Recover to what level of waste?

What they will certainly find in Minnesota is government funds were being recycled in part to either elected officials, or those in positions with decision-making authority to direct more outgoing funds. In other words, bribery.

 Agreed.  But if we remove 50% of the staff and funding they certainly will find less evidence.  A 50% across the board reduction of staff means the half the staff doing what you want done are gone as well.

 You want a Federal investigation, and rightly so, but how do we take 50% of those investigative resources away then "force" them to complete an extensive investigation?

 What penalties do we put in place to "force" these organizations to do their job equal or more than what they do now, but with half the resources?

 How do we "force" the NTSB to complete infrastructure reports by taking 50% of their staff and money?

We’d find a way. It would be hard,but we’d find a way.

 Considering we never have I find that hard to believe.  

 The real problem is conflating dollars of fraud with numbers of staff.  As if billions can't be stolen by a single person.  I don't believe cutting staff will result in less fraud.  I certainly don't believe we can "force" people to do jobs without violating their rights.

 There's no realistic way to maintain an employment pool by halving wages, benefits, amount of staff and then saying employees are either incarcerated in their places of business, or otherwise physically restrained until their jobs get done.  

Forcing a person to do a job, (Or Fire Them), because they said they knew how to do it, and it is a requirement to have that job, and, they were provided with all equipment to do it, is not a problem.


 How would you recommend "forcing" them?  Gunpoint?  Maybe threaten their family?  It's an easy thing to say, but in actual application there is not much room for "forcing" someone to do their job.  Typically as you described, firing is how that is done.

 
 I don't know what imaginary world people live in where they think removing half the staff and money from the Social Security Administration would result in anything more than a total collapse of those benefits almost immediately.  The answer to that is not to say we "force" them to do it anyway.  

So you are calling, 'do you job, or your fired', forcing ?

 I am not.  That would be forcing them to not work specific to the employer that did the firing.


 I am saying the logic that we can remove 50% of the US Government workforce and funding - then "force" the entirety of those individuals to still function at full capacity is ridiculous.  

 There is no plausible way to "force" people to work for the US Government without violating the rights of the People.  The DoJ alone has had a chronically understaffed Correctional Department for decades.  People are mandated to work 16 hour shifts for months and this organization is to somehow function by removing half of those staff?  They going to work 32 hours a day?