Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I don’t even know if that’s the ideal. The most important thing is that the money is spent in a way that guarantees a positive impact on whatever specific problem that agency is attempting to tackle. Spending more than strictly necessary can be the difference between simply ‘kicking the can down the street’ vs picking the can up and getting it to a recycling center.
The only reason I decided to put my two cents in is that I think we need to be aware how much propaganda is getting pushed on the subject of “less is better!! always!!!”, which is simply not true. Remember, the smaller and more “efficient” a government is, the easier and faster it is to corrupt said government (which I realize is kinda tangential, but i think still applies).
What stands out to me is that they are making a big deal out if a small change…to a Republican approval rating. This is exactly the type of data they’d be holding up while screaming about how bad Obama is, for instance. Did feel odd using the tactic against their own, let alone god emperor Cheeto.