You are here: Home

Federal Spending Cuts – End The Wars

June 4, 2011 by Leave a Comment

The Federal Government greatly exceeds its budget each year and has a debt of over $14 trillion. It is obvious that spending cuts are essential. This series offers suggestions to help balance the budget.

The United States, with a military budget of $698 billion, spends more on defense than the next seventeen nations combined. The U.S. spends almost six times that of the next biggest spender, China ($119 billion) and more than eleven times that of Russia ($59 billion).

The Department of Defense budget in fiscal year 2010 accounted for 19% of the United States federal budget and 28% of estimated tax revenues. $159.3 billion of the U.S. military budget is for “Overseas Contingency Operations,” to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

With Osama bin Laden dead, it is time to bring the troops home from what will be, in October, our decade-long war in Afghanistan. At the same time we can also bring the troops home from Iraq.

The savings of $159.3 billion is my first entry in my Federal Spending Cuts Table.

Federal Spending Cuts Table

The First Year of implementation may not be the same as a Full Year if cuts are phased in over time. The average saved per year is shown as a 5 Year Average. The 5 Year Total is the amount saved in five years with all cuts implemented.

The table has been updated to reflect the latest posts in the series. Click on the table links to access prior and future posts.

Click ONCE on column headers to sort.

Spending Cuts ($billions) First Year Full Year 5 Year Av. 5 Year Total
TOTALS 334.4 567.6 432.0 2,838.0
Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq 159.3 159.3 159.3 796.5
Mortgage Interest Deduction 13.0 131.0 53.0 655.0
Health Insurance Benefits 28.8 144.0 86.4 720.0
Charitable Contributions 37.0 37.0 37.0 185.0
State and Local Taxes 74.0 74.0 74.0 370.0
Farm Subsidies 22.3 22.3 22.3 111.5

 
After the spending cuts phase in periods are over, the savings over ten years would be $5.7 trillion.

Filed Under: Government, Spending Cuts ·

Social Security System

March 31, 2011 by Leave a Comment

Ezra Taft Benson was the United States Secretary of Agriculture for the eight years of the Eisenhower presidency. He was opposed to the system of government price supports and aid to farmers, arguing that it amounted to unacceptable socialism. He was also against Social Security, of which he wrote in An Enemy Hath Done This back in 1969:

The Social Security system, as it is conceived and operated today, is not social, does not provide security, and does not qualify as a real system. It should be made voluntary in order to become social; it should be backed by reserves in order to become secure; and benefits should be computed on an actuarial basis to make it a system that is fair and impartial, to all participants, whether young or old.

What was written 42 years ago is still true today. Ezra Taft Benson further writes, “Social Security is unconstitutional. Why not end it by refunding to all participants their equitable share?”

Filed Under: Agriculture, Government, Social Security ·

Individual Bargaining

March 10, 2011 by Leave a Comment

What a fuss in Wisconsin.

If my employer is not paying me what I am worth, or wants to cut my wages and benefits, I will look for other employment, or accept my salary as is. True, I may have to wait for the end of the recession before I can find a better paying job. But I remind myself I am a one man union and I should keep my skills current.

I am in charge of my life. If I don’t agree with my employer, I can move on. If I can’t leave my job because no-one else would want me, then I am overdue for a skills upgrade.

The reason there is so much wailing and gnashing of teeth in Wisconsin is that union members think the only answer is collective bargaining.

They have forgotten they still have individual bargaining.

Filed Under: Employment, Government ·

Do Legislate Morality

February 27, 2011 by Leave a Comment

U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, in a speech to Nevada state legislators, said:

Nevada needs to be known as the first place for innovation and investment — not as the last place where prostitution is still legal. When the nation thinks about Nevada, it should think about the world’s newest ideas and newest careers — not about its oldest profession.

We should do everything we can to make sure the world holds Nevada in the same high regard you and I do. If we want to attract business to Nevada that puts people back to work, the time has come for us to outlaw prostitution.

Ed Goedhart, a Republican member of the state assembly, attacked Reid’s remarks as an attempt to “legislate morality.”

In 1987, Elder Dallin Oaks*, at a Ricks College Devotional, explained the superficiality of the “Don’t legislate morality” argument:

‘Don’t legislate morality.’ I suppose persons who mouth that familiar slogan think they are saying something profound. In fact, if that is an argument at all, it is so superficial that an educated person should be ashamed to use it. As should be evident to every thinking person, a high proportion of all legislation has a moral base. That is true of all of the criminal law, most of the laws regulating family relations, businesses, and commercial transactions, many of the laws governing property, and a host of others.

