By Tina Grazier
Government is expanding like the fat lady in the circus, every year she gets bigger and bigger. While a fat lady is an asset to the circus, a fat budget is a definite drag on the health of our country. The extra bulk is our debt and future debt which demanded $220 billion in 2012 but will rise dramatically when interest rates begin to go up. This debt is a result of unsustainable programs that need bold reform. Our representatives have failed to create dynamic changes in these programs even though they have known for years that it is making America sick. American legislators have made other poor choices through the years in the form of high calorie deserts. Americans are being asked to fund this fancy fair even as the numbers of citizens in poverty continues to grow. The current administration thinks the answer to our problem is a bigger and fancier feast. He is demanding more revenue through higher tax rates and added tax streams. This irresponsible position shows he has no intention to put the fat government lady on a diet no matter how misshapen and blubbery she gets. Paul Ryan’s new budget, once again, suggests a sensible diet that would serve the people today and into the future but unless the people demand it the President and the Democrats under Harry Reid will sabotage efforts to create healthier attitudes and behavior at the federal government. The American people have been squeezed every calorie from our budgets…it’s time our government went on a diet.
Over the last several years we the people have been asked to accept 7-8% as the new normal in unemployment even while DC adds to its employment roles and pay. Even after the sequester that was supposed to result in terrible job losses the government is still posting 2,600 job openings. The administration has mollified the people with extensions in unemployment benefits and food stamps. We have been asked to accept 1% growth in the economy as “making progress” in the recovery. This is unacceptable.
The President has used the bully pulpit to demand that the rich pay their “fair share” even though the rich have been carrying the biggest burden for decades by paying most of the federal tax and more taxes on the personal savings and investments that fuel the economy. Unsatisfied with recent increases in tax rates on the rich, the administration is asking for more.
The big government banquet is driven by an ideology that government knows best how to spend your money. As President Clinton infamously demonstrated on January 20, 1999 when asked if he should consider giving some of the surplus back to the taxpayer: “We could give [YOUR money] all back to you and hope you spend it right. But I think — here’s the problem: If you don’t spend it right, here’s what’s going to happen … [Social Security might go bankrupt in 13 years, etc., etc.]. He was right about what the future holds but he’s wrong that the government can continue to binge on private sector wealth without creating a bloated government in crisis.
But big government doesn’t work because, as Margaret Thatcher said, “eventually you run out of other people’s money.” We’ve been out of money for some time. We’ve known about the unsustainable nature of government programs like Medicare and Social Security for several decades and yet Washington has not been able to agree on a way to reform them in all of that time. They would not do what was needed when we had the republican surplus under Bill Clinton and they don’t show any signs of doing the right thing now when deficit spending (the high calorie feast) is at an all time high. The main reason is that the two big parties are at loggerheads about how big and controlling government should be. Democrats want an unrestrained ability to grow government and make spending decisions. They speak in the collective, “we” must do this or “we” must do that. Republicans believe that individuals making common sense decisions based on their own budgets are the best market force for keeping costs down and the less the federal government interferes the better. Democrats have won the argument more often than not and now we find ourselves with $16.68 Trillion in debt and thousands of calorie packed programs that continue based on borrowing.
Can there be any question that the big government feast must end? Washington must put itself on a diet. No more fatty sumptuous foods and calorie laden deserts…the people are demanding a slimmer and trimmer government! Do you really buy the Democrat lie that it can’t be done? Does the federal government really know best how to spend your money? Does their record show that they are good conservators and managers of the money that taxpayers have dutifully sent to Washington year after year since WWII?
Paul Ryan suggests that our representatives in Washington have not done the best job they could do and it is now time for Congress and the President to DIET! His plan deserves serious consideration and it deserves an earnest congressional debate…the tug and pull that results in a sound solution. Talk of bipartisan work doesn’t get it done.
Stories in the news today prove the time has come for DC to Diet:
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has awarded $1.5 million to study biological and social factors for why “three-quarters” of lesbians are obese and why gay males are not, calling it an issue of “high public-health significance.” Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Mass., has received two grants administered by NIH’s Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) to study the relationship between sexual orientation and obesity.
The Washington Times asks:
…can the government really afford to spend $227,437 to study pictures of animals in National Geographic magazines?
The Examiner in DC reports that “Five Guys” restaurant will raise the price of burgers and dogs to cover the costs associated with the new healthcare regulations:
“Any added costs are going to have to be passed on,” said Mike Ruffer, a Five Guys franchise holder with eight of the popular restaurants in the Raleigh-Durham, N.C. area. He will need all the profits from at least one of his eight outlets just to cover his estimated added $60,000-a year in new Obamacare costs.
What’s more, he’s iced plans to build another three restaurants until after the administration explains the exact rules and penalties employers will face. The law’s plan to have those available March 1 has been pushed back to October.
The American Thinker takes umbrage when Obama used the sequestration to eliminate tuition assistance to servicemen when there are so many areas of waste or frivolity that could be eliminated or reformed:
Federal dollars were spent to study “how cocaine affects the reproductive habits of Japanese quail” at a cost of $181,000.
Fourteen point eight million dollars is spent on unemployment checks sent to millionaires.
Senator Coburn says he sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood outlining $1.2 billion in savings that cover the alleged $600-million shortfall two-to-one — a shortfall Secretary LaHood claims will cause flight delays.
Senator Coburn points out that the Transportation Department has $34 billion in funds lying around that have already been approved by Congress that could be spent, instead of just letting the money further waste away.
The senator also highlighted subsidies for airports serving fewer than ten passengers per day.
Over at Homeland Security, one $830-million grant program to protect a pumpkin festival in Keene, NH (my home state, and a good pumpkin festival, indeed…but not one deserving DHS protection) could be cut by one third to cover all TSA furloughs
According to Senator Coburn, his office did a report in 2008 showing that federal employees were AWOL for 3.5 million hours in 2007 — enough to “screen 1.7 billion checked bags, or enough to avoid security delays for nearly four years.”
The big area of waste Senator Coburn outlines is, of course, duplication: Another source of potential savings is duplication of federal services, which accounts for $364 billion spent every year, according to the Government Accountability Office. Washington spends $30 million for 15 financial-literacy programs run by 13 separate agencies. Taxpayers also spend $3.1 billion on 209 separate science, technology, engineering and mathematics education programs across 13 agencies. Why not fund one good program in these areas instead of dozens that don’t work and waste money?
The democrats under Harry Reid have chosen the same old tack, demonizing the plan and its author and releasing a rerun video featuring a Ryan look alike who tosses a dummy granny over a cliff. At this point their response is nothing short of clownish. It’s time for our leaders to grow up and get in shape. Drop the clownish posturing, cut the sugar and fat, and get the federal budget on a sustainable path.
Note from Tina: Apologies to all for yesterdays premature posting of this article in draft form and without title…old brain clicks on wrong button…twice!