The Challenge to Cut Spending

It's a myth that conservatives want to cut spending in general but not in particular. I mean, if libs like Kevin Drum want to ask the question of what to cut, he should go to a conservative for the answer, because we have lists!

About the only federal program I have ever actively participated in was the direct student loans from the DOE. I thought that Sallae Mae did a much better job. So start cutting there.

What else? Tolls on the Interstates? Sounds good to me. Does air travel pay for itself? I fly a lot.

Of course, there's the big one, Socialist Insecurity. I would be happy to forgo all future SS benefits if I didn't have to pay one more dime in payroll taxes.

Not right now, but the Iowa Legislature is supposed to send such an animal to the Governor for approval today. If you are close to the border, stand back for the stampede of entrepreneurs...

Any politician daring to cut spending will pay a severe price. That is why the Bush administration will do virtually nothing until after the next election. Have we already forgotten the lesson learned from Newt Gingrich’s effort during the mid nineties? Some people claimed that Gingrich met his Waterloo because he advocated overall “right-wing extremist” policies. I think this to be very unlikely, and the real reason is that Gingrich desired to cut government spending.

$200,000 is indeed “a drop in the bucket in the Federal Budget.” However, it can be a very big deal to the small handful of folks receiving this funding. A couple of managers, for instance, may see their paychecks increase by 10-15% or even more. Thus, it behooves them to scream and yell like immature children if anybody dares threaten their pocketbook.

What will happen after the 2004 election? I expect that George W. Bush will bite the bullet and take the heat. If nothing else, we need to raise the Social Security retirement by a few more years. Also, why is our government providing drug benefits to retired people who rank among America’s wealthiest demographic group? It’s time to end the myth that most of our older citizens subsist on dog food and scraps left in garbage cans.

Kevin Drum's challenge is, of course, disingenuous. Somewhat akin to asking Willie Sutton what he thinks about laws prohibiting robbing banks. Whatever the merits of the laws, that doesn't change the fact that Sutton was correct to note that that is where the money is.

What Drum is trying (intentionally or not, I don't know enough about him to say) to do is deflect attention from the sheer waste inherent in government programs. One needn't be a disciple of Tulloch and Buchanan (but it helps) to see how the incentives distort behavior toward less highly valued uses of resources. It's no accident that those who place a high priority on government activity focus on inputs (funding), and ignore results.

The question should not be "how much to spend" on this or that, but on who gets to decide how much AND the manner in which the amount is spent. Anyone think the country would be better fed if we increased the amount of money spent on food, but switched from the present system of market allocation of food to one more like the public school system? If there is such a person, he might want to click on this link:

http://www.fcpp.org/publication_detail.php?PubID=425

As luck would have it, Joanne Jacobs has an item that nicely demonstrates my point:

http://www.joannejacobs.com/archives/2003_06_01_archive.htm#200382852

The state of California, supposedly in the midst of a gigantic budget crisis, wants to make it more expensive to construct new schools. Expanding the scope of one of the most blatantly racist laws, the Davis Bacon Act, ever passed in the U.S.