How To Cut Federal Spending Without Eliminating Essential Services Part Two

The majority can no longer afford to remain silent. The price they are already paying is nothing compared to the future cost of inaction. It's time to wake our friends, families, neighbors, and co-workers and send an army of Mr. Smiths (i.e., statesmen) to Washington to CUT programs and CLOSE agencies and bureaus by the bushel. After all, we elect the folks who pass the laws that create the conditions in which we will all prosper or perish. Passing over the so-called climate "crisis," what else can be cut or closed?

The spring, 2024 campus protests alerted the nation to some disturbing realities: (1) Diversity, Equity & Inclusion definitely does not include the state of Israel or Jews, in general, (2) cultural appropriation is okay if it's a Muslim hijab that white protesters choose to wear on their heads, (3) as with the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, the George Floyd riots and ANTIFA's refusal to let conservative voices speak on campus, the radicals enlisted the Palestinian cause in their continuing jihad against capitalist "greed," income disparities and industrial pollution, (4) In large measure, university professors are teaching their students to revile and reject America's cultural values and traditions and (5) the schools that employ these radical professors are pocketing billions from American taxpayers annually.  

In a 2017 report published by Open The Books.com we learned that between FY2010-15, the nation's colleges received $41 billion in "taxpayer subsidies, tax-breaks, and [other] federal payments. 

Columbia University which kicked off the pro-Palestinian fireworks collected $5.7 million from the National Science Foundation, alone. Did the colleges need federal assistance? Not at all, over the years these institutions have built up huge endowments. Harvard University controls $51 billion. Yale amassed a $41 billion fund. Stanford University's endowment exceeds $36 billion. The 15 colleges that boast the biggest endowments own a combined sum of $312 billion. 

Now, consider the almost $84 billion the Department of Education will spend in 2024. Conducting business since 1979, that cabinet department is clearly not doing any school child in America any imaginable good. Public education is in a horrific state and all the "educrats" in the world won't teach Johnny how to read, write, or think. 

As many have noticed, today's school kids are being indoctrinated not educated. And the mandates coming out of the educational establishment are choking the creative life out of our classroom teachers. A well-paid teacher who is dedicated to her profession and to her students doesn't need any ancillary personnel. A teacher who is just phoning it in won't succeed, no matter how many administrators oversee her pedagogic methods.    

Author and Founder of Wrong Speak Publishing’s 'Black Victim to Black Victor: Second Edition' is now available at Wrong Speak Publishing, Amazon, and Barnes & Noble! Pick up your copy today!

But it will do no good to go through the federal budget looking for specific programs to cut and agencies to close. There are just too many to examine. What is needed is a broad concept that encompasses a multiplicity of specific programs and agencies that can be downsized or eliminated. Now, the federal budget is divided into two general categories: entitlement spending and discretionary spending. The former includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food assistance programs, housing help, and medical services.

Each program has eligibility requirements. Anyone who is eligible is entitled to receive the specific benefits earmarked for program recipients. Entitlement spending represents a full 50% of today's federal budget. Noticing that and realizing that no one in Washington is eager to step on that "third rail" of politics, i.e., take a sledgehammer to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or any of the other entitlement benefits, the budget-cutting conversation grinds to a halt. 

But that leaves all the possible discretionary spending that can be put on the chopping block. It is divided into (1) defense and (2) non-defense expenditures. Each amounts to roughly 25% of Washington's annual budget. 

So what public spending is truly essential? What must government do for us? It must protect us from enemies foreign and domestic (from overseas aggression, criminal activity at home, and conflicted civil claims). Government must be a PROTECTOR, protecting us all in the enjoyment of what is ours, our lives, liberties, and possessions. 

 As we learned on 9/11/2001, If people don't feel safe, they cannot feel free. To keep foreign adversaries at bay, government must fund a national defense that is second to none. Does that mean that discretionary defense spending should not be touched? Not at all, frequently defense contracts are awarded not because the weapon systems that are procured will satisfy the nation's strategic defense needs, but to keep or create jobs in a powerful politician's state or congressional district. Or worse, contracts will be issued in consideration of sizable campaign contributions. All such instances should be dug up and buried.

To keep our streets and cities safe, government must provide essential law enforcement and justice services. It must hire the judges and law enforcement personnel, and build and maintain the courthouses and prisons that will keep convicted felons incarcerated and citizens safe. The country is now learning what happens when those efforts are politically suspended. Here, too, parsimony is needed. Where less is needed, less should be spent. 

That brings us to the discretionary non-defense side of the ledger. Regardless of how popular and untouchable the mandatory entitlement spending may be, there's a great deal of questionable discretionary spending to consider. How much of that spending is truly necessary? How much is accomplishing any real good? What constitutes non-defense, discretionary spending? If welfare denotes any program that redistributes wealth then in the broadest sense, it can come in the form of pork, bacon, earmarks, member items, constituent services, protective tariffs, farm and business subsidies, pay-to-play, and too-big-to-fail policies. Let us consider constituent services and business/farm subsidies.  :

Constituent Services. This category consists of federal dollars that are earmarked and sent back to the states and localities for transportation projects, educational experiments, park and playground construction, and an unimaginable welter of additional purposes. The folks back home are certainly counting on their congressional delegations in the House and Senate to bring the bacon back home. Little do they realize that in order to line up support for their piece of pork, call it barrel "A," their representatives are going to have to support passage of pork barrels "B" through "Z" and everyone in the country will be taxed to the teeth to pay for the alphabet of subsidies.  Why not let the states spend their own money on what they need? 

Next Time: We'll start with Business and Farm subsidies

Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author's own.