Media attention on the federal budget usually focuses on contentious issues, such as the debt limit, food stamp cuts, and Republican cave-ins. But let’s look at the big picture: What does the government spend almost $4 trillion of our money on each year?
In today’s issue of Nature, scientists from the National Ignition Facility (NIF) in California are trumpeting their advance in achieving fusion ignition. However, the National Ignition Facility is just like so many other projects from the Department of Energy. It’s behind schedule and over budget.
Canada released a new federal budget yesterday. The ruling Conservatives are centrists and far too supportive of the welfare state. Nonetheless, the government is expected to balance the budget next year while steadily reducing spending and debt as a share of GDP.
Over at DarwinsFool.com, Michael Cannon summarizes a lengthy report issued by two congressional committees on how the Treasury Department, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Department of Health and Human Services conspired to create a new entitlement program that is authorized nowhere in federal law.
Here is a rule of thumb to remember when you hear about a proposed government project: If a politician says that it will cost $1, it will end up costing $2 or more. Call it Edwards’ Law.
The Washington Post reports that President Obama is cheerleading for more spending on high-speed Internet, tablet computers, and Wi-Fi in the nation’s K-12 schools. There are budget and federalism reasons why the president of the United States should not be sticking his nose into local schooling activities, but let’s put those concerns aside here.
The CBO released its new budget outlook today. The chart below shows total federal spending since 2000. Spending was way up under Bush and the first two years of Obama, and roughly flat since then.
We’re not going to come up with a good answer if we don’t understand basic fiscal facts.
President Obama set the chattering classes abuzz after his unilateral announcement to raise the minimum wage for newly hired Federal contract workers. During his State of the Union address, he sang the praises for his action, saying that “It’s good for the economy; it’s good for America.” Yet this conclusion doesn’t pass the economic smell test; just look at the data from Europe.
What should President Obama have said about education policy in this year’s State of the Union address? In a more perfect world, he would have announced his plan to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education in order to restore control of education policy to the state and local governments where it constitutionally belongs.