This is the battle-cry of many Liberty-Minded Citizens. But it generally relates to Auditing the Federal Reserve. I say, Why stop there?

Here's a lifecycle of how projects are created and managed in most healthy private business:

PLANNING PHASE (should account for 2/3rd's time of the total initial effort)

1. Concept - Someone comes up with an idea that directly relates to solving a problem and/or conserving resources.
2. Plausibility / Feasibility Analysis - Before taking ANY action, ALL experienced stakeholders involved in the process are gathered to evaluate the proposed action and ensure it directly aligns with the organization's intended goals and mission.
3. Impact / Risk Analysis- All Stakeholders then provide feedback on both the foreseeable short and long term impacts of the proposed change
4. Creating a Project Plan - definitions for scope of work, measurements of quality and effectiveness, time-lines, resource requirements, external policy integration, documentation , you know - the usual "devil-in-the-details" stuff.

IMPLEMENTATION PHASE (should account for 1/3rd time of the total initial effort)

This is where the "rubber-meets-the-road"stuff , like resource allocation, etc.

MONITORING PHASE
Control, and Continuous Improvement- This is most important aspect of Project management, as it pertains to monitoring ongoing information and checkpoints regarding project effectiveness and quality of service. These are the main factors that determines the need for continuing, adjusting or deleting an ineffective / inefficient project.

Seems pretty simple, huh?

But, if you look at the performance history of Federal Government Programs like, "The War on X" (Drugs, Terror, whatever), "No Child Left Behind" Social Security, etc. it appears as these simple and commercially acceptable project management concepts are completely foreign to both Congress and the White House. There's no "magic" about it - Poor Leadership Skills will lead to Poor Administration

The truth is that, once a Federal Government puts ANY program in place, regardless of how poorly it was planned for, or how miserable the results, it's generally there forever. This stems from weak political leadership that doesn't want to bear the burden of tough decisions.

True leaders hold little regard for "getting in the history books: so long as the job gets done right. Unfortunately, Most politicians are concerned more with establishing their personal Legacy at any cost, than maintaining a fair, effective and Constitutionally-supported administration. If we want REAL Change, we have to look for less vanity in our leadership and more proven core management experience.