Comments on: D.C. Traffic and Terrorist Attacks

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 17:46:33 +0000

When CIA--through force Byrd--moved one of its offices to the WV panhandle, they told Congress that they'd never be able to staff the new facility. Instead, they had to deny transfers because so many wanted to live outside the DC area.

Better cost-of-living, better schools, lower crime... just generally better lifestyles available.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:50:33 +0000

DCL: Huntsville would be a far better location than Arlington from a cost perspective and it's a gorgeous area to boot.

The only real downside is that it would remove the easy moving from job-to-job that occurs for contractors and civil servants with everything in DC.

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:48:17 +0000

Don't let the politicians get ideas. I'm sure Sen. Shelby would love to move the entire DoD down to Huntsville. Heck, he's got a lion's share of it already :)

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:32:53 +0000

I've been advocating Federal decentralization for decades! Most Cabinet and Agency offices could be put out in the field, leaving core headquarters in DC to deal with Congress and the White House.

Why isn't AG located in the Mid West? Couldn't Commerce work as easily from Chicago as Pennsylvania Avenue? Put the offices where the constituents can see them--and be part of them. Let people see their tax dollars working in their states directly.

Certain agencies don't have constituencies, so to speak. State and DOD, for instance, have such wide constituencies that it really doesn't matter that they're in DC.

Move HUD to St. Louis; Education to Hartford; Energy to Houston or Fairbanks.

BREAK UP THE BELTWAY!!