By Henry Decker

Poll: Americans Oppose Almost Every Possible Spending Cut

February 22, 2013 3:06 pm Category: Memo Pad 70 Comments A+ / A-

On Thursday, a Pew Research Center poll disproved the Republican talking point that Americans would oppose a deficit reduction plan that links spending cuts to new revenues. Now, a new Pew poll is calling into question the very idea that Americans want to cut spending at all.

Although a bipartisan 70 percent of Americans say it is essential for Congress and the president to pass major legislation reducing the deficit, the new poll, released Friday, shows that Americans actually oppose cutting almost any specific program.

The survey asked 1,504 adults whether they would increase, decrease, or maintain the budgets for 19 government programs. On 18 of the 19, respondents opposed cutting the budgets.

Aid to the world’s needy is the only program for which a plurality of Americans support decreasing spending, and even in that case the total respondents who believe that the aid budget should be increased or kept the same outnumber those who believe it should be reduced. And in any case, cutting foreign aid — which amounts to around 1 percent of the federal budget — won’t go very far towards reducing the deficit.

Although more Republicans than Democrats support cutting spending on 16 of the 19 programs tested, bipartisan majorities oppose decreasing the budget on most of the GOP’s major targets. Republicans support increasing Social Security spending by a 35 to 17 percent margin, while Democrats support it 49 to 3 percent. Raising Medicare spending is favored by 24 percent of Republicans, while 21 percent would like to see it decreased; the margin is 52 to 7 percent among Democrats.

One major exception is health care, for which 44 percent of Republicans want to see the budget slashed, compared to 16 percent who want to see it increased—and 58 percent of Democrats want to increase the health care budget, while just 7 percent want to decrease it.

The survey sheds some light on House Republicans’ strategy on the sequester negotiations. Although GOP leaders have repeatedly slammed President Obama for “threatening [Americans’] jobs because we cannot make even the tiniest cuts” to government spending, as House Majority Leader Eric Cantor put it in a recent tweet, they have refused to explain how—specifically—they want to see the budget cut. Instead, they have demanded that the president take the initiative in proposing unpopular cuts.

“Mr. President, we agree that your sequester is bad policy. What spending are you willing to cut to replace it?” House Speaker John Boehner asked in a Wall Street Journal op-ed Wednesday.

Boehner’s calculus is clear: Although Americans agree with the theoretical idea of cutting the budget,  as Paul Ryan learned the hard way, targeting specific programs is usually political malpractice.

Poll: Americans Oppose Almost Every Possible Spending Cut Reviewed by on . On Thursday, a Pew Research Center poll disproved the Republican talking point that Americans would oppose a deficit reduction plan that links spending cuts to On Thursday, a Pew Research Center poll disproved the Republican talking point that Americans would oppose a deficit reduction plan that links spending cuts to Rating:

More by Henry Decker

Poll: Americans Broadly Back Obama’s Immigration Executive Action

A new survey finds that voters are very open to the president's immigration plan.

Read more...

This Week In Crazy: Immigration Meltdown Edition

Obama starts a new civil war, Latinos escalate the War on Whites, and so much more.

Read more...

5 Reasons The GOP Should Not Shut Down The Government Over Immigration

Republicans should really think this new shutdown plan through.

Read more...

Tags

Comments

  • empiremed

    Congressional Republicans are simultaneously united, divided and confused about the $85 billion of cuts in defense and domestic discretionary spending that begin on March 1 when the budget sequester takes effect.

    Republicans are united in their dislike of across-the-board cuts but understand that this is the only way now to restrain federal spending. The GOP-controlled House twice passed bills, in May and December of 2012, that replaced the sequester with targeted reductions to less essential programs. Both measures were ignored by the White House and Democratic Senate. This led to the current impasse.

    Nevertheless, there are philosophical and tactical divisions in the party. While most House Republicans worry that defense cuts will harm national security, a minority welcomes them. GOP Congressmen are also split over whether the House should approve a continuing resolution (or “CR,” to fund the government through the rest of the fiscal year) before or after the sequester begins.

    As things now stand, cabinet departments will have to cut equally from programs important and insignificant, efficient and inefficient. But Republicans are confused over how to provide federal agencies with the flexibility to adjust their budgets under the sequester. Flexibility means giving the executive branch, e.g., President Obama, greater authority. Republicans are loath to do this, but many fear that without this authority the sequester will be especially damaging to military readiness.

    And so Republicans don’t know whether they should pass a separate flexibility measure next week, incorporate flexibility language in the continuing resolution, or simply paste the Department of Defense and Military Construction appropriations bills language into the CR.

    Forward motion shows the GOP acting responsibly while inactivity allows Mr. Obama to keep the public spotlight on him. My own recommendation is that House Republicans should pass a continuing resolution next week to fund the government for the balance of the fiscal year at the lower level dictated by the sequester—with language granting the executive branch the flexibility to move funds from less vital activities to more important ones.

    True, Mr. Obama may use that flexibility to cut spending that Republicans favor. Still, the GOP will be acting responsibly, and perhaps by doing so will put the president and Congressional Democrats a bit on the defensive.

    Above all, the GOP must also keep setting the record straight for the public. It was Mr. Obama, not the Republicans, who came up with the sequester in the summer of 2011. In November of that year the White House said that the president “will not accept any measure that attempts to turn off part of the sequester.” Now Mr. Obama describes his own sequester cuts as “sudden, harsh, arbitrary” and “brutal.”

