For all the boldness of Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to reduce projected federal expenditures by $6 trillion, an initiative that I support, the Pentagon’s budget emerges essentially unscathed in Ryan’s plan. This is a mistake on both fiscal and strategic grounds. Significant cuts in military spending must be on the table as the nation struggles to close its fiscal gap without saddling individuals and businesses with burdensome taxes and future generations with debt. Such cuts will also force a reappraisal of our military’s roles and missions that is long overdue.
House Budget Committee Chairman, Paul Ryan, introduced his budget resolution for fiscal 2012 and beyond today entitled “The Path to Prosperity.” The plan would cut some spending programs, reduce top income tax rates, and reform Medicare and Medicaid. The following two charts compare spending levels under Chairman Ryan’s plan and President Obama’s recent budget (as scored by the Congressional Budget Office).
House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) is proposing reforms to Medicare and Medicaid as part of his budget proposal for fiscal 2012. Readers who are interested in getting a better understanding of these pillars of the federal welfare state should check out two Cato essays on our Downsizing Government website.
The Washington Post said today that a plan to "cut $33 billion from the federal budget" would be "the largest one-time reduction in U.S. history."
Today the Cato Institute placed an ad in major newspapers highlighting specific spending cuts that policymakers should make to restore our country's fiscal sanity and economic stability. Our public call for policymakers to demonstrate leadership on spending cuts comes in the midst of the on-going battle on Capitol Hill over funding the government for the remainder of fiscal 2011.
An economist in the Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics at the University of Illinois posted an interesting entry on the FarmDocDaily blog yesterday, claiming that farm subsidies flowing to the biggest farms is a sign of progressivity.
The federal government has been meddling with sugar production since 1934. Today’s convoluted system of supply controls, price supports, and trade restrictions benefits domestic sugar producers at the expense of consumers and utilizing industries. In other words, sugar producers “win” and the rest of the country “loses.”
Last year the House Republican leadership created the GOP’s “YouCut” website, which offers several possible spending cuts for citizens to vote on. The cut with the most votes goes to the House floor for an up-or-down vote. It’s a decent idea, but unfortunately, most of the cuts the GOP have offered thus far only amount to chump change.
A new Cato Policy Analysis from Michael Tanner examines so-called “entitlement programs” – chiefly Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid – and how they will push the government’s finances to the brink if they’re not reined in. As he notes in the introduction, if politicians continue to duck the issue, they “will condemn our children and our grandchildren to a world of mounting debt and higher taxes.”