Though Congress is away for the month, the Congressional Budget Office is not. CBO is the source for most of the cost estimates we use to report the cost (and occasionally savings) of legislation, and it continues its work even during the dog days of summer (- which haven’t been all that bad this year, by the way!).

Here are the bills most recently analyzed by CBO, and thus reported to you here on WashingtonWatch.com with their cost per family, per person, etc.

H.R. 263
The Cybersecurity Education Enhancement Act of 2007
Costs $0.09 per family

S. 3341
The Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 2008
Costs $2.15 per family

H.R. 404
The Federal Customer Service Enhancement Act
Costs $0.55 per family

S. 1933
The Small Community Drinking Water Funding Act
Costs $26.27 per family

If you want to see all bills as their cost estimates come out – it’s a decent sign that they’re moving – you can use the Cost/Savings RSS feed.

Don’t know what RSS is? Learn more here.

Yeah, I had never heard of him either, but the American Trucking Associations today announced its support for H.R. 6709, the National Conservation, Environment, and Energy Independence Act – and they brought along professional truck driver Tony Sifford!

Tony is a driver for FedEx Ground out of Hillsville, Virginia, and he’s involved in various good causes around trucking (most of which appear to be sponsored by the ATA). Tony looks like a nice guy.

And he joined Rep. Nick Lampson (D-Texas) at ATA’s National Truck Driving Championships in Houston, Texas – now that’s a good time! – to say good things about the bill.

According to the ATA, it calls for domestic oil drilling, tax incentives, and alternative energy research to bring down the price of fuel.

Tony Sifford is for it. How could you not be?

It’s an interesting commentary on policymaking that having a truck driver endorse a bill is supposed to tell us that the bill is good. I look to truck drivers for knowing how to drive a rig, where to get good grub on the road, and the trucking business, but – no disrespect to all the solid, professional truck drivers – I have no idea what this truck driver can contribute to our knowledge of the economics, science, or business of energy. (Though I might hear it from all the drivers debating the proposed TRUCC Act.)

Here’s the current vote on H.R. 6709, the National Conservation, Environment, and Energy Independence Act. Click to vote, comment, learn more, or edit the wiki article about the bill.

Last week, I wrote here about Congress passing through 10,000 introduced bills even while the annual spending process goes neglected.

Now the Wall Street Journal has picked up the story, coming at it from a slightly different angle. The story is called “As U.S. Economic Problems Loom, House, Senate Sweat the Small Stuff,” and reporter Elizabeth Williamson points out how many symbolic resolutions have been introduced in Congress while the real work of government goes by the wayside.

The 110th Congress, whose term officially ends in January, hasn’t passed any spending bills or attacked high gasoline prices. But it has used its powers to celebrate watermelons and to decree the origins of the word “baseball.”

Williamson’s story emphasizes the small number of bills that have been passed into law, but counting laws is not an appropriate measurement of Congress’ work. A small number of high quality laws would be much better than numerous junk laws.

But like the 10,000 bills post, the story highlights the fact that Congress hasn’t taken care of its basic responsibilities.

Congress, which won’t return to session until September, has yet to pass any 2009 appropriations bills, even though funding the federal budget is its official function. Before leaving town for summer break in August, lawmakers failed to establish August as Heat Stroke Awareness Month, blowing the deadline to make it official.

Now, you won’t find the Heat Stroke Awareness Month resolution or the “we love watermelon” resolution here on WashingtonWatch.com. We have them in our database, but generally don’t display the symbolic bills. The 10,000 bills I wrote about are all substantive and not the symbolic stuff featured in the WSJ story.

But the point is the same. Congress is frittering away its time, while its basic responsibilities are going neglected.

Last week, I wrote here about how well federal civilian workers are doing compared to the private sector worker. Well, it might soon get a little better.

H.R. 6339 is called the “Federal Employees Deserve to Volunteer on the Elections Act of 2008.” In addition to giving money to states for recruiting and training election workers, it would give federal employees paid leave for time spent working at polling places.

Certainly, service to your community as an election worker is a good thing. My mom was one for many years – and the woman was a saint! But private sector workers don’t get paid to do it.

Federal workers who volunteer to work in polling places should volunteer for it – meaning they don’t get paid.

H.R. 6339 would cost a little under 75 cents per U.S. family to implement, some of which goes to improving the lot of those federal workers yet more. You’re paying for it.

Here’s the current vote on H.R. 6339, the Federal Employees Deserve to Volunteer on the Elections Act of 2008. Click to vote, comment, learn more, and edit the wiki article on the bill.

One of the most visited bills on WashingtonWatch.com this week is H.R. 2774, The Solar Energy Research and Advancement Act of 2007. It has been reported from committee, which means that it is ready for the full House of Representatives to debate. The bill would establish a group of programs and subsidies to advance solar energy and its commercialization, at a cost of about $2.50 per U.S. family.

As always, there are at least two sides to the story. On the one hand, technological progress is a good thing, and solar power is a wonderfully renewable resource – that’s for sure. Using more of it would lower energy prices, reduce pollution, and perhaps lessen our reliance on unstable foreign sources of energy.

On the other hand, economists will tell you that it’s a mistake to try to make any product “viable” through subsidies – and that’s what we’re talking about here: subsidies. There is a point in the future when solar will be viable simply because it’s a more efficient way of producing energy than others. And we will get there without any government spending because private capital can be drawn to the problem by the profit motive. Let the sun rise on its own, and let taxpayers keep their dollars.

Where do you come down on all this? Can a bill like this bring sunshine to our energy portfolio? Or is it another government program feeling along in the dark?

Here’s the current vote on H.R. 2774, The Solar Energy Research and Advancement Act of 2007. Click to vote, comment, learn more, and edit the wiki article about the bill.

As I finished assembling the WashingtonWatch.com Digest for the week (see it here), I realized that the featured laws represent an interesting cross-section of things the federal government does – though not nearly all of it, of course.

Take Public Law 110-315, the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007. This is mostly about redistributing wealth. The $1,200 in spending per U.S. family is mostly intended to go toward getting young people through college.

Does it actually get there? Not so sure. And does it go from, say, people who have plenty of money to people in need? Doubtful. This looks like classic middle-class entitlement legislation. Feel free to blast me in the comments if you think it’s not.

Then there’s Public Law 110-314, the Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act. It’s a classic example of public health and safety regulation.

Does it do the job and cost-effectively make us safer? There’s often more to the story, as regulatory agencies can be captured by the companies they regulate. But at thirty cents or so per U.S. family (and whatever costs might be imposed by the regulations – which are very hard to determine), it’s hard to complain about this one compared to one costing $1,200.

Finally, Public Law 110-316, the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008. This is also health and safety regulation. But . . . it’s about the health and safety of animals.

A buck-fifty per family isn’t a lot, but how many buck-fifty programs at the outer edge or beyond the federal government’s real responsibility are you willing to support? It’s stuff like animal drug regulation that we created the Jack of All Trades – Master of None category for.

WashingtonWatch.com isn’t going to make you an expert on every bill in Congress, but perhaps you’ll be in a better position to make a few judgments about what you like and don’t like. Keep watching.

Here’s the WashingtonWatch.com email newsletter for the week. Subscribe here.