    On Tuesday he paraded first responders onto a stage to demand that Republicans “protect . . . education and health care and national security and all the jobs that depend on them” by passing his “balanced approach to deficit reduction that would prevent these harmful cuts.”

    Yet Mr. Obama has never offered a specific plan for deficit reduction. Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, acknowledged this recently when Sen. Roger Wicker (R., Miss.) asked if he could score the president’s speeches.

    Last week, some Senate Democrats did suggest $55 billion in cuts (half from defense and half from the farm program), coupled with $55 billion in new taxes—mostly from a proposal that already failed to pass the Democratic-controlled Senate last year. But this was a halfhearted public-relations gesture.

    The Senate Democratic proposal also violates Mr. Obama’s campaign pledge of a “balanced” deficit reduction that consists of $2.50 in spending cuts for every $1 of new revenue. In December, the president received $600 billion in new taxes, which should now be matched with $1.5 trillion in spending cuts, according to his definition of balance. That hasn’t happened.

    Mr. Obama is a once-in-a-generation demagogue with a compliant press corps. So in coming weeks, we will be subjected to a slew of presidential photo-ops with those whom he claims will lose jobs because of a 2.3% cut in future federal spending.

    The looming sequester is perilous for both political parties. The Feb. 4 Quinnipiac poll reported that only 22% of Americans believe the sequester should take effect. Yet a Feb. 6 Fox poll says 73% believe cutting spending now would help strengthen the economy, and in a Jan. 18 Fox poll, 83% said spending is out of control.

    To win public opinion to their side, Republicans will need a proactive strategy that shows the GOP is committed to restrain spending, make cuts as smartly as possible, and keep the government running.

    It won’t be easy, given the president’s intrinsic advantages and bigger megaphone. The Republicans only have the facts on their side. Sometimes that’s enough.

    Congressional Republicans are simultaneously united, divided and confused about the $85 billion of cuts in defense and domestic discretionary spending that begin on March 1 when the budget sequester takes effect.

    Republicans are united in their dislike of across-the-board cuts but understand that this is the only way now to restrain federal spending. The GOP-controlled House twice passed bills, in May and December of 2012, that replaced the sequester with targeted reductions to less essential programs. Both measures were ignored by the White House and Democratic Senate. This led to the current impasse.

    Nevertheless, there are philosophical and tactical divisions in the party. While most House Republicans worry that defense cuts will harm national security, a minority welcomes them. GOP Congressmen are also split over whether the House should approve a continuing resolution (or “CR,” to fund the government through the rest of the fiscal year) before or after the sequester begins.

    As things now stand, cabinet departments will have to cut equally from programs important and insignificant, efficient and inefficient. But Republicans are confused over how to provide federal agencies with the flexibility to adjust their budgets under the sequester. Flexibility means giving the executive branch, e.g., President Obama, greater authority. Republicans are loath to do this, but many fear that without this authority the sequester will be especially damaging to military readiness.

    And so Republicans don’t know whether they should pass a separate flexibility measure next week, incorporate flexibility language in the continuing resolution, or simply paste the Department of Defense and Military Construction appropriations bills language into the CR.

    Forward motion shows the GOP acting responsibly while inactivity allows Mr. Obama to keep the public spotlight on him. My own recommendation is that House Republicans should pass a continuing resolution next week to fund the government for the balance of the fiscal year at the lower level dictated by the sequester—with language granting the executive branch the flexibility to move funds from less vital activities to more important ones.

    True, Mr. Obama may use that flexibility to cut spending that Republicans favor. Still, the GOP will be acting responsibly, and perhaps by doing so will put the president and Congressional Democrats a bit on the defensive.

    Above all, the GOP must also keep setting the record straight for the public. It was Mr. Obama, not the Republicans, who came up with the sequester in the summer of 2011. In November of that year the White House said that the president “will not accept any measure that attempts to turn off part of the sequester.” Now Mr. Obama describes his own sequester cuts as “sudden, harsh, arbitrary” and “brutal.”

    On Tuesday he paraded first responders onto a stage to demand that Republicans “protect . . . education and health care and national security and all the jobs that depend on them” by passing his “balanced approach to deficit reduction that would prevent these harmful cuts.”

    Yet Mr. Obama has never offered a specific plan for deficit reduction. Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, acknowledged this recently when Sen. Roger Wicker (R., Miss.) asked if he could score the president’s speeches.

    Last week, some Senate Democrats did suggest $55 billion in cuts (half from defense and half from the farm program), coupled with $55 billion in new taxes—mostly from a proposal that already failed to pass the Democratic-controlled Senate last year. But this was a halfhearted public-relations gesture.

    The Senate Democratic proposal also violates Mr. Obama’s campaign pledge of a “balanced” deficit reduction that consists of $2.50 in spending cuts for every $1 of new revenue. In December, the president received $600 billion in new taxes, which should now be matched with $1.5 trillion in spending cuts, according to his definition of balance. That hasn’t happened.

    Mr. Obama is a once-in-a-generation demagogue with a compliant press corps. So in coming weeks, we will be subjected to a slew of presidential photo-ops with those whom he claims will lose jobs because of a 2.3% cut in future federal spending.

    The looming sequester is perilous for both political parties. The Feb. 4 Quinnipiac poll reported that only 22% of Americans believe the sequester should take effect. Yet a Feb. 6 Fox poll says 73% believe cutting spending now would help strengthen the economy, and in a Jan. 18 Fox poll, 83% said spending is out of control.

    To win public opinion to their side, Republicans will need a proactive strategy that shows the GOP is committed to restrain spending, make cuts as smartly as possible, and keep the government running.

    It won’t be easy, given the president’s intrinsic advantages and bigger megaphone. The Republicans only have the facts on their side. Sometimes that’s enough.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/UHE4MJP5FHMFIEAOGEQHETUGDQ Rvn_sgt6768

      Nice post. Same as the earlier post by a different name you used on another Memo thread. Guess that means you are a TROLL. Need I say any more?

    • WhutHeSaid

      Wow — that was an awful lot of gas to expend just to say that Republicans are unhappy about losing.

      The majority of Americans not only support most of President Obama’s positions, but they also clearly lay blame on Congressional Republicans for FAILING to act responsibly. Indeed history has proven that Republicans only TALK about financial responsibility, but in practice they are the absolute monarchs of runaway federal spending growth. It is a historical fact that EVERY Republican President in the last 30 years grew federal spending at a faster rate than EVERY Democratic President. Period.

      Facts are those inconvenient little points that tend to take the wind out of the sails of even the windiest of arguments — like your over-sized blast of hot gas (above).

      • plc97477

        well said, well said

    • TheSkalawag929

      You sir are a willing dupe that obviously relies solely on Faux Noise and the wrong-wing echo chamber for your news and information.

      You appear to be the kind of person that believes that the horizon is the end of the world.

    • Mikey7a

      I’m probably the least educated person on this blog. That being said Empiremed….Austerity never worked, and will never work. Spending is NOT the problem, Revenue IS the problem! Create jobs for infrastructure, health care, EDUCATION.

      • plc97477

        I would like to refute your claim of “least educated”. sounds to me like you know a bunch.

    • ococoob

      I don’t hold any credence to you and FoxNews, pal! You’re quoting their statistics is grossly biased and unfair.

  • lambypie

    We need to reduce health care cost by practical measures such as lowering the cost for services rendered. Why would a hospital charge or even medicare and medicaid pay the prices they do. Why does an aspirin cost $20.00 . Why do they get away with it?

    • http://openid.aol.com/lenuc LenUc

      Hospitals may charge $20 for an aspirin but medicare and insurance company’s won’t pay that amount. They have set charges that they will pay.

      As to the charges that hospitals bill. They charge for the people that are uninsured and can’t pay. That’s one of the reasons health care costs will be lower if we have universal coverage

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/IQNV5NV2RS7A7XMJKYHLRBZZ5A Betta

        Ummmm, I think you need to do some research. Obamacare is faltering. The insurance pool of the sickest people is running out of money. Yes, that’s right. More than half of the money has been spent already and they currently can’t accept new people on their rolls.

        Additionally, insurance premiums have gone up for those who pay for their insurance and people are taking home less in their paychecks than they were last year. See, BO raised everybody’s taxes when he said he wouldn’t on the middle class. Well, sorry, but he lied to you.

        Universal coverage will not be cheaper. In fact, it is costing individuals and businesses more. Are you guys beginning to see a pattern of how things are going here? Please open your eyes.

        • latebloomingrandma

          Since 2005, our insurance premium has gone up every year, until finally in 2012 it reached double the amout since the 2005 level. Imagine our surprise that in 2013 our premiums went down!.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/HGC4BGWVYXV76PHZBPSPOOU5GA Independent1

      They charge exhorbitant prices to make up for the deadbeats who they’re forced to provide care for but who don’t have insurance and end up not paying for their care. And millions of those who don’t have insurance are couples who could afford insurance but because they know an ER has to treat them if they have what they consider to be an emergency, they go without insurance. Unfortunately, some of these folks, although maybe younger, get into an auto accident or contract a bad illness that requires weeks of hospital treatments; which sometimes runs up bills of hundreds of thousands of dollars that they can’t pay. So to recoup these lost monies the hospital has incurred, they often charge rediculous amounts for normal treatment. An example was one of my grandsons who injured his leg playing a high school soccer game and required 8 stitches from the ER; the ER charge for putting in the 8 stitches was $1,500; but what was even worse was they wanted $800 to remove the 8 stitches a couple weeks later – something that probably would have taken a nurse a couple minutes to do. Kind of gives you an idea of just how much hospitals, and even doctors, labs and other healthcare providers are padding their bills because of deadbeats. Had my grandson been able to go to a doctor’s office on the spur of the moment, his treatments probably would have cost less than $100/visit.

      (My use of the term deadbeats is not intended to be descriptive of everyone who has the need for medical care that they can’t afford to pay for. I used the term deadbeats here primarily to describe those individuals who could well afford to purchase insurance but choose not to because they know that should they need emergency care, healthcare providers are legally bound to provide them with medical care even if they don’t have insurance and could not afford the care on their own. These people know full well that they are the primary cause of why America’s healthcare is the most expensive in the world, and that they will most likely be foisting the cost of the care they can’t pay for on you, me and everyone else who does have insurance; through much higher costs for every procedure healthcare providers give which result in the need for higher than necessary insurance premiums which makes insurance unaffordable to even more Americans.)

      • WhutHeSaid

        Ever wonder who those deadbeats are? Just look at the so-called red states, whose residents squeal about ‘evil liberals’ spending too much. Those are the same states that suck up the vast majority of federal tax dollars from the so-called blue states. The deadbeats themselves are always the ones squealing the loudest about taxes while trying every trick in the book to avoid paying their share.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/X2KKGDYW2F5T5XUT6233KBNWSI robert

          hey Whut, plus, the reason these red states get so much social aide and federal help is because these republican/tea bags know that their sequester would injure Americans more than anybody else, so they simply take care of their own, and to hell with the rest of us. It’s all out of their Acme Bag O’ Tricks (dirty tricks).

      • plc97477

        You didn’t talk about the amount that ceos take of that $20.00 for an aspirin

    • TheSkalawag929

      I think the answer to your why questions is because they can.
      I think a better question is how do they get away with it.

    • latebloomingrandma

      The biggest expense in hospitals are the salaries. The “room charge” capture many items, including a boatload of salaries, and not enough to cover all these expenses. Meds and gauze, etc. can be “charged” for, and are usually way marked up to capture the costs of salaries. Pharmacist make a pretty good wage.

    • plc97477

      because reagan privatized the health care industry making it possible to screw everyone

  • cpbis

    Europe took the austerity approach in trying to solve their economic problems and it failed miserably which has been the case throughout history. We must find inefficiencies and reduce waste but more importantly this is the time for the government to spend money on programs such as our decaying infrastructure which will add some 2 million jobs and improve our overall economy. Most economists agree with that approach as do Simpson/ Bowles and, of course, our President.

    • TheSkalawag929

      We can borrow money for those projects now while the money is cheap or we can wait until the interest rates go way up and then borrow the money.

      Which option do you think our illustrious congress will choose?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/IQNV5NV2RS7A7XMJKYHLRBZZ5A Betta

        Borrow more money and increase the debt? Really? It is the borrowing, fraud and waste going on now that is the problem. We borrow 46 cents for every dollar spent. This is not sustainable. Surely you see that no matter what BO is telling you.

        As of Dec 10, 2012 the US borrows $0.46 for every dollar spent. Can you imagine that? Rounded up that is 50 cents borrowed for every dollar because of course there’s fees added on somewhere.

        We are going deeper and deeper and deeper in debt every second, down a deep dark black hole in a firey hand basket to hell. How do you think it will end? It certainly can’t go on forever. Eventually something’s gonna give and it ain’t going to be pretty.

        • TheSkalawag929

          Okay get rid of the fraud and waste which reduces spending by 2/3 then we will only be borrowing 15 cents for every dollar we spend.
          Next use the money that we borrow at interest rates that are the lowest that they have ever been to fix our infrastructure which is in dire need of repair.

          By doing this we can begin to put people back to work. This in turn decreases the unemployment rolls and decreases government spending. It will also stimulate the economy there by increasing the tax base and begin putting money in federal, state and local coffers. That would be a win all the way around.

          The alternative, which is what you propose with spending cuts, doesn’t fix our infrastructure. It increases the number of people eligible for unemployment through layoffs which would be more government spending not less. It would also reduce the tax base which means less money coming in to pay for the things we MUST do which leads to more deficit borrowing and spiraling deeper into debt. The exact opposite of what you say you want.

          • plc97477

            and waiting until infrastructure is worse just costs more money in the long run. maintaining it would be much more cost effective

          • TheSkalawag929

            Amen. Your preaching to the choir here.

      • plc97477

        they will choose to wait until there is a repugnic in the white house before making up their minds. then it will be back to spending like drunken sailors

        • TheSkalawag929

          Hopefully the rethuglicans won’t have that choice after the 2014 elections. If we can convince the democratic base that it is in our best interest to get out and vote like we did for the 2012 election we will once again hear the sweet refrain Madame Speaker Mrs. Nancy Pelosi.

          Get out the vote 2014.

  • deekai

    We might try not buying planes that are not flown, tanks that are not used and subsidies to the oil companies

    • Samizzy

      What subsidies to Oil Companies ?? Like GE with No Taxes or Auto Industry with bail-outs

      • DurdyDawg

        Yes! Those as well. Why do we need to continue to give the oil companies major tax breaks and incentives?.. Too many times they’ve crowed about ‘Record’ profits yet they keep holding out their hands.. Why do we have to give major tax breaks to ANY big corporation? We don’t and that’s a fact but the g’ment works with nonsensical rules.. For instance, to receive aid (of any kind) is tough as rocks to acquire but once awarded, it takes a congressional mandate to reverse this motion.. Once upon a time a long time ago, the oil moguls and corporate toads were in a position where they needed these entitlements’ in order to survive.. After much begging and pleading they were awarded this (corporate) welfare.. Now that they’ve risen above those dire times, when this welfare is no longer needed, nay! when it should be eliminated (or at least reduced) because what they now receive is a pittance of the profit they make (using the entitlements as petty cash now) the law makers refuse to even look into it, probably because they feel if they did eliminate it that they would be seen as crooks for awarding it in the first place, so.. the wheels just keeps turning and all remains right in this silly swamp pool that we call politics..

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jim-Myers/100001512942781 Jim Myers

    And the spineless jellyfish once again slime around the edges of the problem. (Sorry for any insult to the jellyfish of the world.)

    The TURD PARTY wants President Obama to propose cuts. That way, they can appose the cuts, and blame the “Liberals” for stalling the negotiations.

    It’s time for them to “GROW A SPINE” and actually tell the public who should suffer the most in order to avoid sequestration.

    I certainly hope President Obama does not fall for this blatant attack. Let Congress propose the cuts. They are the ones who want to make cuts to the Domestic side of the Ledger. And only programs that help the neediest of Americans.

    This is a case of the GOP allowing the Nation to go over the cliff, while trying to figure out how to blame it on the Democrats.

    • WhutHeSaid

      Actually I believe that they are actively doing their level best to drive the Nation over the cliff, knowing full well that the Democrats will do what is necessary to avoid it. Once the Democrats manage to dig the country out of the mess created by the Republicans the GOP will naturally complain about the shovel that they used to do it with.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/IQNV5NV2RS7A7XMJKYHLRBZZ5A Betta

      “The TURD PARTY wants President Obama to propose cuts. That way, they can appose the cuts, and blame the “Liberals” for stalling the negotiations.”

      Oh come on now. That doesn’t make any sense at all.

      “It’s time for them to “GROW A SPINE” and actually tell the public who should suffer the most in order to avoid sequestration.”

      Tell the public who should suffer the most? Do you hear yourself? That’s sheeple talk. Why would you give someone that kind of authority over you?

  • JohnRNC

    I find it interesting that federal employees are facing 22 Furlough days – approximately 1 day per 2 week pay period – a 10% cut in pay – The Congress experiences no salary cut and theirs are significantly higher than the majority of those taking the 10% pay cut.

    And this is not just lost wages. It’s lost retirement contributions, lost tax revenue, not to mention to lost buying power. Those that live paycheck to paycheck may have trouble keeping up with their mortgages and other bills.

    I know the Republicans are hoping to do damage to Obama with this, but the responsibility to handle the Budget lies with the Congress and they are refusing to compromise. They keep saying that they have already given ground on revenue increases, but so have the democrats on spending cuts – repeatedly over the last 2 years – it has all been about spending cuts until the most recent action, but there is still more to do with the tax structure. There is still an enormous amount of tax avoidance going on out there. If those revenues could be collected it would go a long way toward resolving our debt issues.

    • TheSkalawag929

      I think that congress should be taken off salary and put on a time clock.

      Let them punch in and out and get paid for the time on their time card. They could even get time and a half and double time for the time they WORK over forty hours per week and they can pay for part of their own health care out of pocket like everyone else.

      With the House being in session nineteen days and the Senate thirteeen days so far this year think how much money we would have save with scheduling like that.

  • montanabill

    Let’s assume for a moment that we couldn’t borrow any more money and that everyone had to pay the taxes necessary to keep up with our current and projected spending. Then would they still be against cuts?

    • WhutHeSaid

      While we are day-dreaming, let’s imagine what this country would be like if we went directly from the Clinton Administration to the Obama Administration, without the intervening Republican Administration that created such a big mess. Then we wouldn’t need to be talking about digging out of such a hole, and the GOP might be able to actually find people to believe that they had solutions, rather than annoy an American public that remembers all too well how their ideas worked out the last time.

      • DurdyDawg

        Hmmm! Let’s see.. An assumption or a day-dream.. I think I’ll take door number two.. Nice come back Whut.

  • jakenhyde

    The one category that was omitted on the chart was the one about cutting the salaries of those drones who sit in congress in DC and, most of all, cutting their obscene pensions.

  • Kurt CPI

    Of course Americans oppose almost every spending cut! Look at the poll results cited in the article. They support cuts that affect offshore spending and those that involve government agencies. They oppose anything that might affect their own lifestyle. This like saying, “Children oppose most cuts to free school lunch programs”. They’d support cuts to lunches at other schools, and they’d support cuts to program administration. The fact remains we spend waaayyyy more than we take in. In fact after covering JUST THE INTEREST on treasury bonds (owed to the Federal Reserve for currency), federal tax revenues are all but spent. MOST of our government expenses are financed with debt. How long does this opposition think they can keep dipping into the well?

    • WhutHeSaid

      The kings of runaway federal spending have always been the Republicans, who only see spending as a national crisis once they have been voted out of office. The real — and only — way to address the deficit is by growing the economy to the point where tax revenues are coming in at a healthy clip. Not only did the last Republican Administration fritter away the surplus left over by the last Democratic Administration, they nearly wrecked the entire world economy. Only now that they are out of power do they see the very situation that they caused as an emergency, yet they are trying everything within their power to obstruct any progress by the current administration.

      The last thing we need is advice from the very same wrecking crew that created this mess. What is needed is for them to shut up, realize that their turn is up, and start working in the best interests of the entire country. Maybe if they do that much people may start to believe what they have to say in, oh, 10 or 20 years from now.

    • TheSkalawag929

      Lets assume that you make X amount of money per year and you have cut your spending down to the barest of minimums and you’re still in the hole. What is your best option?

      Most people would say increase your revenue.

      You on the other hand would probably say cut more spending.

  • nobsartist

    I propose that NO elected official be paid until the fiscal issue is solved in a way that benifieits America, not the fuckers feeding at the trough of the American taxpayer.

    Like Jefferson said, we need to replace the entire government. The time is now.

    No deficit resolution, tar and feathers for ALL political hacks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.robertson.sr Robert P. Robertson

    The Cowardly Lion Boehner says that it’s President Obama’s sequester, but it was the Republican Party who created the sequester concept long before Mr. Obama became president. They are using it as it was intended, to hold a sword over the president’s head to sign onto the cuts they have wanted from the beginning. The president doesn’t make budgets, that’s the job of Congress and the Senate. President Obama will not sign onto anything that will adversely impact the American people. The Republican/Tea Bags don’t get that. They hate the fact that President Obama is a true American President, that he will not sell out his country nor his countrymen, and he will not go along with a bunch of treacherous traitors hell bent on bankrupting America for the sake of wealth.

