# Pink bicycles or a cure for cancer: How do you believe our money should be spent?

We must no longer tolerate the misdirection of resources for policies the American people do not want

I have battled a  for over two decades, first as a private attorney working on behalf of the state of Wyoming and small businesses, and currently as Wyoming’s lone representative in the U.S. House. I am well-versed with agency structure, lingo, procedures and mentality, especially when it comes to congressional oversight and resource allocation.

Considering the discussion surrounding President ’s creation of DOGE to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in the executive branch, I believe it is important to expose how federal agencies have historically avoided accountability, while diverting resources to pursue policies that Americans don’t want, Congress never approved, and are contrary to their purpose and mission.

I often refer to agency misallocation as the "Pink Bicycle Effect." Using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as an example, and when given the choice between spending $1 million on curing cancer or, say, buying pink bicycles (being a bit tongue-in-cheek), they will choose the pink bicycles. Why? Because the incentive structure for spending public funds is entirely different than what incentivizes the private sector.



Agencies are conditioned, after decades of deficit spending, to believe there is no limit to how much money will be available for their programs, no matter how silly or unnecessary, as Congress has never forced them to justify their spending or held them accountable.



More insidiously, agencies spend taxpayer dollars on ridiculous things because they are incentivized to do so by our appropriations process. These agencies presume they can direct their money to buying pink bicycles, and when called out for failing to cure cancer, they fall back on their tried-and-true answer of "Congress didn’t give us enough money!"

Under a functioning system, Congress would respond to these agency shenanigans by appropriating money with specific instructions to spend all money on curing cancer. But alas, no such incentive structure yet exists, with Congress year-after-year appropriating money for cancer, while watching as the agencies buy "pink bicycles," or, as in the case of NIH, paying for gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China, and torturing beagles.



Let’s now  in exposing corruption and waste: $250,000 to increase "Vegan Local Climate Action Innovation" in Zambia; $74 million for "inclusive justice" in Colombia; $52 million for the outright evil World Economic Forum; $40 million to "improve the social and economic inclusion of sedentary migrants," and $40 million weekly to the Taliban, along with numerous other terrorist organizations.



I expect that DOGE will ultimately expose hundreds of billions of dollars being spent around the world on programs that are downright un-American – and colossal misdirection of assets – that undermine the very foundation of who we are as a culture.

Congress now has the opportunity to reclaim its responsibility as appropriators, and with the assistance of DOGE, federal agencies will soon be out of the business of buying pink bicycles.


```