So what does it mean when a person says, “Don’t try to legislate morality?” There is ample room for debate on the wisdom of most legislation, whether it has a moral base or not. Some legislation is unwise or undesirable because it is an excessive interference with liberty or because it will be impossible or expensive to enforce. But the mere statement that we should not legislate morality contributes nothing to reasoned public discourse.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil. For once I agree with Senator Reid.

* Elder Oaks practiced and taught law in Chicago. He was president of Brigham Young University from 1971 to 1980 and a justice of the Utah Supreme Court from 1980 until his resignation in 1984 to accept his calling to the apostleship.

Filed Under: Politics, Social · Tagged With: ,

There Should Be A Law Against It

February 27, 2011 by Leave a Comment

The executive branch has decided that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. So the legislative branch is now planning to arrange for the defense of DOMA in court. Maybe the judicial branch could save us all a lot of time and effort and legislate DOMA from the bench.

Such interesting times. The executive decides what is constitutional, the courts legislate from the bench, and now Congress goes to court.

As far as tampering with DOMA: There should be a law/executive order/judgement against it.

Filed Under: Constitution · Tagged With:

No More DOMA Defense

February 24, 2011 by Leave a Comment

When officials ran away from their duty to defend the law, as was done with Proposition 8 in California, many of us believed that it was an anomaly. But yesterday was to prove us wrong.

The U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, decided that the U.S. Department of Justice will no longer defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Constitution clearly states that the executive branch is to:

take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed

DOMA was enacted to protect states from the radical changes to family law and social policy that other states’ laws on homosexual marriage will bring.

The correct response for opponents of DOMA is to utilize the process the Constitution provides to change the law. It is indeed unfortunate that a politically appointed official would order government attorneys to abandon the defense of DOMA, a duly enacted law.

Filed Under: Constitution, Social · Tagged With:

Government Services

February 21, 2011 by Leave a Comment

I sometimes hear, “Voters want everything they can get without paying for any of it.” Certainly it seems that many citizens vote that way.

But not every voter wants everything they can get without paying for it.

I want well maintained roads so raise the gasoline tax.
I don’t want the age of retirement raised so increase FICA 1%.
I want every wage earner to at least pay some income tax.

If you want savings, end the two unnecessary wars we are fighting.
Cut services the federal government provides that should be done by the states.
Require those receiving welfare or unemployment checks to volunteer in their communities.

If you want Americans to save, quit taxing investments, at least on the first $5,000 of interest.
If you want people to work hard, tax consumption and not productivity.
If you want the federal government to balance its budget, elect Romney.

Filed Under: Government, Spending Cuts, Taxes, Voting · Tagged With:

Defend Freedom of Religion

February 20, 2011 by Leave a Comment

Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, speaking at the Chapman University School of Law in Orange, California, February 4, 2011, defended the right to free exercise of religion.

Elder Oaks made four major points in his speech:

  1. Religious teachings and religious organizations are valuable and important to our free society and therefore deserving of their special legal protection.
  2. Religious freedom undergirds the origin and existence of [the United States] and is the dominating civil liberty.
  3. The guarantee of free exercise of religion is weakening in its effects and in public esteem.
  4. This weakening is attributable to the ascendancy of moral relativism.

Elders Oaks gave an interview prior to his speech.

Filed Under: Religion ·

The Military-Industrial Complex

February 19, 2011 by Leave a Comment

President Eisenhower, addressing the nation January 17, 1961, spoke of the military establishment and the arms industry:

The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
. . .
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Was Eisenhower’s warning heeded? Are we currently fighting unnecessary wars? Today does the arms industry have unwarranted influence? Are we an “alert and knowledgeable citizenry?”

Filed Under: Defense, Government ·

Blueprint For Giving

February 18, 2011 by Leave a Comment

Jesus Christ’s Blueprint for Giving:

  1. You must earn your bread by your own labor. (Gen. 3:19)
  2. From the fruits of your labors, you are to care for those of your own household. (1 Tim. 5:8)
  3. From your surplus, and often by sacrifice, you should deal your bread to the poor and needy. (Mosiah 4:16–19)
  4. You must live in harmony with those around you, esteeming others as yourself seeking to make all men equal in temporal things so all may receive the blessings of the Spirit. (D&C 78:5–6)
  5. You are to use the resources the Lord has given you to further the work of God. (D&C 104:11–12)
Filed Under: Service ·
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »