Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 5 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Fix Our Policies to Fix the Budget

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   1 comment
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Dean Hartwell

President Obama has said "show me your budget and I will show you your priorities."  It is important to keep this idea in mind when listening to Republicans who have rediscovered the issue of "runaway" government spending that eluded them during the time of George W. Bush. 

Here is a recent history of our federal budget:

We arrived at high deficits because we have not balanced the federal budget since President Clinton.  Deficits cause us to borrow money, which raises the debt level.  Our high federal debt (approximately $12 trillion) causes us to pay high interest on the debt.  High interest payments and other spending continue the cycle of deficits.

We could balance the budget by (a) raising taxes and/or (b) cutting spending. With the recession in full force, no elected official is talking seriously about raising taxes.That leaves us with cutting spending, even though most of the budget is beyond serious debate. According to Wikipedia, the highest budget expenditures for Fiscal Year 2008 were: 

  1. Social Security ($608 billion)*
  2. Department of Defense ($481 billion)
  3. Medicare ($386 billion)*
  4. Unemployment and Welfare ($324 billion)*
  5. Interest on the National Debt ($261 billion)*
  6. Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program ($209 billion)*
  7. Global War on Terror ($145 billion)
  8. Department of Health and Human Services ($69 billion)
  9. Department of Education ($56 billion)
  10. Department of Veteran's Affairs ($39 billion)

The budget deficit was approximately $240 billion.  And it is higher now because of the recent stimulus packages and bailouts, but this figure will work.

OK - let's try reducing our spending.  To do that, we would have to forget about changing the expenditures above with an asterisk because they are mandatory. 
Anyone for reducing spending on the Department of Defense?

Unless we want to get out of the two wars we are fighting any time soon, I don't believe that will happen.

How about spending less on fighting terrorists?  It would take a bold move by one of our leaders to call for an investigation of whether the Central Intelligence Agency funded al-Qaeda, in part as a way of justifying its (non-published) budget.  We lack this kind of boldness in our current leaders, so forget that.

We would next have to go through the departments.  The problem with this approach, though, is that many states rely upon federal spending to fund programs they cannot afford with state money.  This raises the idea of "robbing Peter to pay Paul," which defeats the purpose.

One last try: We could cut out spending to those who are not entitled to it, like illegal immigrants.  That sounds good, but consider: we would first have to identify them (i.e. more money on enforcement of laws) and second, we would have to contend with court decisions like Plyer v Doe, which forbid shutting off services like education to the children of illegal immigrants.

It looks like we are stuck.  We will never balance our budgets or reduce our debts unless we change our thinking about why we spend our money the way we do.  In short, if we want to keep our entitlements, fight two unnecessary wars and pretend to get bin Laden, we will have no choice but to put our money where our mouths are.


Rate It | View Ratings

Dean Hartwell Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Dean Hartwell's book, "Planes without Passengers: the Faked Hijackings of 9/11," reached the top of Amazon's charts for large print books on history. He has authored three others: "Facts Talk but the Guilty Walk:the 9/11 No Hijacker Theory and Its (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact EditorContact Editor
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Stop Shooting Conspiracy Theory Messengers

Reverse the Revolution of 1963

9/11 Passengers Landed in Cleveland

Debate over Judyth Vary Baker's JFK Story Gets Record Response

Road to 9/11 Truth Goes through Cleveland

What is the Real Story about Jesus?

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend