Sign today.
Let's restore fiscal sanity.
Reject the debt.
It's time to get responsible.
Make a donation
Show your support.
Our Mission
Out-of-control government spending is the most pressing issue of our day. The Coalition to Reduce Spending is dedicated to advocating for reducing federal spending and balancing the budget. Continuing to live beyond our means will only jeopardize our country's future prosperity and security.
News

Louisiana Candidates Reject the Debt

By and large, the 2014 primary season has come to a close. With less than a month until the election, most states are done with everything but the last push of the election.

But there’s one notable exception: Louisiana. Perhaps the most unique “Jungle Primary,” all of the candidates run together — the top two vote-getters on November 4th advance to a December runoff if no one gets 50%.

So far in Louisiana, several candidates in key races and in both parties have signed the pledge to Reject the Debt, including Cassie Felder (LA-06), Capt. Bob Bell (LA-06), and Col. Rob Maness (LA-Sen.)

We continue to encourage all the candidates in Louisiana to go on the record with this straightforward commitment. Polls show voters want Congress to cut spending, and it’s time politicians listen to the people.

If you’re a voter in Louisiana, take a moment to review who’s gone on the record with spending — and who has not. And take a moment to encourage your favorite candidates or Congressmen to put their money where their mouth is.

Americans don’t know how the government spends money

Washington Post reports on one of the biggest challenges facing spending reformers: lack of information.

The Pew Research Center recently polled Americans on how much they know about events in the news (want to test yourself? go take their quiz). People were generally knowledgeable about items related to current events and debates — ISIS, Ukraine and the minimum wage. But when it comes to how much the government spends on various programs? Not so much.

Pew asked respondents which program the government spent the most money on: Social Security, transportation, foreign aid, or interest on the national debt. Here’s how they responded:

imrs.php

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The most popular answer was foreign aid at 33 percent, followed by interest on the debt, at 26 percent. Twenty percent named Social Security, and an additional 4 percent named transportation. For comparison, here’s how much money we *actually* spend on those things:

imrs.php2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the article goes on to note, foreign aid is one of the most unpopular programs, while Social Security is one of the most popular.

This should come as no surprise given that polls have shown an almost exact disagreement between how Americans tend to feel about cutting spending in general as opposed to cutting specific domestic programs.

That’s what we must work to change. If programs like Social Security are to survive into the next generation, Americans must be armed with knowledge about how much they spend and learn the uncomfortable truth that all programs must be open for consideration if we are to get our budget under control once and for all.

Secret Service scandal shows every department needs reform

Recently, controversy has erupted, as the Secret Service allowed an intruder to run past the locked gates and security barricades and run all the way into the White House — eventually being tackled only by an off-duty officer. This follows a 2011 incident in which the Secret Service was unaware for some time that gunshots had made contact with a wall of the White House.

This latest story will continue to evolve, and it’s safe to say we don’t know all the facts — and perhaps never will. But this story reminds us that even the most crucial and respected departments (or perhaps especially those agencies) must be scrutinized and reformed with an eye toward efficiency and good practices, not just throwing more money their way.

Often, unfortunately, National Security-related agencies or the Pentagon are placed on a pedestal, away from attempts to pass necessary reforms.

The Secret Service, which had a $1.6 billion budget in FY2013, is now getting what some call a long-overdue second look. Three high-profile scandals within the last three years have shone light on the fact that there were a startling 824 cases between 2004 and 2013 in which officials were cited for misconduct. The Secret Service’s reputation of being “invincible” is hardly accurate.

Regardless of what comes of this specific scandal, or even of the Secret Service in general, one thing is clear: there are no invincible government departments. The more we think there are, the less accountability, efficiency, cost-savings, and effectiveness there will to be had.

Some people would like to pretend that the more crucial a department is, the more impervious it should be to criticism and reform. But in fact, the opposite is true. We have to demand reform of our most important departments. We can’t afford not to.

ACA’s cost? $73 billion and counting

Around 5 years after the law passed, Bloomberg Government has analyzed the cost of the program so far. And the picture isn’t pretty.

Nearly five years after passage, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and a companion electronic health records (EHR) program have run a startup tab of more than $73 billion, the Bloomberg Government analysis finds.

Part of that total is the cost of healthcare.gov, the flawed website and related enrollment system intended to expand U.S. health insurance coverage.

BGOV’s analysis shows that costs for both healthcare.gov and the broader reform effort are far greater than anything publicly discussed. They’re also substantially greater than what the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) initially estimated health reform would cost by this point, although not what the agency’s more recent piecemeal estimates suggest.

Meanwhile, the changes in health-care financing and delivery on which the money is being spent remain very much in their startup phase.

The following graph, from Bloomberg, shows just how bad the situation really is.

ACAcosts

Read the whole report here. Partisan squabbling and posturing aside, this law and its related provisions are well on their way to having a severe negative impact on deficits and debt. This is too important to get lost in the noise of political debates — it’s time for real spending reform.

 

Funding football: On our dime

Welfare for Millionaires-1In a time of multiple national scandals, you might be surprised to learn that your tax dollars have been pouring into the same prosperous — and troubled — institution that has been making headlines recently.

Yet the Washington Times revealed last week that exactly that situation has been occurring. Taxpayers have spent billions financing NFL stadiums — and despite lofty promises of economic benefits, “there is little evidence those hefty public expenditures pay off.”

From Bankrupting America, some key findings:

  • Taxpayers In Virginia, D.C. And Maryland Pitched In $70 Million For FedEx Field, The Washington Redskins Stadium.
  • Indiana Residents Pitched In $620 Million, Or $1,866 Per Household Towards The Indianapolis Colts Lucas Oil Stadium.
  • Taxpayers Paid For 100 Percent Of The Tampa Bay Buccaneers Stadium When It Was Built In 1998.
  • Cincinnati-area Residents Paid For 94 Percent OF The Bengals Stadium, While Taxpayers Covered 90 Percent Of The Baltimore Ravens M&T Bank Stadium.
  • In 2016, The Minnesota Vikings Will Be Opening A Stadium Financed With $500 Million In Taxpayer Funds.
Learn More
Friends
Tweets
Contribute
Help us spread the message. Donate today.