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.robertson.sr Robert P. Robertson

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. . . ZZZZZZZZZZZZ . . .ZZZZZZZZZZ. . . What, you said something, empiremed? I was just resting my eyes.

    • TheSkalawag929

      No worries. You’ve probably heard it all before. Same old wrong-wing BS talking points.

  • lambypie

    TO: Independent
    I don’t know if you are aware but there are programs available to assist those who have no insurance plus what they don’t get from those programs are written off as tax write offs. All of it. So my heart does not break for profit making hospital care and also not everyone is a “dead beat” ! Not having any kind of insurance is real scary all of a sudden you are hit with a catastrophic health issue. People living just above the poverty line and have no health care because it is cost prohibitive have only those programs. People can’t afford insurances that cost $300 a month. Food and clothing and essentials are their priorities. Many doctors expect to be paid when you walk in the door and for senior citizens on medicare many doctors will not except medicare so seniors go without. Lets face it America’s Health Care System IS BROKE and it needs fixing , contrary to popular belief.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/HGC4BGWVYXV76PHZBPSPOOU5GA Independent1

      I fully understand what you’re saying and apologize if my use of the word deadbeats seemed a bit callous. I used the term only from the standpoint of the healthcare providers, and only to describe a huge problem for them which is people who sometimes get lots of care and are not able to pay their bills (irrespective of their financial condition these people are deadbeats to the healthcare industry). I understand that there are millions of folks in financial situations that prohibit them getting insurance and certainly sympathize with them , but unfortunately I believe, that of the 40-50 million people in America who apparently don’t have insurance, the biggest majority (10s of millions of Americans), are those who are purposely choosing to go without insurance thinking that should a medical emergency arise, they can rush to the ER and get medical treatment while foisting the bill for that on you and me – even though they earn enough to buy insurance (these are true DEADBEATS!!).

      What’s unfortunate, is that the practice of these 10s of millions of Americans who choose to go without insurance on the CHANCE they won’t need medical care, and then ending up needing sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars of care because they were in an accident or contracted the wrong disease, is the single biggest cause of why America’s healtchare is the most expensive in the world. And by the way, writing off these loses as tax deductions, doesn’t help in paying the bills for hospitals, doctors, labs and many other healthcare providers that get shortchanged by these true DEADBEATS – people who could well afford insurance but choose not too and then end up needing the care and foisting the costs on you. me and everyone else by drastically driving up the costs of virtually every healthcare procedure.

      And keep in mind to, when the costs of every procedure healthcare providers charge for are jacked up 4-8 or more times, the negotiated costs that insurance companies will pay are much higher than need be,which serves only to drive up the insurance companies’ premiums;which in turn makes insurance even more unaffordable to millions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.robertson.sr Robert P. Robertson

    Montanabill, that’s like assuming that if a frog had wings, it wouldn’t wear the skin off of its ass everytime it jumped. Make the cuts where it’s neccessary. America ought to assess the off-shore and overseas bank accounts of the wealthy who only have their money in them to evade paying their fair share of taxes to their government. We ought to assess how these politicians go into office in debt and leave office filthy rich off of our backs. We ought to assess the government welfare paid to industries and corporations who outsource their employment, depriving Americans of these jobs. Speaking of welfare, we need to relegate politicians to ACA instead of the special health care they and their families are enjoying off of our backs, and assess the worth of the lifetime pensions they receive after their service, and that if they become employed afterwards and earn more than those pensions, they get nothing, the same as they do the elderly on Social Security. We need to take a hard look at ALL of the over spending we do instead of picking on the helpless and the elderly. That way, we won’t be wearing the skin off of our asses every time we jump.

  • adriancrutch

    Should have let the BANKS FAIL! screw them ALL! NOW! WE GOT A REAL BIG PROBLEM! A FEDERAL RESERVE WITH NO MORE OPTIONS!

  • ralphkr

    When a politician says that he is against defense cuts because it shall damage national security what he is really saying is that it shall reduce the amount of military money being wasted in his district which shall damage said politician’s job security. I spent the first 20 years of my life in a super conservative super Christian state and I learned in school that you judged your congressman by how much Federal money he could siphon to his district.

  • Urbane_Gorilla

    it’s because our citizens don’t know how much we spend where that they are at a loss when it comes to choosing what to cut. If they knew that we spend $1.08 Trillion per year or 30% of our budget on defense, would they really consider that acceptable? If they knew we gave Israel $8 Billion per year and Egypt another $1.3 Billion to play nice with them, would they find that acceptable? If they knew that Human Services (Includes Medicare and Medicaid) costs us $768 Billion per year because we won’t fix the system, would they accept that we spend twice as much as any other developed nation? Our Founders expected an informed electorate, yet our budget is purposely obfuscated so we never really know what costs what, leaving us at the mercy of our Congressmen and their lobbyists.

    • TheSkalawag929

      The reason why Americans don’t know what the government spends their money on is because they don’t want to know.

      You found out so they should be able to find out too. The American people would rather have someone else do all the leg work and then sit back and complain about the results.