email newsletter | tell a friend | wiki | about | home | log in On the WashingtonWatch.com Blog At last, there’s talk of making airline security rational and sensible. Featured Items Congress continues its August recess and will not return to Washington for several weeks. When it returns in September, there will be just three weeks until the beginning of the 2009 fiscal year October 1st. As yet, not a single FY 2009 spending bill has passed both houses. You can follow the the FY 2009 budget and spending process on this page. The president signed several bills into law over the past week. Public Law 110-315, the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 amends and extends the Higher Education Act of 1965. Just a few provisions of the bill were discussed in the WashingtonWatch.com blog post “Good and Bad in the Big Education Bill.” Its implementation will cost the average U.S. family over $1,200. Public Law 110-314 is the Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act. The law establishes consumer product safety standards and other safety requirements for children’s products, and it continues the operations of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The cost of implementing the law is just under thirty cents per U.S. family. The Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 (Public Law 110-316) revises and extends the animal drug user fee program in the Food and Drug Administration. The program allows FDA to charge animal drug manufacturers for its reviews of their products. The cost of implementing the law will be a little over $1.50 per average U.S. family. P.L. 110-315 The College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 Costs $1,209.34 per family P.L. 110-314 The Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act Costs $0.29 per family P.L. 110-316 The Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 Costs $1.66 per family What People Think The College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 33% For, 67% Against Vote on this Bill The Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act 48% For, 52% Against Vote on this Bill The Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 38% For, 62% Against Vote on this Bill Displayed below are new, updated, and passed items with their cost or savings per family. New Items H.R. 3068 The Federal Protective Service Guard Contracting Reform Act of 2007 Costs $0.00 per family S. 3328 A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide for a one-year extension of other transaction authority Costs $0.00 per family H.R. 4779 To enact certain laws relating to public contracts as title 41, United States Code, “Public Contracts” Costs $0.00 per family S. 2969 The Veterans’ Medical Personnel Recruitment and Retention Act of 2008 Costs $60.67 per family S. 3192 A bill to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to authorize the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, the Coquille Indian Tribe, and the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Indians of Oregon to obtain 99-year lease authority for trust land Costs $0.00 per family H.R. 6577 The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact Costs $0.00 per family P.L. 110-314 The Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act Costs $0.29 per family S. 3052 The Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008 Costs $0.00 per family P.L. 110-287 Approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 Saves $0.03 per family H.R. 6460 The Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act of 2008 Costs $5.46 per family S. 199 A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of 1996 to modify the grant program to improve sanitation in rural and Native villages in the State of Alaska Costs $0.76 per family H.R. 6608 The House Reservists Pay Adjustment Act of 2008 Costs $0.00 per family S. 1211 The Saving Kids from Dangerous Drugs Act of 2007 Costs $0.01 per family H.R. 6503 The Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program Reauthorization of 2008 Costs $0.14 per family Updated Items P.L. 110-315 The College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 Costs $1,209.34 per family Passed Items P.L. 110-301 The Libyan Claims Resolution Act P.L. 110-312 The United States Parole Commission Extension Act of 2008 P.L. 110-313 A bill to amend title 35, United States Code, and the Trademark Act of 1946 to provide that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, shall appoint administrative patent judges and administrative trademark judges, and for other purposes P.L. 110-314 The Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act Costs $0.29 per family P.L. 110-315 The College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 Costs $1,209.34 per family P.L. 110-316 The Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 Costs $1.66 per family email newsletter | tell a friend | wiki | about | home | privacy | contact | log in WashingtonWatch.com P.O. Box 77576 Washington, D.C. 20013

. . . and someone in Congress wants them to pay their own way.

H.R. 6812 would prohibit United States foreign assistance to countries with budget surpluses.

Here’s the current vote. Click to vote, comment, learn more or edit the wiki article.

Well, this isn’t hot off the presses, but it’s a fascinating paper that I just had the chance to read.

Mark Stewart, a civil engineer at the University of Newcastle and John Mueller, a political science professor at Ohio State University, have done an analysis of the dollars spent per life saved by a couple of airline security measures.

The conclusion? Hardening cockpit doors has the highest risk reduction (16.67%) at the lowest cost: $40 million. The Federal Air Marshal Service costs $900 million but reduces risk by only 1.67% – an annual cost of $180 million per statistical life saved.

The government’s target price per life saved is between $1 and $10 million. That means $180 million is a pretty high number. It’s money that could be used on more efficient security alternatives.

In case you’re freaked out about putting a dollar value on human life, don’t be. We weigh the value of our own lives against other things all the time. To articulate this balancing for policymaking purposes, what economists are doing is using a dollar value to measure the relative importance of life versus other things. It doesn’t cheapen your life to think that people are trying to be smart about protecting it.

This study was written up a lot of places: Bruce Schneier’s blog, the Freakonomics blog, and the Wall Street Journal, just to link a few. But you know why it’s special to see it here? Because you can do something about it!

S. 3181, The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2009 is the bill that spends money to run the Federal Air Marshal Service. If you think this waste is wasteful, this would be something you want to tell your Member of Congress. Mention that this is the bill on which to do something about it.

Here’s the current vote on the overall bill (the Senate version – the House doesn’t have one yet). Click to vote, comment, learn more, or edit the wiki article about the bill.

Federal civilian workers earned an average wage of $77,143 in 2007, 61 percent higher than the $48,035 average in the U.S. private sector. That 61 percent pay advantage has increased from a 34 percent advantage in 2000.

Total compensation (wages plus benefits) was $116,450 for the average federal worker in 2007, compared to $57,615 in the private sector. The federal compensation advantage increased from 68 percent in 2000 to 102 percent today. You’re paying for it.

All this is according to Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute in a recent Cato@Liberty blog post. (Full disclosure: My day job is at Cato and I think Chris is a nice guy.)

Edwards suggests that this disparity and the federal budget deficit of $500 billion demand a freeze in federal pay and privatization of costly activities like air traffic control.

The list of bills dealing with federal employees is long. One of the most often visited these days is H.R. 5781, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2008, which would expand federal worker compensation a little more with paid time off, at a cost of a little over $7.00 per U.S. family.

Here’s what people think of H.R. 5781, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2008. Click to vote, comment, learn more, or edit the wiki article about the bill.