• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Heritage Foundation "Cut Government Spending" Goal Gains Ground

    As the public debate swirls over whether and how to limit the size and cost of the federal government, The Heritage Foundation’s longstanding efforts to shrink the government gain ground.

    In May 2010, Heritage published Saving the American Dream: The Heritage Plan to Fix the Debt, Cut Spending, and Restore Prosperity. The Heritage plan proposes to balance the federal budget within a decade and keep it balanced forever at no more than 18.5 percent of the total output of the American economy in goods and services in a single year, called gross domestic product (GDP). The government currently spends over 23 percent of GDP — which means that government is nearly a quarter of the depressed American economy.

    The delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida, recently adopted a platform for their party noting that the federal government is “financially broken” and calling for “cutting spending” and “balancing the budget.” Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI), addressing those delegates on August 29, 2012, said that “we will keep federal spending at 20 percent of GDP, or less.” Previously, President Obama noted, disparagingly, on June 4, that the Republican Party believes that “we have to drastically shrink government.”

    For decades, Heritage has encouraged the public to focus on the importance of limited government in maintaining our liberty. The current public debate may well bring about a healthy, sharp focus on whether and how to reduce the size and cost of the federal government.

    The public debate reflects progress toward the key Heritage fiscal objective: to drive down federal spending toward a balanced budget not to exceed 18.5 percent of GDP without raising taxes, while maintaining a strong national defense.

    As it has for the past two years, so too in the coming years, Heritage will continue to fight for Saving the American Dream. The plan advances the principles of limited government, free enterprise, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.  With national attention now focused on reducing the size of the government relative to the size of the economy — that is, shrinking the size and cost of government — key Heritage ideas are on the march.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    9 Responses to Heritage Foundation "Cut Government Spending" Goal Gains Ground

    1. Bruce Hall says:

      Medicare alone makes $100 billion in improper payments annually. The Government Accountability Office has for two decades designated both Medicare and Medicaid as posing a high risk for fraud.15
      Add to that the waste and fraud around military expenditures, dubious energy subsidies to unproven technologies, wasteful agricultural programs, and all manner of spending for special interests in nearly every bill that crosses the Oval Office desk… and we're beginning to talk real money.

      So, here's the answer: an across-the-board reduction in SPENDING by 2% annually for the next 5 years. Not 10% all at once. 2% annually for 5 years. Let each department determine how to absorb the cuts… either through better auditing, better planning, or through better management… I like the last part. But we mean REAL CUTS, NOT CUTTING ESTIMATED INCREASED SPENDING.

      Let the GAO and a consortium of private accounting firms be the watchdogs. Then we can see where the wheels are squeaking the loudest after 5 years. If there is that much waste and fraud in government spending, a guy in a trailer park in Arkansas could figure out how to manage 2% cuts. After all, it still leaves him 98% of the money to screw around with.

    2. Bruce Hall says:

      Medicare alone makes $100 billion in improper payments annually. The Government Accountability Office has for two decades designated both Medicare and Medicaid as posing a high risk for fraud. Add to that the waste and fraud around military expenditures, dubious energy subsidies to unproven technologies, wasteful agricultural programs, and all manner of spending for special interests in nearly every bill that crosses the Oval Office desk… and we're beginning to talk real money.

      So, here's the answer: an across-the-board reduction in SPENDING by 2% annually for the next 5 years. Not 10% all at once. 2% annually for 5 years. Let each department determine how to absorb the cuts… either through better auditing, better planning, or through better management… I like the last part. But we mean REAL CUTS, NOT CUTTING ESTIMATED INCREASED SPENDING.

      Let the GAO and a consortium of private accounting firms be the watchdogs. Then we can see where the wheels are squeaking the loudest after 5 years.
      If there is that much waste and fraud in government spending, a guy in a trailer park in Arkansas could figure out how to manage 2% cuts. After all, it still leaves him 98% of the money to screw around with.

      While the above seems like rather small potatoes and 10% of $3.8 trillion is only $380 billion… over five years of projected growth, the annual government expenditures would be about $4.5 trillion. If the 2% annual reductions were implemented from a base of $3.8 trillion, then the annual savings in five years would be $1.1 trillion per year. That's not small potatoes.

    3. Blair Franconia, NH says:

      How much would it cost to replace the M16 with a new assault rifle? How much does it cost to make the M16 in
      the first place? I know it's better than it was in the '60s, but it's old. Germany has the G36, a new assault rifle that's been in use since the late '90s. There are several alternatives to the M16, including the XM8, which was
      cancelled by Donald Rumsfeld in his "infinite wisdom." What are other alternatives? I don't know offhand but there are others.