      • Urbane_Gorilla

        I think it’s easy to sit back and watch Oprah, or FOX TV and ignore the real details. I’m not ready to beat up my fellow Americans over it though for a three reasons : (1) Our educational system doesn’t promote critical thinking, (2) Our Govt and the media purposely hides reality from us and (3) Most Americans really do work pretty hard and do want to return home and chill out, (which is a reasonable expectation), while doing what we are all trained to do…Leave the business to the professionals. If you train a dog to be a lapdog, you can hardly gripe at it for not being a watchdog… We’ve all been trained from birth to fit in and to not question- Sadly.

        • TheSkalawag929

          I can not speak to the Oprah and Fox syndrome because I don’t watch that type of television.

          I don’t want to beat up on my fellow Americans either. I was just stating an observation.

          Our education system has become what we have allowed it to become. Which is not to say that it can’t be fixed. We just have to protect it and not allow it to be placed on the chopping block so that a very small minority reaps all the rewards at the expense of the majority.

          I don’t think that our government is hiding things from us so much as it is becoming more and more dysfunctional and ideologically driven. The media on the other hand is being forced to report before verifying because of 24 hour news cycle and the profit driven need to be first rather than right.

          I agree that we Americans do work hard and want to enjoy our leisure time but that doesn’t absolve us from keeping up with what is going on around us. After all if we don’t we will end up working harder and falling further behind.

          As to leaving business to the professionals I would say that that is unwise considering the sad state of our educational system which you alluded to earlier. And old dogs can learn new tricks if sufficiently motivated.

          • Urbane_Gorilla

            I don;t watch FOX or Oprah either. As an ex-teacher and coming from a family of educators, I don’t know what to do about US education. If I had to point a finger, I’d have to say that US families don’t value schooling any longer. Anything not appreciated tends to fall by the wayside.

            As to obfuscation, I do have to disagree with you. Our budget is parceled out in such a way as to diminish our defense costs. I can’t think of any reason to do so except as a means of fooling the casual reader. If you add Homeland Security, Veteran’s Administration, and another dozen little pieces to our $700Billion+ Pentagon Budget, you actually come to $1.08 Trillion, or about 30% of our yearly discretionary spending….Yet Congress focuses on the horrors of Social Security, which is separately funded and not part of our budget per se. Res ipsa loquitur. It speaks for itself.

    • plc97477

      caused a large part by the fact that we do not have journalism that deserves the name anymore

      • Urbane_Gorilla

        You’re correct. I don’t watch US TV News for that reason. I do watch overseas news. But the days of Woodward and Bernstein are long gone.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/IQNV5NV2RS7A7XMJKYHLRBZZ5A Betta

    How about we stop all foreign aid? That’s a good place to cut spending. The money we send to other countries is disgusting. Tell everybody our purse is CLOSED! And so are our borders.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dominick.vila.1 Dominick Vila

    Most Americans want a strong military, but we don’t want a wasteful military that spends billions of dollars building a new carrier group when we have already match the total number of carrier groups in the world combined. At a time when our only potential military contenders, China and Russia, are engaged in massive economic growth, improvements in standard of living, rebuilding their infrastructure, and focus on education, the last thing we need is a focus on military adventurism influenced by cultural and religious intolerance.
    While we are at it, let’s get rid of tax loopholes that favor the wealthy, subsidies to sectors of our economy that are posting record profits and investing overseas instead of in the USA, and punish companies that invest abroad by imposing high tariffs on their products.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/LIOWPV3RG2BI6EUJVVKTE6KSQU Charles

    Cut all forgian aid out , Get out the wars we started in all forgian countries. Look At Russia, China,….They have money,.THere not giving there money away to all these forgien countries.There building a big militery,Taking care of there on people. …………..But not the USA. They rather borrow money. Countinue gining money to Isreal, eptgy, and many other countries. Have to borrow it. And give this money for forgien aid. How stupied does that make. Our USA goverment look. Compare to China and Russia..WATCH WHAT I AM SAYING. THE USA WELL ON IT WAY TO BE THE NUMBER 3 COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.Russia and China are passing us up…………………………………Make me sad . Because the USA president,seneate,congress……………..Destoyeing our country.Barrowing,spending,starting wars ,forgien aid,,,,MASSY DRAMA BETWEEN THE DEM. AND REPUBLICAN PARTY……………WHILE ALL THIS IS HAPPING,……China and Russia in the next 10 years . Will be the supper powers and will be number 3 supper power. ……………………Because our congress ,seante, president., Can!t do good for the people. All about them……………………Called STUPIED……………JUST LIKE FORREST GUMP………………..STUPIED IS THAT STUPIED DOES…………………..Mean while Russia and China take care there of there on people. …………………………..While the USA put Isreal, Eptgy, all there others countries first.By civing them moeny . We do not have…………………..So that is the first answer. Cut there first.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/W6CMDMYSZXSFZAW54T3VVSG2VI Mem

    Americans don’t want budget cuts, don’t want tax increases, just want it all as usual. just goes to show, congerss does really represent the people. They all want it both ways.

  • http://www.facebook.com/commserver Jim Lou

    It is easy to cut. Where? Just cut anything that doesn’t affect me.

  • http://twitter.com/CassSpeaks Cassandra Dean

    Since foreign aid isn’t on the list, I assume “help to world’s needy” is supposed to be it.

