Sacrificing Programs I Once Supported

How would I personally sacrifice to cut the federal budget down to size?

First, I will take no pension for my years in Congress (and I have already refused to do so).  I am also willing to forgo my Social Security benefits as long as Congress, at the least, raises the retirement age to 70 and caps or limits future cost-of-living adjustments.

Second, unlike some fiscal conservatives, I would be willing to pay higher taxes as part of a comprehensive budget fix, as long as increased revenues are held to no more (I would hope less) than one-fourth of the solution.  I voted for the Clinton budget and its taxes on upper-income earners, and those taxes did not kill the economy; however, I would prefer that tax increases be combined with tax reform along the lines proposed by the Bowles-Simpson Commission.  This would allow us to lower overall tax rates and clean up the tax code by eliminating distortive tax breaks and credits.

Third, we need comprehensive health reform that actually reduces the rate of increase in health costs—sadly, a goal left unaddressed by Obamacare.  Accordingly, I would support Medicare reforms similar to those proposed by Congressman Paul Ryan and would be happy to accept a government subsidy for my Medicare that covers only 50 percent of the expected premium.  I have also purchased long-term care insurance and disability insurance and have prepared a living will so as not to burden taxpayers (or my family) with astronomical end-of-life health care bills.

Fourth, even though I may qualify for some Veteran’s benefits, including VA health care, due to my years in the Navy Reserve, I will not pursue any of those benefits.

Fifth, consistent with my role in Congress as co-chair of the Porkbuster’s Caucus, I would support elimination of all porkbarrel spending—even projects that would be welcomed in my own region of southern Minnesota.  I still believe that porkbarrel spending is like a gateway drug that leads to an overdose of spending.

Sixth, given the growing threat of deficit spending, I would be willing to sacrifice programs I once supported, including funding for public broadcasting, Planned Parenthood, ethanol subsidies (as long as tax breaks for oil production are also eliminated), and the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities.  Moreover, despite my affinity for America’s industrious family farmers, I would support eliminating current farm subsidies in favor of a crop insurance system with affordable rates designed to reduce federal costs dramatically.  I think the Federal Elections Commission could also be replaced by a simple requirement that no campaign contribution can be deposited until it is reported electronically and posted publicly.

Seventh, America (and I personally) can remain safe with less Pentagon spending.  For starters, we should enact outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ recommendation to save $154 billion over five years.  As progress continues in Iraq and Afghanistan, troop and spending commitments can be brought down.  Another Base-Closing Commission report is due soon (2013) and should be put into effect.  In the future, no major military mission should be undertaken without a commensurate tax increase; this should cause our leaders to think twice before engaging troops in another war.  Though constituting less than one percent of federal spending, we should also eliminate all foreign security aid and retain only aid focused on development programs.

Finally, though resulting in little effect on me personally, I think major restructuring of federal agencies is long overdue.  A recent Government Accounting Office report about duplication and redundancy points to serious savings.

In addition, we should collapse our 14 Cabinet departments into no more than seven, thereby achieving huge efficiencies.

Emergency spending (for natural disasters) should be subject to a dedicated tax to eliminate expensive “riders,” the unrelated expenditures that so often accompany true emergency appropriations.

Federal transportation dollars, generated by the gas tax, should be passed through to the states, thereby allowing them to prioritize road and bridge projects while removing the very costly federal role.

Moreover, federal spending for education should be eliminated, unless the federal government is willing to finance these activities fully—no more “unfunded” federal mandates!

Tim Penny is a former congressman from Minnesota’s First District, a senior fellow at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, and co-chair of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, www.crfb.org.