    4. Justin says:

      Shrinking the physical size and balancing the budget is a must for this nation to survive. I do not agree with the shrinkage of the government by 50% percent or more as quickly as feasible to do so. Allowing 18.5% of GDP for government spending is far too much. The thing that does need to be done is to determine exactly what he federal government was formed to do, not what it has taken upon itself to do through the politicians desire. The less government intervention we have in our life the better our country will function. As how to reduce the physical and financial size of the government is very simple, view it as a business and determine that this department, service,etc., isn't within the the framework of what government should be involved with and shut the department, committee or other entity down with a 6 month notice. The government is overstepping it's given purpose and has usurped power through self-expansion without regards to what it's function is really supposed to be. Read and find out exactly what your government is supposed to be doing for the nation as a whole and you can very quickly understand why the government isn't empowered to be doing services that belong to private sector to be performed. The government is to perform duties that are very limited in nature, but of significant to the sovereignty of the nation. The government has grown to it's smothering size due to misguided actions and laws that legislate how they want you to live your life, not based upon the reality of the real world at all. We will soon be socialist country, we are very near there now. It is not he taxpayer's responsibility to support the government's social engineering give-away programs. Help those who are unable to work and earn a living and let those citizens that want the government(taxpayer) to support them the opportunity that is afforded the working class, find a job, pay taxes and make your own way in the world or starve. The United States will soon regain it all important work ethic.

      • Stephen Henning says:

        You are absolutely right that "government is overstepping its given purpose and has usurped power…" However, re-electing Obama, who views the Constitution as an impediment to his wishes, will serve to institutionalize BIGGER government – more unionized government workers, more citizens (and non-citizens) in a permanent dependent class – and new Supreme Court appointees will rubber stamp it all – and the media will completely support his every wish. Years from now, history will record that our republic died with the 2012 election…

    5. awkingsley says:

      Let me ask you something, why are the Tea Party, Patriots, and Republicans after the farmer, the "Little Guy", all of a sudden? Is this the work of the usual Republican corporatizers who are ready for a corporate "Land Grab"? Farmers are heavily leveraged right now because they are buying their siblings shares of family farms or an uncle's farm. Why are Republicans going after the farmers, if this isn't a land grab? You are doing nothing about bailouts; you are doing nothing about other industry subsidies; you are looking the other direction instead of breaking up the "Too Big to Fail Banks", in order to save tax payers money. Why this heavy focus on farming all of a sudden?

      The Middle Class has lost 50 trillion dollars since 1980, but the Republicans are bent on taking out another sector of the Middle Class. Why is that? What Socialist or Corporatizer started this rotten game of taking out the farmers, the "Little Guy", instead of solving all of the other very expensive problems we have with the big corporations first? How about R & D grants to Big Pharma, for all of those expensive medications that do so little to help patients? Why don't you take on the corporations that are costing this country so many tax dollars?

      Morgan Stanley, and possibly others, have been manipulating in the gold and silver markets for over a year and a half. Our corrupt Federal Government has done nothing to stop the paper trading and resulting market manipulation. If farmers have to face price manipulation with paper trades from the big cereal companies, they will be out of business. But, obviously that is what some corrupt Republican Socialists are after. Again, who started this game? Was it the Heritage Foundation? If so, as usual, the Heritage Foundation is the think tank with a Socialist Globalist New World Order brain, not exactly what Middle Class American’s need.

      I'm not a Socialist, but when Republican corporatists go after the "Little Guys", I see red, and it isn't Romney Republican red: It is Ron Paul red as a write-in.

    6. Bobbie says:

      to cut government spending is pure logic and common sense, but would cut the pampering of America's overstaffed, oversensitive leaders, who are beneath us. Looking FORWARD to honorable leadership.

    7. carolyn kirkland says:

      Some of these "overstaffed, oversensitive leaders" also include some senior military officers who have been appointed by this President and are probably drinking the "kool aid" to keep their "bennies" and not fighting for the men and women's benefits and equipment not only for this war but for the next. I don't believe we have ever seen such selfish people in my lifetime like we have had since the 60's when I served in the military. Where is the outcry from some of these senior military officers over Obama's exposure of the Navy Seals, and the reduction of the Defense budget under this President. Just asking! We have Tricare for Life & Medicare and I had to pay for "PREVENTIVE CARE" Do our Congressmen & President pay for their 'PREVENTIVE CARE'? Isn't this what they are telling us to do? Just asking!!!

    8. Go Top Down Cost Reduction. A program where I cut many millions in business
      List costs top down and hit biggies not wasting time on smallies
      Pentagon–Medicare–Social Security–Medicaid-Interest
      We know zoomers are Pentagon and Medicare so spend most of time reducing those costs
      Each $$ has a proponent in government. Let em squeal as you cut cut cut

      P.S. Revenue is also big problem—-We join Chile and Mexico as 3 Least taxed in OECD.
      14,000B Income cannot pay 3800 budget!!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×