GOP's $2.5 Trillion in Proposed Spending Cuts Are Commonsense

January 21, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (24)

My colleague at U.S. News, Paul Bedard, reports the House GOP has proposed $2.5 trillion in spending cuts to the 2011 continuing resolution that is funding our government in lieu of a budget. In addition to eliminating funding for healthcare reform, saving $900 million, they're proposing ending federal control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, cutting the federal workforce through attrition by 15 percent, and returning federal spending on everything except defense, homeland security, and vets to 2008 levels. After that, they've got a list of additional specific cuts. If you'd like to take a look at the whole list, here it is. You won't need your morning coffee; it'll get your blood pressure up nicely.

[See which industries donate the most to your member of Congress.]

First, the list raises more questions than it answers. Actually, it's the same question over and over, and that is: "What the hell?" For example, "Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees; $1 billion savings." If I'm reading that correctly to mean that federal bureaucrats are not paying their taxes to the tune of $1 billion dollars, I'd like to know how someone who doesn't pay their federal income tax is able to keep their federal job in the first place. One way to save money would be not only to collect the unpaid taxes, but then to fire the tax scofflaws. Here's another: "Eliminate duplicative education programs; eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually." Another: "Prohibit taxpayer-funded union activities by federal employees; $1.2 billion in savings over ten years." This is the kind of stuff that drives taxpayers crazy, and they want it fixed yesterday. 

Second, people in Peoria would question why the heck they've been paying for some of this stuff in the first place: millions in subsidies for the Washington, D.C., subway; exchange programs between native Alaskans, native Hawaiians, and "their historical trading partners in Massachusetts;" mohair subsidies and "weatherization" grants. The list reveals the depth of special-interest horse trading that's been going on for years here in Washington, and why people are fed up with excessive earmarks. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on the economy.]

Other cuts are simply commonsense ideas—things that should have already been done: cuts in the federal travel budget and in new cars for the federal fleet, and new rules encouraging more competitive bidding. 

Third, the list shows the willingness of the House GOP to make some difficult cuts, or at least to start a discussion about them. They've raised the question whether the federal government should continue its support for some programs that, to some, seemed reasonably within the federal purview: public railroads and public broadcasting, for example, and foreign aid. But the tide has turned against foreign aid, and maybe against public broadcasting, too. There's also a proposed end to the federal financing of presidential campaigns, which will bring on a great debate, as will ending both the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. So will ending the federal role in Fannie and Freddie. I'll give the House GOP points for bravery. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on Democrats.]

Finally, George Will's column today quotes James Q. Wilson, who wrote that until relatively recently, "politics was only about a few things; today it is about nearly everything." In the past, when a new program was proposed, a great debate ensued about whether it was an appropriate area for the government to enter. Not any more. "There has been," Wilson wrote, "a transformation of public expectations about the scope of federal action, one that has put virtually everything on Washington's agenda and left nothing off." He suggests that it is difficult to think "of a human want or difficulty that is not now defined as a 'public policy problem.'"

Nowhere is that more clear than on this list. The "hubris" of Washington, as Will calls it, has put the government in a pickle of over-promising and under-delivering on such a broad array of services, it's unbelievable. The fact that this list spans everything from mohair to Egyptian foreign aid to high-speed rail to family planning to sugar price supports to climate change to doctoral dissertations to rural air service to organic farming ... well, it just goes on and on. [See a roundup of political cartoons on Obama.]

Truth be told, spending cuts like these are not going to get us there—reining in entitlements is what really needs to be done. But what this list says to me is that people who are worried about the size and scope—and the massive spending—of the federal government are not crazy. And they're not any less intelligent or compassionate than the rest of us. In fact, they're right on the money.

Tags:
Congress,
politics,
health care reform,
deficit and national debt,
national security terrorism and the military,
Republican Party

Reader Comments Read all comments (24)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

That is only peanuts!

How about the 737 military bases scattered throughout the world?

How about the 600 golf courses supporting them?

How about selling the Tag Mahaul embassys we have in Iraq and elsewhere along with the very large airbases?

Sparky75 of WA 8:55AM January 25, 2011

Eventually both defence and entitlements will have to go under the knife. Social Security is only in the red right NOW because of the recession, but all too soon it will dip into the red permanently. It has always been a demographic ponzi scheme. The need for a robust defence does not mean the ability to take on the entire world.

Regardless, the GOP proposals are a start. The arts, Humanities and NPR will survive fine without federal money. They will be better off if they are no longer a political football.

dhlii of PA 7:30PM January 23, 2011

Please. Provide link proof.

Did you ever wonder why Doctor fix was not included in obamacare. Why people were added to Medicare and Medicaid ? Steals "$$$ 525 billion" from Medicare. Why 4 year wait for nearly all of obamacare, etc ? More. To monkey around with the numbers to BALANCE THE obamacare BUDGET.

For instance:

"Obamacare Steals from Medicare"

Written by the Candidate

Thursday, 25 March 2010 01:16

http://www.briankellyforcongress.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=97&Itemid=82

For instance:

“CBO confirms: ObamaCare with “doctor fix” will actually add billions to the deficit”

March 19, 2010

“How do you slap a $940 billion pricetag on what’s actually a multitrillion-dollar bill? Well, as we’ve seen, the first thing you do is make sure not to start the program until almost halfway through CBO’s window of time for measuring how much it’ll cost. That cuts a trillion or two right off the top. But what if that still leaves you with budget deficits, thus crippling your sub-moronic talking point about how this massive new federal entitlement will save money over time?”

“Simple. You break the bill up and pass one of the expensive parts separately later. Here’s how a supposed $118 billion reduction in the deficit becomes another case of Obama bloat.”

“Update: Oh look, some more hidden costs discovered by CBO. Who’s up for another $50 billion on the hook just to administer this thing?”

You can read link.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/19/cbo-confirms-obamacare-with-doctor-fix-will-actually-add-billions-to-the-deficit/

Bill Hedges of MO 2:08PM January 22, 2011

Mary Kate Cary

Mary Kate Cary

Mary Kate Cary is a former White House speechwriter for President George H.W. Bush. She currently writes speeches for political and business leaders.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

JFK's Virtuoso Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Kennedy presented a radical idea: Peaceful coexistence.

Mary Kate Cary

Calling Terrorism What It Is

Refusing to call terrorism by its name helps no one.

Latest Videos

advertisement