President Trump and Elon Musk have proposed a government efficiency commission designed to cut $2T from the federal government. In addition, The Washington Post published a reaction to this plan that empathized with the government workers, many of whom live in DC, Northern Virginia, and Maryland, who are resigned to the fact that their jobs are on the chopping block. According to the Post,
Part of Trump’s plan, as outlined in Agenda47, his campaign platform, has included moving up to 100,000 federal government positions “out of Washington to places filled with patriots who love America” — a move decried by local leaders who fear it would crater the regional economy.
Of course, the unions for government employees are up in arms, claiming there is no “Deep State.” Cutting the federal government by $2T is a good start. Again, from the Washington Post:
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest union representing federal employees, with 800,000 members, on Wednesday sounded a defiant tone, vowing to “not stand by and let any political leader — regardless of their political affiliation — run roughshod over the Constitution and our laws.”
It is unclear how cutting $2T in government spending would run roughshod over the Constitution. My reading of the Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to be as overreaching and tyrannical as it has become. Read the 10th Ammendment!
One of the reasons the government fears those annual threats to shut down is because they are afraid people will see we can get along fine without them, thank you.
“Until 1930, Federal spending was less than 5 per cent of the national income except during or just after major wars (the War of 1812, the Civil War, World War I). With the same exceptions, local and state governments spent several times as much as the Federal government. For example, in 1930, Federal spending was 4 per cent of national income; state and local spending, 11 per cent. Spending at all levels of government combined thus amounted to roughly 15 per cent of the national income.
“… From 1789 to 1930, residents of the U.S. never spent more than about 15 per cent of their income on the expenses of government. In the past four decades, that fraction has nearly tripled and is now about 40 per cent.
“…There is hardly one among us who believes that he is getting his money’s worth for the nearly half of his income that government––Federal, state, and local––spends for him. Yet so long as we simply blame waste and bureaucracy, but continue to believe in the omnipotence and beneficence of government, the trend toward ever bigger government will continue.
“…That trend will stop only when and if we come to recognize that government is the problem, not the solution; that the general welfare requires that we dethrone the Federal government from its role as Big Brother and restore it to its historic role as keeper of the peace and umpire.” [my emphasis]
In the 1980s, the towns around military bases made it clear that they had no respect for soldiers. Their sentiment changed when based began to shut down during the Base Realignment and Closure Act. Suddenly, they realized how much of their local economies was driven by indirect support from soldiers (shopping in local stores, eating in local restaurants, renting local housing, etc.). Maryland, CD, and Northern Virginia are already whimpering that reducing federal bloat and moving other offices to other parts of the country will hurt their economies that still struggle due to government lockdowns. Is it a surprise that the top four jurisdictions for government workers (California, Maryland, Virginia, and DC) are all solidly “blue?”
While I can empathize with small business, restauranteurs, and merchants who will be collateral damage, the federal budget should be cut 90%, but $2T is a solid first step. If 10% is good enough for God, it is more than good enough for the federal government. Two trillion dollars are about a third of the federal budget. Cutting $2T will make spending less than collections ($45.T) according to USAFacts, but that does little to pay back the $33T debt. Cutting the budget 90% won’t necessarily eliminate all government programs. Can anyone name a federal office or program that is run efficiently and effectively? These kinds of draconian cuts will move a lot of programs to the States (if the people in those states see value in those programs), and perhaps federal organizations will cut dead wood and learn to operate efficiently.
Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, asserted that as much government as possible should be as local as possible. He asserted that the people are more able to judge whether they are getting their money’s worth from the local government than the federal government. They can also influence (and curtail) local spending more than federal spending. (Toward the end this video, Friedman gives his own opinions on which Federal departments should be abolished. His list is slightly different than mine.) Friedman said,
Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property. When government– in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the costs come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.
We as a nation must insist on stripping the Federal bureaucracy of most of its power, influence, and budget and push any functions deemed necessary by the people to the States where they will be more transparent, efficient, and influenced by the people.
Predictably the swamp is already conspiring to thwart the new administration by jamming through as many new regulations as possible before Comrade Biden leaves office. One can expect the administration to get massive pushback from unaccountable and unelected federal bureaucrats who all think they are smarter than the people they are supposed to be serving. On one of his few 2020 campaign ventures out of his basement, President Biden famously yelled “I don’t work for you!” to a factory worker. Having worked with many different parts of the federal government, my experiences is that that attitude is more common than not in federal workers and organizations. Many (most?) government workers think we work for them, when in fact, they work for us.
You can bet there are meetings occurring among the seniors in all federal agencies about how they are going to protect the swamp against President Trump and Elon Musk. CNN reported on 8 November how senior Pentagon officials are already meeting to plan strategies to thwart the President’s orders. It says something about the boldness and entitlement of the swap that they are willing to publicly admit they are engaged in these conversations.
During his first administration, Trump had to fight the swamp AND his own party. With control of the executive and legislative branches we can all hope that sweeping changes are going to occur between January and the midterm elections. If we are lucky, $2T is the beginning and will be followed by drastic reduction in awful constructs like income tax, property taxes, inheritance taxes, taxes on capital gains, and dozens of other hidden taxes designed to maintain the federal bloat and intrude in our lives. Let’s ignore the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Deep State and see if the Republicans are serious about reducing government. For a change.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA