They Did It Again: Trump Set Another Trap for Dems on Rogue Judges
How a CNN Political Commentator Shut Down the Leftist Meltdown Over the FBI...
A Judge Was Arrested for Trying to Help an Illegal Alien Escape. Let's...
Whoever Did This to Shedeur Sanders During the NFL Draft Is Cold-Blooded
Lawless in the Courtroom
If It Saves One Life?
The Party of Racism, Prejudice, and Bias
Jennings Offers Telling Reminder About How Media Has Botched Story on Arrest of...
Trump: I'm Not 'Trolling' When I Say Canada Should Join the US
Hakeem Jeffries Boasts About Blocking Citizen-Only Voting Rule
Nancy Mace Blasts Clemson’s 15-Gender Lunacy
Trump Meets With Zelensky While in Rome for Pope Francis' Funeral
These Posts From Ed Markey, Amy Klobuchar in Reaction to Judge's Arrest Were...
The U.S. Should Learn From a Diminished Europe’s Energy Mistakes
Democrats Should Love the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
OPINION

‘Unthinkable, Draconian’ Spending Cuts

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

It’s my job to advocate for spending cuts. It’s a job I’ve been doing in one form or another for over a decade. If I’ve ever experienced a victory, it must have been a pretty small one, because I can’t recall any.

So why do I persist?

For one, I’m a naturally optimistic person. And fueling that optimism is the press. I’m constantly reading about the possibility of spending cuts, and those articles usually say that the cuts would be major … or massive … or severe … or even draconian! The possibility sends a thrill up my leg.

Alas, the “draconian” spending cuts invariably turn out to be not-so-draconian after all. In fact, it’s often the case that reporters are talking about smaller spending increases rather than real spending cuts. Other times, the cuts are likely to only be temporary or come after years and years of increases.

In today’s example, a National Journal article reports that the “unthinkable” could happen: the fiscal 2013 sequestration cuts—just reduced and postponed by the fiscal cliff deal—might actually go into effect March 1st as scheduled:

Republicans and Democrats in the Senate appear to be coming to the same conclusion on spending, namely that once unthinkable, draconian cuts designed to force a more reasonable compromise may be much harder to undo than anyone ever imagined.

How “draconian” would these “unthinkable” cuts be? About $85 billion. To put that in context, the federal government will spend around $3,500 billion ($3.5 trillion) this year. The deficit alone is likely to approach or exceed $1 trillion (the federal government has run a deficit in excess of $1 trillion for four straight years).

If that’s draconian, what would the press call cutting enough spending just to balance the budget?

As we’ve been trying to demonstrate at DownsizingGovernment.org, spending cuts would be good for the country. I encourage journalists who cover federal policy to check out the site to see what real spending cuts are all about. It might cause you to have to find new adjectives to use to describe what Republicans and Democrats are really doing, but you’re readers would be better served—especially the wild-eyed optimists like me.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement