<prompt> Human: It is frequently recommended that funds be left in the TSP government employee version of a 401K rather than be transferred to a TIRA upon leaving federal service. The rationale is commonly that the TSP fund components have extraordinarily low expense ratios, and some commenters laud the G fund TSP option as a riskless and valuable investment vehicle for the bond portion of a portfolio. This makes sense to me, but I now see a risk associated with the TSP in the news, the risk of political manipulation. Since it is strictly under government control, politicians of any stripe can use it as a political tool.For example, today I see news that brings the political risk into focus.The most popular fund in the Thrift Savings Plan would become virtually worthless as an investment option under a proposal in the House budget, a TSP spokeswoman said.The budget plan, up for floor voting this week, assumes a change in the way money in the government securities fund, or G Fund, is invested that would sharply drop its rate of return.I dont think this particular political proposal will come to law, but I believe it illustrates the political risks potentially associated with remaining invested in the TSP Assistant: I believe it illustrates the political risks potentially associated with remaining invested in the TSP Still beats the alternatives.Human: For now. There is more going on, potentially:The TSP offers five funds linked to stock, bond and government securities indexes, as well as five lifecycle funds that mix investments in those funds in ratios that differ according to the projected withdrawal dates.Following criticisms from Capitol Hill and elsewhere of those offerings as too sparse, a 2009 change in law authorized, but did not require, the TSP to create an investment window, a feature available in many comparable savings plans such as private-sector 401ks. The TSP afterward focused on other changes required by that law, including introduction of after-tax Roth investing.The 6 million to 10 million cost of developing an investment window would be shared among all 4.7 million account holders but those who actually use it would be charged a fee, potentially around 100 a year, and could be limited to investing 25 percent of their account balances in outside funds. Long said that in 401ks, relatively few investors use such windows.He added that the TSP investigated limiting the outside funds to those that charge no more than 1 percent annually but found that such a limit would be difficult to administer and would eliminate a substantial number of the outside fund options.It seems like there is also political pressure to expand the TSP to include non-indexed, much higher ER options, and then charge all TSP account holders for the new structure. What I am saying is that there are high political risks, because of the government control. Assistant: An investment window in the TSP is such a terrible idea. There are better, cheaper improvements they could make. Obviously this is pressure from the financial industry. But I dont expect the cheap core funds to go anywhere.Human: Following criticisms from Capitol Hill and elsewherePressure on the politicians from the financial industry, sure. The cheap core funds will likely remain, but permanently?The TSP is sensitive to the pressure, is the point Im making.  <response>: True. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail. The TSP is close to perfect and shouldnt be messed with. 