Skip to comments.Are Spending Cuts Good Politics?
Posted on 02/24/2013 9:08:04 AM PST by Kaslin
Grover Cleveland says “yes.”
Calvin Coolidge says “yes.”
Chris Edwards says “yes.” From Downsizing the Federal Government:
Another myth is that policymakers cannot make budget cuts without a backlash from voters. Yet reform efforts in the 1990s did not lead to a voter rebuke. In 1996, the Republicans were denounced viciously when they were reforming welfare. But they stuck together and succeeded, and today the achievement is widely hailed. Also in the 1990s, the Republicans proposed reductions to many sensitive programs including Medicare, Medicaid, education, housing, and farm subsidies. In their budget plan for 1996, House Republicans voted to abolish more than 200 programs including whole departments and agencies.
The Republicans who led on these reforms were not thrown out of office, despite many of them being specifically targeted for defeat in 1996. The most hardcore budget cutters in the 104th Congress were freshmen who were reelected with larger vote margins than they had received in 1994. They included John Shadegg and Matt Salmon of Arizona, Joe Scarborough of Florida, David McIntosh and Mark Souder of Indiana, Steve Largent and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Van Hilleary of Tennessee, and Mark Neumann of Wisconsin. Indeed, many budget-cutting Republican freshman got reelected in districts that went for Bill Clinton on the presidential ticket in 1996. The high-profile leader of the House budget cutters, John Kasich (R-Ohio), consistently won reelection throughout the 1990s with two-to-one margins. In sum, cutting the budget can be good politics when done in a serious and up-front manner.
This nation, (run by gross incompetents), has lost its ever loving mind collectively save for a few sane ones like us at FR. How much simpler can it be when balancing a budget that you make spending cuts and realistic revenue projections with a plan. These rotten Dems, RINO’s and the Fraud-in-Chief simply wont do it for political power games they scheme up. Worthless basura all.
Hell yes! We need even more! We are currently addicted to gov!
Seriously I don’t see how the country can continue this way. Something is going to give and then it’s going to be seriously bad. Of course there are enough idiots in high places that can’t wait for it to happen.
Most ordinary people understand that you cannot spend, spend, and spend on a limited income. They understand that you cannot keep borrowing indefinitely, and that you’re in a really bad way when you must borrow to keep up with everyday expenses.
The problem is with the politicians who have put us into this situation. Democrats want as many people dependent on government as possible, because that is the basis of their power. Republicans don’t have the backbone to stand up and point out that the spending is unsustainable, and that making people dependent in that manner is dehumanizing them. And we, the voters, are stuck in the middle, longing for someone who will represent *us*.
In Washington, a “cut” is merely a reduction in the rate of increase in spending.
Everybody wants spending cuts, EXCEPT for the programs they don’t want cut.
It becomes a non-issue when you look at what the Constitution allows/mandates; if we went by that we could eliminate every federal agency except: