In the last two years spending by the current Congress has increased21.4 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The question thrown in the face of tea party activists and otherconservative Republicans when they talk of cutting spending is Where would you cut?
Its a loaded question of course and those who ask it follow it upwith vitriolic assertions that any cuts will mean that children will go hungry the elderly will be evicted from nursing homes and the federalgovernment will be forced to close meaning no more Social Securitychecks. This is precisely the approach taken in 1995 when the Clintonadministration set a trap for the new Republican congressional majorityand shut down the government sending Republicans into a hasty retreat from which they and their proposed spending cuts never fully recovered.
Everyone knows Social Security Medicare and Medicaid must be reformed but Democrats want to maintain control so they wont do what isnecessary to fix these massive entitlement programs. So where to cut?
The presumed new Republican majority can begin by paring downnoncontroversial spending that the public will understand and then after proving the programs arent necessary or could be better run bythe private sector move on to more expensive programs.
Rep. John Mica (R-Fl) ranking member on the Committee on Transportationand Infrastructure has made a start. In a letter to me Rep. Micaencloses a report by his committees minority staff with the clevertitle Sitting on Our Assets: The Federal Governments Misuse ofTaxpayer-Owned Assets.
Misuse is a word most Americans understand and dont like.
The report identifies hundreds of billions of dollars in potentialsavings through improved management of what the federal governmentowns. If implemented says Rep. Mica the opportunities ... have thepotential to save up to approximately $250 billion.
Admittedly thats not much when the latest deficit projection is $1.294trillion but we must start somewhere.
The problem is and always has been that once government programs andagencies are created they quickly become sacrosanct and virtuallyimpossible to destroy. As Ronald Reagan said Government programs oncelaunched never disappear ... a government bureau is the nearest thingto eternal life well ever see on this earth! So it doesnt matter thatthe Department of Education doesnt educate or that the Department ofEnergy doesnt produce energy. Its government and thus by definitiongood in the minds of the Washington establishment.
There are quite a number of solid proposals for spending cuts andefficiencies in the minority staff report. These include Amtrakssquandering the potential development of high-speed rail in theNortheast Corridor; The Federal Aviation Administrations management ofair traffic control facilities; utilizing innovative financingalternatives including well-defined private sector participation forinfrastructure projects. (Why should the money come only fromgovernment?) There is much more. The entire report is available at republicans.transportation.house.gov.
Additionally a new House (and possibly Senate) majority ought toembarrass Democrats by exposing the number of government programs thatno longer work (or never achieved their objectives) and then ask for areferendum from the public as to whether they want the money they earnto continue to go for such things. Republicans could also ask theprivate sector to submit proposals for projects it could do lessexpensively and more efficiently than government.
People who elect not to participate in government programs might begiven a tax break. A new emphasis on healthy living (thank you Michelle Obama for emphasizing how overweight we are) would reduce the costs ofhealth care and possibly lower the cost of health insurance as well asreduce the number of hospital stays.
The public will likely accept these and other cost reductions if theycan see results and if Republicans can persuade them that the cutstheyre making are in the publics interest and not in the interest ofthe GOP. Thats the challenge. Rep. Micas minority report offers oneanswer to the question Where would you cut spending? Get this rightand there will be many others.
Cal Thomas is co-author (with Bob Beckel) of the book Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That is Destroying America.
In the last two years spending by the current Congress has increased21.4 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The question thrown in the face of tea party activists and otherconservative Republicans when they talk of cutting spending is Where would you cut?
Its a loaded question of course and those who ask it follow it upwith vitriolic assertions that any cuts will mean that children will go hungry the elderly will be evicted from nursing homes and the federalgovernment will be forced to close meaning no more Social Securitychecks. This is precisely the approach taken in 1995 when the Clintonadministration set a trap for the new Republican congressional majorityand shut down the government sending Republicans into a hasty retreat from which they and their proposed spending cuts never fully recovered.
Everyone knows Social Security Medicare and Medicaid must be reformed but Democrats want to maintain control so they wont do what isnecessary to fix these massive entitlement programs. So where to cut?
The presumed new Republican majority can begin by paring downnoncontroversial spending that the public will understand and then after proving the programs arent necessary or could be better run bythe private sector move on to more expensive programs.
Rep. John Mica (R-Fl) ranking member on the Committee on Transportationand Infrastructure has made a start. In a letter to me Rep. Micaencloses a report by his committees minority staff with the clevertitle Sitting on Our Assets: The Federal Governments Misuse ofTaxpayer-Owned Assets.
Misuse is a word most Americans understand and dont like.
The report identifies hundreds of billions of dollars in potentialsavings through improved management of what the federal governmentowns. If implemented says Rep. Mica the opportunities ... have thepotential to save up to approximately $250 billion.
Admittedly thats not much when the latest deficit projection is $1.294trillion but we must start somewhere.
The problem is and always has been that once government programs andagencies are created they quickly become sacrosanct and virtuallyimpossible to destroy. As Ronald Reagan said Government programs oncelaunched never disappear ... a government bureau is the nearest thingto eternal life well ever see on this earth! So it doesnt matter thatthe Department of Education doesnt educate or that the Department ofEnergy doesnt produce energy. Its government and thus by definitiongood in the minds of the Washington establishment.
There are quite a number of solid proposals for spending cuts andefficiencies in the minority staff report. These include Amtrakssquandering the potential development of high-speed rail in theNortheast Corridor; The Federal Aviation Administrations management ofair traffic control facilities; utilizing innovative financingalternatives including well-defined private sector participation forinfrastructure projects. (Why should the money come only fromgovernment?) There is much more. The entire report is available at republicans.transportation.house.gov.
Additionally a new House (and possibly Senate) majority ought toembarrass Democrats by exposing the number of government programs thatno longer work (or never achieved their objectives) and then ask for areferendum from the public as to whether they want the money they earnto continue to go for such things. Republicans could also ask theprivate sector to submit proposals for projects it could do lessexpensively and more efficiently than government.
People who elect not to participate in government programs might begiven a tax break. A new emphasis on healthy living (thank you Michelle Obama for emphasizing how overweight we are) would reduce the costs ofhealth care and possibly lower the cost of health insurance as well asreduce the number of hospital stays.
The public will likely accept these and other cost reductions if theycan see results and if Republicans can persuade them that the cutstheyre making are in the publics interest and not in the interest ofthe GOP. Thats the challenge. Rep. Micas minority report offers oneanswer to the question Where would you cut spending? Get this rightand there will be many others.
Cal Thomas is co-author (with Bob Beckel) of the book Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That is Destroying America.