    Foreign aid is mostly military and goes mostly to Israel.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/X2KKGDYW2F5T5XUT6233KBNWSI robert

    Let’s analyze where the federal government gets it’s money to operate. It doesn’t make it’s own money, and these days, it is hardly self-sufficient. Let’s look at where it gets it’s money. . . Taxes. We are taxed from the moment we go to sleep, through our repose, and from the moment we awake. All of our activities are taxed from a state and federal level, from the cradle to the grave and sometimes even beyond the grave. As cute as the phrase sounds “I don’t want slackers living off of MY tax dollar!” or “Welfare cheats living off of MY hard earned tax dollars!” an individual is not the only person paying taxes. Even if there are slackers living off the government dole, our tax dollars, they too had been hard working Americans at one time or other and were paying taxes, plus any money they receive is used to purchase items, pay rents and utilities that are taxed. So, to hear the disingenuous claim of “MY tax dollars!” WE ALL PAY TAXES in one form or another whether we like it or not. One may not like the way their tax dollars are being spent, and vice versa, but it goes into one trough to be used for many, many things that many of us disagree with and many of us agree with. Those tax dollars goes to pay for things the average citizen would raise hell about were they to become aware of it. But, the main source of revenue comes from income tax, Social Security, Workman’s Comp. With sales taxes, sin taxes, traffic tickets, and laws legislated to penalize (tax) us, nearly 340m people in America, revenue runs into the trillions of dollars annually. As an American, I don’t mind making that yearly investment in my country. It is a social contract that we have as Americans to our America that our country will care for us in our times of need, and it doesn’t bother me that part of that is going toward helping a fellow American who is less fortunate than myself. There are systems in place to catch fraud, plus it is incumbant on us to report and expose fraudulence. I have a serious problem with our tax dollars going into the welfare system of industries and corporations who outsource their businesses and deprive Americans of employment, then redirect their products to jobless Americans to purchase. It unemploys Americans and removes revenues from America that it needs to continue to function. I have a problem with the welfare given to politicians who enter office broke and in debt, then leave office wealthy and empowered with contacts and contracts that continue the personal wealth they built off of our backs while in office. It is the height of hypocrisy to hear them castigate welfare when they are the very recepients of the system. It is our taxes that pay for these things. It is nothing that we have to beg for, that we are “given” by some lordly politician. It is what we have invested in our country, OUR MONEY, and these POLITICIANS WORK FOR US. We are Americans, and WE own America. The United States stands for US. We need to get that understanding before we condemn the less fortunate, the helpless, and the elderly among us as “slackers”, “moochers”, and “dead beats”. What we do to the least of these, we do unto God.

  • charleo1

    It seems to me, Republicans have made their policies very clear. From the Ryan Budget, which
    every Republican in both Houses of Congress voted in the affirmative. Cuts Government programs
    that help the Middle, and lower income people, attend college, train, or retrain for new jobs,
    access child care, and health care, fund research, or provide funds to States to modernized,
    and repair infrastructure. In short, cut investment in people, and public works. Mr. Ryan’s budget
    also cut taxes on capital gains, and corporations, while increasing expenditures for the military. It also changed Medicare in 8 to 10 years, from a guaranteed benefit program, to a privatized plan that would be offered by for profit insurance cos., subsidized, or partially subsidized, by a voucher, or check from the Federal Government. Also, the Federal Government’s Medicaid’s payments to
    the States for low income, and indigent care, would become a grant, without the provision the
    funds carry now, that the money actually be used to pay healthcare costs. So, it could at the
    used at the discretion of a Governor to say, give it to a corporation as an incentive to create
    jobs. Or perhaps help a very fortunate hospital chain owner, purchase the public hospitals,
    and void the provision of mandatory care for the poor. This, was hailed by Republicans as a,
    “Bold, and courageous step in the right direction!” That balanced America’s books in a mere
    30 years! What Americans want is a return to a more equitable system. Where profits in the
    public sector translates to prosperity for the average citizen. What Americans see is huge, too
    big to fail, and too big to regulate, multi-national conglomerates enjoying record increases of 100% or more, while at the same time, American’s income has stagnated, and unemployment, and
    under employment continues to be the case. What Americans do not support is tax breaks that
    pay the expenses incurred by a company moving it’s operations out of the Country. And, what
    Americans see, for their generosity to many of the largest employers, is the extra cash put in
    the hands of business, so they can expand, and create more jobs. Is used instead to buy out
    the competition, capture more of the market share, lay off employees, and without the worry
    of a competitor, they may increase the price of their products, and services. And put a few more
    Americans on the unemployment rolls. That, and listen to Republican politicians claim, the
    one thing we shouldn’t do, is increase the taxes on the job creators.

  • http://www.facebook.com/spookpekes2 LaRae Bailey

    I would like to know were they got the 1508 to vote on these items. I went through them and 5 would stay the same and the rest would decrease in a huge way but would put all federal employees and politicians in there with significant pay and benefit cuts. These clowns are guilty for the mess this country is in they donothing in this countries best interests. They are a greedy bunch of fear mongering wastes of our time and our money.

  • http://twitter.com/Snowman55403 Ralf W

    Actually, per this poll, Americans opposed cutting all 19. Yes, for aid to the world’s poor, 48% said cut. But 49% said either stay the same or add. So a tiny plurality favored the same or more over a cut.
    More broadly, in effect, this poll confirms that deficits matter but cutting spending sucks, so the one reasonable approach is … (drumroll please) … raising taxes!

  • Pingback: The National Memo » Republicans Outraged After Sequester Forces Cancellation Of White House Tours

  • rustacus21

    Is this suppose to be a surprise or something? Or is this what we voted for last November? Or are we not in the same dimension or on the same planet? Just curious…

scroll to top