• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

House GOP Lists $2.5 Trillion in Spending Cuts

S

spidey07

No Lifer
This is certainly a good start. Maybe they can cut some more. Seems like republicans are doing what The People want. Most of the cuts are in wasteful or unnecessary programs.

http://www.usnews.com/news/washingt.../house-gop-lists-25-trillion-in-spending-cuts

Moving aggressively to make good on election promises to slash the federal budget, the House GOP today unveiled an eye-popping plan to eliminate $2.5 trillion in spending over the next 10 years. Gone would be Amtrak subsidies, fat checks to the Legal Services Corporation and National Endowment for the Arts, and some $900 million to run President Obama's healthcare reform program.

What's more, the "Spending Reduction Act of 2011" proposed by members of the conservative Republican Study Committee, chaired by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, would reduce current spending for non-defense, non-homeland security and non-veterans programs to 2008 levels, eliminate federal control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, cut the federal workforce by 15 percent through attrition, and cut some $80 billion by blocking implementation of Obamacare. [See a slide show of the top Congressional travel destinations.]
Click to expand...
 
They can cut some funding for the EPA and put a stop to vehicle emission tests. I dont think it makes cars run any cleaner. Money would be spent better to buy back older cars.

The government should not be giving NPR any money either.

That seems like a long list, but I think there are hundreds of other items that could be cut if you just went through every line item in the budget. I would quit giving money to states with weak economies. Let them self destruct so they change their behavior. Dont bail out states that mismanage their assets. If some states like Nevada or california made bad investments in real estates let them feel the pain of their own actions and take responsibility for what thay have done. There is no reason why states that managed their resources well, send their money (federal budget) to states that mismanaged their state. We dont need to enable bad behavior.
 
Last edited:
I don't think people realize the magnitude of the hole that has been dug. $250 billion per year out of a $1.40 trillion annual deficit still leaves a $1.15 trillion annual deficit.
 
CycloWizard said:
I don't think people realize the magnitude of the hole that has been dug. $250 billion per year out of a $1.40 trillion annual deficit still leaves a $1.15 trillion annual deficit.
Click to expand...

That's why I said it's a good first step. You have to start somewhere. Also, if the economy ever picks up again it will also help reduce the deficit, but only if we keep a lid on further spending.
 
PokerGuy said:
That's why I said it's a good first step. You have to start somewhere. Also, if the economy ever picks up again it will also help reduce the deficit, but only if we keep a lid on further spending.
Click to expand...
We do need to start somewhere, but the approach they're taking will almost surely fail. When they find something that needs to be cut, they should pass a bill to cut it instead of writing one huge bill that's 23895732 pages long and only addresses a small fraction of what needs to be done. The latter approach probably looks better on someone's resume though, so that's what they're likely to do.
 
No one is going to touch the defense budget with Soldiers in combat operations in two occupations. I could be surprised though.

Good start, wish they could work around tough battles like defunding HCR until they cut all the low hanging fruit that wouldn't lead to overly lengthy and politicized bullshit. Trimming the fat off of HCR should be there, just not mixed in with other stuff that both parties can agree on.
 
PokerGuy said:
That's why I said it's a good first step. You have to start somewhere. Also, if the economy ever picks up again it will also help reduce the deficit, but only if we keep a lid on further spending.
Click to expand...

If the economy never has another recession again, ever, and grow at an above average pace, then we won't go bankrupt for 50 years or so. Medicare and SS need to be fixed. Until GOP/Democrats show me how they will address that, I will continue to laugh at this press releases.
 
CycloWizard said:
We do need to start somewhere, but the approach they're taking will almost surely fail. When they find something that needs to be cut, they should pass a bill to cut it instead of writing one huge bill that's 23895732 pages long and only addresses a small fraction of what needs to be done. The latter approach probably looks better on someone's resume though, so that's what they're likely to do.
Click to expand...

They all got together in committee, found cuts and will put forth what I would think an under 50 page bill with a few sentences for each cut. This is a good start, needs to go further but they've only been in the house a few weeks.
 
Start out with a little bit here and a little bit there.

Repeat with a slightly deeper cut and broader in scope.

They need to start somewhere.

While everyone has their pet projects they also have to know that unless they start somewhere, nothing will get done.

The elections were a wakeup to Congress to lead, follow or step aside.
Standing around moaning and pointing fingers has not gotten the job done

If they do not start doing what the American public expects, they will be in the unemployment line
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BoberFett said:
No cuts to defense? Absolute fail.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: this x100

More than anything else it has been unsanctioned military spending that has got us into the mess we are in. We don't have a chance of ever balancing the budget as long as we continue throwing trillions away that we never had to begin with fighting unwinable and unjust wars.
 
Big cuts need to come out of the defense budget and cutting out some of the more exotic programs needs to happen. The F-35B needs to just be scrapped. Sikorsky is already working on turning their X2 into a attack helicopter, this would be far superior for Marines than a fixed wing underperforming jet and would help replace aging cobra frames.
 
These 10-year long budget proposals that only manage to shrink the deficit by a small fraction and hoping the economy will grow in to the spending are complete bullshit. As soon as democrats get back in power (inevitable in 4-8 years if they continue to act the same way they have been in the 2000's) they will ramp up spending like crazy and we'll be even worse off.

Anything short of a balanced budget by 2012 I will consider to be a failure of the republicans to meet their campaign promises and responsibilities.
 
I agree with a lot of the cuts, I just wish some of them would not obviously be so partisan.

There is also a lot of useless R&D that could be cut from the Department of Defense right now that doesn't effect soldiers in combat at all. They really need to end that endless pocket book.
 
Remember too, that cuts mean more unemployment. This is a tough road to go down and one that needs to be thought out to some degree.

Don't misunderstand and think I'm condoning business as usual.
 
boomerang said:
Remember too, that cuts mean more unemployment. This is a tough road to go down and one that needs to be thought out to some degree.

Don't misunderstand and think I'm condoning business as usual.
Click to expand...

Deficit spending has been masking long term unemployment anyway. $14T paid a lot of salaries over the past few decades. We can deal with the pain now or later when it's that much harder to do.
 
QuantumPion said:
<snip>
Anything short of a balanced budget by 2012 I will consider to be a failure of the republicans to meet their campaign promises and responsibilities.
Click to expand...

It will take both parties to generate a balanced budget.

I do not think that either is going to allow it to happen by 2012, to many sacred items would be on the chopping block.

Better to have the Republicans ("being in control to a point w/ respect to proposal") start the trimming with what they can muster. When the Republicans are no longer in control, then let the Dems continuing the chipping cycle on what they can muster.

A little of each end will whittle down to the middle and not shock the economy/system.

In the first two year of Obama, the Dems did not whittle down anything, so let the Republicans attempt to do so.

Failure to get the chipping done means no reelection.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion

New Starts Transit. $2 billion

Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion
Click to expand...

I am still mystified why Republicans hate trains so much but love cars and airplanes. 😕
 
Some Homeland Security spending SHOULD be cut. Pity nobody has the balls to admit that without cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Defense we're not going to accomplish anything.
 
What? No mention by the repubs about cutting all the $illions and $illions of Corporate welfare that Bush put in place while in office that's still going on? How disingenuous is that? huh? huh?

Absolute Fail.
 
Also, cutting Title X family planning funding is the height of stupidity. The last thing we need is MORE stupid teenage babymommas
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top