[arglebarnacle]

I think it's going to be safe. It demonstrably saves much much more than it costs, so conservatives will likely support it from a cost cutting/reducing government "waste" perspective. Liberals will support it because it's smart and makes government run better.

I think only an extremely cynical view would suggest this program isn't safe, a view in which conservatives intentionally dismantle good cost-saving government programs while leaving bad ones for the sole purpose of giving government a bad name.

[mtanski]

Has our legislative branch behaved rationally in the last few years? Recently they threatened forcing a default for unrelated (to budget) issues. And in the not to distant past they voted a law that prohibits Medicare from to using it's bargaining power to negotiate for lower drug prices. You know something that would save every tax payer quite a bit of money since Medicare is one of the larger budget line items.

Based on past behavior you don't have to be overly cynical to think a useful program like this could be eliminated.

[tvanantwerp]

Fortunately, 18F is under the GSA, which is the executive branch. It's entirely likely that most Congressmen don't know 18F exists.

[sailfast]

More to the point, 18F is supposed to be a self-funded organization that shouldn't draw much from the overall GSA budget. (Not sure if that applies to standing up the organization / hiring and other investments). It would be a hard argument to kill it. That said, The US Digital Service is out of the White House Office of Science Technology Policy (a distinctly political / appointed office) and USDS / 18F interact quite a bit so momentum could be a challenge if there was executive-level antipathy.

[SolarNet]

> a view in which conservatives intentionally dismantle good cost-saving government programs while leaving bad ones for the sole purpose of giving government a bad name.

Pretty sure giving government a bad name is the goal for many of the elected conservatives (perhaps not the people who voted for them).

[crdb]

Additional slightly paranoid alternatives:

- $1 IT contracts get in the way of crony overcharging, said cronies then provide campaign financing to the right people (never forget Accuweather paying Rick Santorum $50,000 to lobby to stop making National Weather Service data public);

- overcharging is how some intelligence services finance black ops (the modern Air America might be a press or marketing company) as France is alleged to be doing already (e.g. [1] for the full description)

In both cases, there would be powerful incentives to shut down "more efficient government IT" projects.

[1] http://www.amazon.fr/Missions-methodes-techniques-speciales-...