What's wrong with these sentences?

Maisie is obsessed with prom, so she volunteered to head up the decorations committee.

Every morning I rise up and brush my teeth.

When she makes an omelette, she adds in feta and fennel for an unusual flavor.

He despised the ruling regime, so he joined up with the resistance.

When Frank knelt down to look, he could see the floor was strewn with crack vials.

I'm guessing most readers don't see anything "wrong" here. When I edit stories for the paper, I see constructions like those bolded above all the time. And they're not incorrect — not in the sense that verb-with-preposition constructions such as "The desert lacks of water" and "We discussed about trade policy" are incorrect (for more examples of those errors, see here). All the verb forms above are familiar in colloquial English.

What they also are, in my view, is unnecessary. Cluttering. And more and more common in journalism and other writing.

Specifically, it's the prepositions that are redundant. All the above verbs can be used with the above prepositions, but in most contexts they mean the same thing when you use them solo.

Consider the verb to head. According to Webster's, one of its meanings is "to be the leader of (something)." When you say "He heads the Securities and Exchange Commission" and "He heads up the Securities and Exchange Commission," you're saying the same thing.

Or kneel. Again according to Webster's, one meaning of the verb is "to move your body so that one or both of your knees are on the floor." So why is it necessary to specify that you're kneeling down? (NB: I have seen the phrase "kneel up" used to mean rising from a sitting position to a classic kneeling one. In that case, it makes sense, because you're going against the usual sense of the word: to lower oneself onto one's knees [or to rest there]. When comic-book villains say, "Kneel before me!", kneeling up is not what they mean.)