Supporters of both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have expressed their disillusionment with “business as usual” in the nation’s capital. And if voters elect either candidate, they will expect the new president to have a plan to revitalize the public’s confidence in the federal government. Trump and Sanders voters share the perception that the powers of the federal government are being used to enrich establishment politicians and their moneyed supporters at the expense of average citizens. As a first step towards restoring confidence, a Trump or Sanders administration should introduce a plan to reduce the concentration of federal expenditures in the Washington metropolitan area by redistributing the federal government workforce across the nation.
It is little wonder that many Americans view the federal government as a money machine for bureaucrats and Washington, D.C., insiders. According to the 2010 U.S. census, out of the 20 richest counties in America, as measured by household median income, 11 (including the three richest counties) are in the Washington, D.C., metro area. Incomes in the national capital area are bloated not only by generous federal government payrolls, but also by “beltway bandit” consultancy firms that provide contract services to federal government agencies.
One of the first steps the president-elect should take to restore balance is to move federal government agencies out of the Washington, D.C., area and distribute them throughout the country, targeting low-cost locations that need a catalyst for growth. Many towns and cities across America would welcome the economic development that would accompany the arrival of a stable, well-paid federal agency workforce.
With modern communications technology there is no technical reason that requires federal agencies to be located in the Washington, D.C., area. Why must the headquarters of the Department of Homeland Security be in Washington, D.C.? Why not in Texas or Mississippi? The FBI could just as easily relocate to Utah or Vermont instead of to an expensive site in the nearby D.C. suburbs. Shouldn’t the Department of Agriculture be situated in a state that grows something besides home-use marijuana?
Before modern telecommunications and transportation systems, it was sensible to locate all federal agencies in Washington, D.C., or in nearby suburban Maryland or Virginia. But this is no longer true. While there will be some initial cost involved in relocating federal agencies, the resulting cost savings will span the life of the agency.
By moving agencies out of the high labor cost D.C. metro area into low cost locations, federal agency salaries will decline as cost-of-living federal salary adjustments no longer apply. In 2016, federal employees in the Metro D.C. area receive a 24.78 percent premium over the base federal pay scale because they work in a high cost region. At a time when federal budgets rarely balance, Congress should not ignore the benefits of a significant saving in federal agency labor costs.
Moving federal agencies will bring additional cost savings. Acquisition, building and maintenance costs will shrink, as will agency contracting costs, as contractors follow their agencies to new lower-wage locations. No doubt some federal agencies will still need to maintain a small footprint in the D.C. area to facilitate interaction with cabinet officials, but modern communications make it possible to locate the largest share of any agencies’ operational staff and facilities far outside the region.
Relocation promises not only cost savings, but added security and service continuity. When the federal government’s agency operations are concentrated in the D.C. metro area, federal government services face a systemic risk from snow storms, tropical storms, terrorist attacks, or Metro system malfunctions, all of which have hamstrung the D.C. operations of federal agencies in the past.
Perhaps the biggest benefit generated by federal agency relocation is an increased voter perception of equality and fairness. The expense of managing the federal government should be used to spread the wealth beyond the nation’s capital. For many years, the D.C. region has prospered from its proximity to the federal government while many parts of the country have suffered. This longstanding imbalance has reinforced voters’ belief that the system is rigged to benefit insiders. The technology is available and the national mood is ripe to embrace a plan to relocate the business of the federal government more equitably throughout the states.
Paul Kupiec is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise InstituteThinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.
