Skip to comments.Exclusive: Tea Party Would Cut $9 Trillion
Posted on 11/17/2011 9:32:38 AM PST by mdittmar
Scoffing at Washington's troubled effort to cut just $1.2 trillion in federal debt over 10 years, the Tea Party's own debt commission today unveiled a shocking plan to slash nearly $10 trillion over the next decade, in part by eliminating several federal agencies, balancing the budget by 2015, and killing foreign aid to unfriendly nations.
"Go bold or go home," says the report from the Tea Party Debt Commission. "Are you listening, Washington?"
The FreedomWorks-led effort started months ago by asking Tea Party members for ideas on what to cut from the federal budget. They ended up going much further than Congress or the president wants.
Their plan would cut spending by $9.7 trillion, and shrink the federal government from 24 percent of GDP to 17.5 percent, in line with the post-war norm.
Key initiatives include:
"Imagine a plan that cuts, caps, and balances federal spending without raising taxes; that gives future generations control over their own retirement security; and that lifts the massive debt burden from our children's shoulders so they can know the American dream of ever-higher freedom and prosperity. And on top of all that, imagine that it's a serious, credible, plan generated by the grassroots. This is that plan," said the report.
Well, it would be a good start, at least.
Freeze at current level for 5 years. Get rid of baseline budgeting. All you need.
Repealing the president’s health care reform plan.
I’m betting that before we are done, if we are stupid enough to go through with it, OHC will bankrupt us, so the rest of the list is moot.
Boy, I’ll bet federal workers seeing this will get all “wee-weed up” on this plan!
Too bad there’s no chance, too many people and voters on the dole.
Now that’s more like it!! Go TEA party!!
THAT’s what I’m talkin ‘bout.......
Its always kind of strange when a “journolister” writes as if there is an actual organization called the TEA Party and it has its own bureaucracy.
Yup. Great start!!
1) Cut the spending.
2) Cut the government.
3) Cut the taxes.
But how can politicians buy votes with these cuts.
A small start
About ****ing time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is exactly right, Go Bold, or Go Home.
Cut $10 trillion!!!
FYI..press conference is scheduled to air LIVE on C-span 3..at 2PM..
All Republican candidates need to push this immediately during the next debate.
The middle class WILL VOTE Republican.
Here is a thought on earmarks. Pick a recent year and add up the total earmarks. Then reduce that total by a percentage, say 20%. Then divide that amount by the number of Congressman and allow each Congressman to designate whatever earmarks his constituents want him to designate. This gives the constituents much more say over all these earmarks. They can even instruct him to have no earmarks, or if he favors certain groups they can vote him out of office if the majority does not approve.
I saw an even better suggestion: - "No member of Congress shall be eligible for re-election when the budget is running a deficit."
An excellent start.
If we do NOT do this....there WILL be cuts....and worse...
If I were some poor guy on his umpteenth deployment to Afghanistan I might be "wee-weed up" as well.
Still this makes a whole lot more sense and is a whole lot closer to what we need than any of the joke proposals floating around Washington currently. Which, of course, is why it'll never go anywhere in Congress.
“A trillion” (or so) over ten years sounds dramatic.
It ain’t spit.
BTTT and bookmarking for further reading and distribution!!!
* No more money to PBS or NPR
* Priviatize AMTRAK within 90 to 365 days.
* Stop all Funding to the National Endowment to the Arts.
* Spin off the new Funding of all Student Loans Under Obamacare
* Consolidate all Student loan/grant Programs into one cut staff's to the bare bones and use one form or website.
* All 170 "Job Training" programs need to block granted back to the States and individuals can use them @ the Community College Level for Job Retraining if layed off, downsized etc.
I think it’s going to take a “go big or go home” attitude this election.
By the way, I’ll bet if Fed support to student loans is eliminated, magically, the costs of a higher education will be cut in half in a few years.
The first candidate to endorse this plan as their own, will win the nomination and the Presidency.
Four? That's one more than Perry's plan. And twice as many as he can tell you.
Four? That's one more than Perry's plan. And twice as many as he can tell you.
As long as they don't have to give up the stuff... like mortgage deductions, child deductions, copious unemployment, student loan loot.... but they'll be in favor of cutting OTHER people's rice bowls.
Repeal the NFA, repeal the MG ban, eliminate the ATF and you’ve just saved 1 billion a year at a minimum. The elimination of stupid technically based criminal suits would likely increase the savings to triple that easily. You’ve also stimulated the economy and opened up a large sector for new jobs in manufacturing which translates into more jobs in transportation and metals and plastics.
But of course, no one in Washington has the balls to touch the Unconstitutional MG ban or the NFA. After all, they can’t stomach not having control. That’s why the Tea Party will win and that’s why big Government is doomed.
And twice as many as the times I posted.
Tea Party Would Cut $9 Trillion and within 10 minutes the left along with their useful idiots in the media would label this plan as:
4) backed by greedy corporate America
5) balancing the financial burdens of government on the back of the poor,elderly and disenfranchised.
This budget is an excellent benchmark to frame the future debates and judge the conservative credentials of the GOP campaign positions. All of our GOP candidates should be asked to go on record if they support or oppose the budget and explain their reasons.
Congratulations to the Tea Party Debt Commission and FreedomWorks for a very significant contribution to the national dialogue in the 2012 election.
This is common sense. And it isn’t a “cut” of $9 trillion. Its NOT SPENDING $9 trillion. Its simply going back to spending levels from a couple years ago and then holding firm. Nothing more? What is that radical?!?!? Why is that “extreme”?!??!?
This would be common sense to any family sitting around the dinner table planning a budget.
“Dad had planned on buying a new $70,000 BMW in two years. Well, he lost his job and now works for $10 per hour at Home Depot. He can’t afford the BMW anymore so it comes out of the budget.”
That is not a $70,000 CUT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its living within your freakin means. Its why we may need a revolution to set things right. Dems and Republicans both see a $9 trillion cut as “extreme”; they are all like heroin junkies looking for another spending fix.
Suspend the sale of Treasury Notes
I like this plan. Bump for longevity.
YES! This is what I’m talking about!
It’s an excellent first step!
Replace the tax code with 999 and you are talking.
It’s a real start.
Now they’re talking. Eliminating those redundant and ineffective agencies is a must. And docking the pensions as long as we’re running a deficit is a great idea. Pay for performance!!
I can hear the howls from the Leftards already.
A small start
All we need to accomplish what? We have 2.5T in tax revenue and a 1.5T deficit. We'd have to grow tax revenues almost 10% a year to get to a zero deficit in 10 years, and by that time we'd be close to another $10T in debt, $25T in total.
And in the mean time, we would have wasted all that money on HUD, DoE, etc. We are also going to see government expenses rise as the boomers retire. There is no easy answer any more in the idea of 'freeze and grow our way out'.
What growth in tax revenues we can expect as we continue to clean up the current banking mess (if we actually do clean it up) will be sucked up by growing payments on debt alone.
The government needs to stop issuing new bonds, and immediately.
What kind of “INVESTMENT” is a government bond ?
What is the investor who buys a government bond “investing” in ?
INTEREST PAYMENTS PAID OUT OF TAX REVENUE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is that helpful in any way to economic prosperity ?
Me lighting my cigars with $100 bills would be a better use of capital.
Then I’m going to hear “infrastructure”.
But let’s go to back to the economic education equivalent of 4th grade: the “INFRASTRUCTURE” created by government building programs is not owned by private sector entities.
The infrastructure that is built by government is not owned by a profit-generating entity that a) has to financially stand on it’s own with no prospect of receiving taxpayer dollars to fund deficits and b) has no competitive pressure to lower it’s prices.
The design of quasi-government entities like power, bridge and tunnel, etc., authorities, invite the bilking of their customers.
Even in the manner where bonds are issued to build a specific project, where one can make the naive claim that the bondholders are getting a return from the infrastructure until the bonds are all paid off - even in that case, the private sector does not “own” the “authority” that winds up owning the infrastructure. So there is no real owner. Which is why the operating authority winds up spending a lot of money on itself and slowly letting the infrastructure maintenance fall by the wayside, despite all sorts of shouting that this is not true. Ultimately, someone who owns a thing cares about it. Someone who does not own a thing does not care about it. In the case of “authorities”, they know they have limitless funds from a) rate increases and b) taxpayer dollars.
Back to government debt: It has got to stop - completely. It is “quietly” spiralling out of control.
If the government could not borrow $1 more than it already has - that limits government spending to what government takes in.
Unless the government starts paying it’s bills with money that it just prints - but that would be transparent since government receipts and payments are transparent.
Remember, the government views money that it owes the Fed, OASDI funds (SS/Medicare), etc. for bonds that they own as money that government owes itself - and that is somehow different in the mind of Congress than money it owes to it’s ordinary bondholders.
If these intra-governmental holdings are treated ANY differently than government debt sold to the public (i.e., foreign banks, U.S. citizens, sovereigns, etc.), this means the government would consider the possibility of not paying those bonds back to itself.
If one thinks for 2 seconds about that - duhhh - then the cash it received for the “intra-governmental” bonds - WAS SIMPLY MONEY PRINTING. Can I get a duh ?
What does the government spending rule need to look like to allow wise@ss Congressman to take on fiduciary responsibility for government funds ? If the government takes in $2.2 trillion, spend up to $2.2 trillion, that’s it.
Incidentally, it is the only way to control government spending. Prohibit government borrowing in any and every way: no Treasury bonds, notes, bills, etc., ever again except if there is a declared war. And in that case, require that those bonds be paid off before 1 cent - NOT PERCENT - 1 PENNY - of increase is allowed in government spending.
IMHO, one frustrated, angry, crazy man. Disclaimer: who poses no threat because he’s given up, just laughing at the millions of idiots out there at all levels of the economic spectrum who are simply complete j@ck@sses. Some people need to run smack into a brick wall before they believe the warnings that they’re going to hit it. Then the consultants get called in to clean up the mess (and make a lot of money doing what should have and easily could have been done all along).
Thanks for this long-awaited, common-sense, soothing post!
“Go bold or go home,” says the report from the Tea Party Debt Commission. “Are you listening, Washington?”
The Feudal Lords of the Beltway could not care less about what we think. But now we have a workable plan to save America, and they do not or ever will.