vet would be 1-3 each. Cost per taxpayer (about 180~M iirc) would end up being pennies.
Could we save a few cents a year per person my eliminating this? Sure. But as you point out, it's really not that big of a deal.
Could we save a few cents a year per person my eliminating this? Sure. But as you point out, it's really not that big of a deal.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google