Against Debt

The federal debt is no mystery. It is fed by deficits. “Because the federal government has long been spending more than it takes in tax revenues, we now face a $16 trillion debt, an amount that has grown by $5 trillion in the last four years alone.”

That’s Richard Lorenc and Jonathan Bydlak writing in The Daily Caller. And they are not merely describing a bad situation. They are proposing a solution.

They formed a Coalition to Reduce Spending, and are encouraging citizens and politicians to sign their “Reject the Debt” pledge. The vow has some takers, most notably Ted Cruz, running in a close U.S. Senate race in Texas, with a runoff at the end of the month. Like all who take the pledge, he promises

  • not to vote to raise the debt ceiling;
  • not to borrow more money to pay for spending;
  • to support balanced budgets; and
  • consider all spending fair game for reduction.

Other candidates — from Minnesota and North Carolina as well as Texas — have signed on, and more likely will, as the campaign hits the news, gains fame . . . and “notoriety.”

Perhaps unlike the folks I talked about yesterday, supporters of this coalition and its pledge aim at the heart of the problem. So go on: sign the pledge. And press your favorite candidate until he or she does so as well.

After all, there’s a lot at stake.

The idea that politicians can just run up a tab indefinitely, and “feel no pain,” is absurd.

The pain is coming. The only question is: Do we act in advance to forestall some of it, or just let it hit us like a full ton brick-load?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

4 Comments so far ↓

  1. Jul
    20
    9:10
    AM
    Mark

    Sounds great, and I respect anyone who is trying to make a difference and turn our country’s economy around. However, there is one glaring omission in their pledge: no tax increases. So you know what is going to happen. Or the pledge signers will blame the other party’s lack of “cooperation” for not keeping their pledge.

  2. Jul
    20
    7:45
    PM
    Richard Poor

    How much do you want to bet Paul (don’t look at my voting record) Ryan won’t sign this?

  3. Jul
    21
    1:04
    PM
    Jay

    Mark,

    THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE REVENUES, IT IS THE EXPEDNITURES.

    I do not have the figures, but they are around- with every tax cut ( figures that I have seen go back to JFK’s–and I despised him–__) with every tax cut, revenues went up. Unfortunately, expednitures went up more–often on unimportant items.

    How does $700 million to help repair the CAIRO EGYPT SEWER SYSTEM sound to you as an AMERICAN necessity?

    $53 million to a firm OWNED BY NANCY PELOISI’S BROTHER-IN-LAW to builda facility in Nevada to employ about 45 people?

    I am sure that a careful reading can find many more such “important” expenditures.

  4. Jul
    22
    5:42
    PM
    Drik

    Commentator Dan Mitchell has figures that show that we’d be back to a balanced budget if we were able to limit the government’spending increases to 2% a year. Sadly, our government refuses to do this. All of the spending, all of the appropriation originates in the House. They could cut off funding for 85% of Obamacare anytime they choose. Instead, they go thru a vote, pretending like sending a defunding bull is actually doing anything when they know it will be shot down by Reid. They continue to pretend like they have no choice in the matter. They are in control of what DOES get funded. They are not worthy of that 11% approval rating.

Spruce up your comments with
<a href="" title=""><abbr title=""><acronym title=""><b><blockquote cite=""><cite><code><del datetime=""><em><i><q cite=""><strike><strong>
New comments are moderated before being shown * = required field Be sure to answer the simple math problem below to help demonstrate that you are a human rather than a spambot.

Leave a Comment






− 2 = zero

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Common Sense With Paul Jacob: Against Debt | Coalition to Reduce Spending
  2. Coalition to Reduce Spending at Townhall.com | Coalition to Reduce Spending