Representative Darin LaHood thinks: “Federal spending is out of control. The national debt has doubled over the last 10 years, from $10.6 trillion to $21 trillion. Paying interest on our debt alone will consume more and more of our annual budget until we get our spending in check, let alone the power it gives to the countries that own our debt. Our debt crisis is not due to the fact that Americans are taxed too little, it is due to the fact that Washington spends too much. We have to work to slash wasteful spending and consolidate or eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs that are riddled with waste, fraud, and abuse. As a father of three, I do not want to leave the burden of our tremendous national debt on future generations.” (Source: https://lahood.house.gov/federal-spending)
“Waste, fraud, and abuse.” Ugh. Here we go again.
That’s forty year old Reagan-esque blather regurgitated by Mr. LaHood.
Cut taxes without cutting programs. Increase the national debt. That was the Reagan way. Apparently, it’s the Darin LaHood way, too.
Did you know that Dwight Eisenhower was the last Republican president to submit a balanced budget to Congress? (Source: https://www.answers.com/united-states-government/Which_republican_president_balanced_a_budget)
In short -- Republicans since Eisenhower have been phonies on federal spending and deficits. Absolute fiscal phonies.
As noted in the Economics tab, Mr. LaHood is a champion of the budget-busting Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Portions of the TCJA is due for either renewal or sunset next year. Mr. LaHood wants to see them renewed. "The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut taxes substantially from 2018 through 2025. The resulting deficits are adding $1 to $2 trillion to the federal debt.” (Source: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-did-tcja-affect-federal-budget-outlook)
The Representative is a deficit hawk? Oh, please. Look. It’s simple math. If we’re to cut taxes (and, as the TCJA does, simultaneously skew those cuts heavily to corporations and the wealthy) -- then spending must be reduced if the deficit is to be curbed.
Perhaps I’m missing something, but -- I’m unaware of Mr. LaHood suggesting any cuts in federal spending. Any. So here he goes again: cut taxes, don’t adjust spending, balloon the national debt.
There are plenty of things ripe for cutting – if only the Congress had the will. Let’s look at three examples.
Example 1: corporate welfare. “Federal subsidies to U.S. businesses now cost American taxpayers nearly $100 billion a year. If all corporate welfare programs were eliminated...Congress could cut the personal and corporate income tax by 10 percent across the board.” Source: https://www.hoover.org/research/welfare-well-how-business-subsidies-fleece-taxpayers By the way – why do corporate interests need subsidies in the first place? What ever happened to capitalism in America?
Example 2: reduce our nuclear weapons arsenal. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reports that “(i)n May 2024, the US Department of Defense maintained an estimated stockpile of approximately 3,708 nuclear warheads…” Source: https://thebulletin.org/premium/2024-05/united-states-nuclear-weapons-2024/ Do we really need all of those? The Congressional Budget Office estimates costs of “...$756 billion over the 2023–2032 period, or an average of just over $75 billion a year...” for nuclear weapons. (Source: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59365)
Example 3: fossil fuels. “Calculating the cost of U.S. subsidies for the fossil fuel industry is complex because the incentives stretch across the U.S. tax code, but estimates range from $10 to $50 billion per year.” (Source: ttps://www.reuters.com/business/energy/biden-budget-target-us-fossil-fuel-subsidies-2023-03-09/)
Subsidize fossil fuels while climate change accelerates? Oh, please. Actually, fossil fuel subsidies are entirely consistent with Mr. LaHood’s thinking: he’s a climate change denier. (Source: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/climate-deniers-of-the-118th-congress/)
In summation: we need to address federal spending and federal deficits with laser-like focus. Let’s begin by straightening out the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA):
Make it fair. As it now stands, the TCJA heavily favors corporations and the wealthy.
Make it neutral. Restructure the TCJA in ways that don't add to the federal deficit.
Make it progressive. In other words, levy income taxes on a stair-step basis: the more you earn, the higher percentage you pay.
It probably will take years – generations, perhaps – to reduce significantly the federal deficit. We owe it to ourselves, and those who follow us, to do so.
And we must begin to do so now. NOW.