Today, Democrats are quaking in their jackboots. It's bad enough that their messiah is about to leave D.C., but they're also facing a new government that's openly hostile toward most of their goals. On top of that, we're getting word that the nascent Trump administration has "dramatic" plans to trim the federal fat. This news will, as will most news concerning Trump, have lefties curled up in a ball in the corner, shaking their fists as the sky.
But should it?
"Dramatic" is good, and cuts are good, but there had better be much, much, more than this in the pipeline...
From The Hill:
The changes they propose are dramatic.
The departments of Commerce and Energy would see major reductions in funding, with programs under their jurisdiction either being eliminated or transferred to other agencies. The departments of Transportation, Justice and State would see significant cuts and program eliminations.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be privatized, while the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be eliminated entirely.
Overall, the blueprint being used by Trump’s team would reduce federal spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years.
The proposed cuts hew closely to a blueprint published last year by the conservative Heritage Foundation, a think tank that has helped staff the Trump transition.
Look, before we get into the meat of this, allow me to say one thing. Cuts are great. I'm all for cuts. Take a hatchet to the beast and chop it into bits. If President Trump is going to champion cuts, I'll back him all the way.
However...
In February 2017, the national debt will soar past $20 Trillion. It's virtually impossible to comprehend the enormity of that figure. A plan that supposedly eliminates $10 Trillion over 10 years is fine, but it's nowhere near enough. ...And, if we're being realistic, it will probably never come to fruition anyway.
Support Canada Free Press
The solution needs to be bigger, bolder, and unalterable. To borrow the Dems' favorite word, it needs to be comprehensive
That's because - as we all know - the $10 trillion will never actually be cut. It would be nice if it was, but we've been down this road before. That budget will only be binding until the next budget is passed. Even then, there are ways around it. Congress will make a big show out of it, say "look at the amazing thing we've done," and then they'll return to their old ways. In ten years this budget will be a distant memory and our debt will have continued to climb.
The solution needs to be bigger, bolder, and unalterable. To borrow the Dems' favorite word, it needs to be comprehensive.
First, we need to be eliminating agencies, not shrinking them. Shuffling duties from one department to another, or shrinking the size of certain bureaucracies while enhancing others? That's not an answer. It's treading water. The 10th Amendment is clear on the role and scope of the federal government. It's time politicians started paying attention to it.
Second, we desperately need a balanced budget Amendment. Tie it to Congressional pay and federal funding. If you don't balance the federal budget, you - and your state - will lose that sweet, sweet, lucre. Cash and influence are the only pressure points politicians ever acknowledge, so let's leverage them. It's time to put the hurt on.
The federal government is like a hydra. Cut off one head and two grow in its place
Finally, and most importantly, we must eliminate "baseline budgeting." In baseline budgeting, Congress looks at what they spent in the previous year on an item, and defines that as a starting point. They also assume that every item would receive a certain percentage increase as a matter of course. So, if 5 percent is the presumed increase, then last year's number plus 5 percent is the "baseline." If they budget only the baseline, they claim there was no increase. If they budget less than the baseline (say, a 4 percent increase instead of 5 percent), they actually call that a cut. This, perhaps more than anything else, has helped the federal monster to grow, while simultaneously allowing Democrats to wail about miserly, unfeeling, Republicans. It has to end.
The federal government is like a hydra. Cut off one head and two grow in its place. As the last 45 years have demonstrated, lopping off heads is not a winning strategy. You must slow, or eliminate, the beast's ability to regenerate. Otherwise - and I'm not being melodramatic - you've doomed the country to implosion.
If we're not going to do it now, when we have an outsider President, both houses of Congress, and (soon) a sympathetic Supreme Court, when are we going to do it?
