From The Hill
The House on Thursday afternoon voted down a budget alternative offered by the Republican Study Committee (RSC), paving the way for House passage of a plan offered by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Members rejected the RSC proposal in a 136-285 vote in which 136 Republicans supported it and 104 Republicans opposed it. That's more support than the RSC budget received last year, when 119 Republicans favored it and 120 opposed it.
The RSC plan proposes $7.5 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade, about 50 percent more than Ryan's budget. It also calls for cuts and a freeze to discretionary spending until the budget balances.
The problem is that baseline budgets start at last year's spending. That's a big reason why spending keeps going up and it's perpetual in length. It's unacceptable. What's needed is a zero based budgeting plan, along with the look at every single expenditure and department to decide the following.
1. Is it constitutional?
2. Is it needed?
3. Can states and local governments do the same work?
4. Does it work?
We don't need a federal department of education. The feds are not competent enough, or trustworthy enough to be involved in education. We elect school boards for a reason. We have a state board of education.
We do not need the BATF. We do not need a lot of federal crimes that are taken care of on the state level. It's none of Washington's business if states legalize medical marijuana.
Most transportation can be passed off to the states, and eliminate the hostage taking of state policy for highway funds while you are at it.
Go with zero based budgeting. Eliminate what isn't needed. Balance the budget. Don't raise taxes. That's not asking for much.