Who cares about the %#&@#% $16 muffins?

Posted By Blake Hounshell Thursday, September 22, 2011 - 10:35 AM Share

The latest tempest in a teapot in this season of austerity? Congressional outrage over the Justice Department's spending on food and beverages at one of its conferences in 2009. An inspector general's audit report found that the department paid $4,200 for 250 muffins and $2,880 for 300 cookies and brownies.

"By itemizing these costs, with service and gratuity, muffins cost over $16 each and cookies and brownies cost almost $10 each," the report reads.

Never mind that this analysis is not necessarily accurate. Chuck Grassley, the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued a statement decrying the muffin-spending: "The Justice Department appears to be blind to the economic realities our country is facing."

Frank Wolf, whose committee oversees the Justice Department in the House, chimed in with his own letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder:

"It is clear that while American taxpayers were tightening their belts and making difficult financial decisions, the department was splurging on wasteful snacks and drinks as well as unnecessary event planning 'consultants.'"

OK, let's stipulate that spending $16, or even $10, for a muffin is excessive, and a waste of taxpayer money. But give me a break -- this kind of spending is hardly the problem.

Not only are spiraling health-care costs the real cause of America's long-term budget woes -- something Congress has done hardly anything to address -- but defense spending is by far the biggest chunk of annual discretionary spending. The Pentagon can't even pass an audit, and won't be able to do so until 2017, according to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's Senate testimony today. With the enthusiastic patronage of Congress, the U.S. military spends tens of billions of dollars on weapons systems that either don't work as adverstised (Future Combat Systems, anyone?), cost far more than budgeted (all of them), or are wholly unnecessary (remember the Kafkaesque fight over the Joint Strike Fighter's "alternate engine"?).

The Justice Department's entire budget request for 2012 is $28 billion -- less than what the U.S. spends in Iraq and Afghanistan in three months. Before it was cut to only $200 million in July, the Pentagon's budget for military bands was $325 million. Military bands!

But by all means, rant about the muffins...

EXPLORE:FLASH POINTS
 
Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

ZSINGERB

2:31 PM ET

September 22, 2011

Who cares about the %#&@#% $16 muffins? I do!

Come on Blake! The comment "Not only are spiraling health-care costs the real cause of America's long-term budget woes -- something Congress has done hardly anything to address -- but defense spending is by far the biggest chunk of annual discretionary spending. " is both a blatant distraction and a red herring, rolled into one. It is not spiraling health-care costs that are causing our problems. It is the government that doesn't consider spending $16 a muffin a problem. So the $3 muffin that is bought for 16, becomes the $300 laptop that is bought for $2400 without a blink, and on up the scale to billions for projects that should cost millions. If you won't question an over-ring on a muffin, how will you challenge a medical bill? I had kidney stones and got a lithotripsy treatment which the hospital wanted $26,000 for. They settled for the price my insurance had previously negotiated....$2,600. Why didn't they just charge $2600 to begin with? Because they thought they might not be questioned on the amount. Let's question all these bills, muffins, and hospital stays, and maybe we can bring sanity to this tornado of government costs that is sucking our money out the windows....

 

SCREWED AND TATTOOED

3:21 PM ET

September 22, 2011

Zinger

100% valid. Unfortunately, the contracts given, especially on very large projects like aircraft etc for the military, are never held to the contract due to the amount of money already invested in the project. i.e. when deadlines are crossed and the contractor has not delivered, it is cheaper to extend the deadline than to tell them where to go. When something is promised and not delivered, it is again too cost prohibitive to cancel the thing and have someone else do it. Of course, this is an oversimplification, but that's the idea on a lot of the spending on contracts and especially those in the military. I wish I knew how to fix it, but the drain on the defense budget is tremendous due to this sort of garbage, imo.

The argument about putting up with the incredibly marked up prices the government has to pay is right on though. We've all hear dabout the$200 toilet seats etc. $16 muffins is the same thing. The contractor charged that much because they knew they'd get it. Greed is a terrible thing.

 

COMETLINEAR

12:48 AM ET

September 23, 2011

Moaning about trivial expenses like is a waste of time

...and a counter-productive distraction.

Travel expenses and bills for room service aren't where the real money goes. I never quite understood why people find this hard to understand.

 

JASON SIGGER

7:55 AM ET

September 23, 2011

Blake's right

This "complaint" was a punk-ass move by Repubs who are desperate to put the administration into any kind of scandelous light. Caterers know the budgetary limitations and rules and set the prices so that govt agencies can use them without getting into trouble. This was a ridiculous issue to fume about, allowing people to ignore what Congress isn't doing (i.e., demanding that DOD and other govt agencies get their books in order, getting acquisition costs and timelines under control).

 

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.

Read More