15 Ways to Actually Balance The Federal Budget

Americans at Defund Obama Care Rally

Americans at Defund Obama Care Rally

Many Republican and conservative politicians talk about balancing the federal budget. (Democrats don’t because their party is too busy spending more to care about spending less), but very few have specific details on how to get it done. In the case of Donald Trump, the discussion centers on:

Significant tax cuts to dramatically grow the economy (well above OMBs projected 2.2% long term GDP growth rate) to outpace the cost of current government programs, and an increase to the Department of Defense.

Some people, like conservative radio host Sean Hannity, advocate the Penny Plan. The penny plan calls for reducing one penny out of every dollar that the federal government spends. Over a 5 to 6 year period the budget balances.

The devil, however, is always in the details. Specifically how do you reduce one penny out of every dollar that the federal government spends?

I spent 10 years building and balancing budgets in the Department of Defense and the details matter. The following list of ideas are the foundation of, and principles upon which, one penny out of every dollar, for example, could be found over six years in order to shrink the federal government, reduce the burden on American taxpayers, and balance the budget!

First, and a lynchpin to balancing the budget, the economy must be energized and grown beyond historic growth and current CBO projections of 2.2%. While this is well above the average for the Obama Administration, it isn’t nearly good enough.

Spur Economic Growth:

Growing the economy starts by eliminating laws and regulations that strangle small, medium, and large businesses instead of enabling their expansion and competitiveness. Minimum wage laws, Obama care, energy mandates, and oppressive tax laws, for example, should be repealed outright or dramatically simplified to unshackle America’s economy.

  • Minimum wage laws not only hurt small businesses and entry-level workers, they cost the taxpayers as well since the federal government also pays those higher wages.
  • Obama care is a well-documented job killer, massively expensive and the gateway program to institute socialized medicine.
  • Taxes must be reduced to spur business creation, expansion, and innovation. Letting the American people keep more of their own money is also a moral imperative.

We must enact an all the above energy policy and repeal penalties instituted by the Obama administration and the EPA upon nonrenewable sources like coal. Democrat policies drive the costs of energy up, and the federal government uses a lot of it. Cheaper energy means cheaper government. Reducing energy costs results in a net savings not just to the federal government but also to Americans and businesses. With reduced cost comes greater competitiveness, profitability and prosperity both at home and abroad. The United States has enough energy to lead the world for 100+ years. We will need it to balance our budget, pay back our national debt, and posture America for another hundred years of prosperity.

Growing the economy is critical, butwe must cut the budget.

Macro Level Reductions.

  1. Freeze hiring on all civilians within the federal government. There could be exceptions made in areas that are considered strategically important, such as the Department of Defense or Customs and Border Patrol, but on the whole the effort would be a freeze to further hiring across the federal government. A slightly less contentious option would be to institute something like a 3 to 1 hiring policy. In this case for every three people who naturally leave the federal government, such as to retire, one civilian hire would be allowed to replace them.
  1. This policy would reduce manpower in agencies across the federal government. There are duplication of missions and programs throughout our government. As personnel decline those duplicative organizations, agencies and programs should be collapsed into one another. As the organizations are collapsed into one another, the management overhead should be trimmed as well, effectively cut in half and taken as additional savings.
  1. Another benefit of smaller and simpler government is that the oversight and management of government itself becomes less complex, and more effective. The potential for savings and reductions in watchdog organizations like OMB (which oversee the federal government’s budget and budget building process) could be further reduced.
  1. The federal government, including the Department of Defense, owns or leases over 361,000 buildings, office spaces, and warehouses, with an annual operating cost of over $33 Billion.

Much of this infrastructure is excess to need, and should be sold or disposed of now. As the federal government is reduced through manpower reductions, even more excess office space and facilities will be exposed. Those facilities need to be returned to state and local governments or sold outright to businesses and the American people freeing taxpayers from the burden of maintaining them, paying utilities such as water, electricity, etc.

There is significant excess infrastructure and basing across the DOD. The Air Force, for example, constantly states that it has 30% access infrastructure and desperately needs a BRAC in order to cut excess bases down to the proper size to support the diminished Air Force. Done properly, a BRAC could save the Department of Defense billions every year without any adverse impact to our nations military capabilities.

Micro Level Reductions:

  1. There is waste in the Department of Defense when it comes to the military’s energy spending. The Obama administration turned the Department of Defense into a research and development arm of the renewable energy industry.

Untold billions of dollars, hidden within the Service budgets, are being spent every year by the Department of Defense on windmills, solar farms, development of renewable biofuels, and testing of biofuels on military equipment from aircraft to ships. Unfortunately biofuels are far more expensive than the fuels they’re replacing. They’ve also proven to be corrosive, contain less energy per pound of fuel than what the replacing, and effectively reduce the range and capabilities of the equipment in which they are used. They increase the cost of maintenance, wear and tear on assets, and decrease the longevity of jet engines and other components such as seals that are exposed to the more corrosive biofuels. All of this R&D should be stopped and the Department of Defense should no longer be used as an experimental arm for the progressive anti-global warming movement.

  1. Agencies and programs across the federal government need to be eliminated or drastically reduced. The list includes the EPA, the Education Department, Health and Human Services, the IRS, the Public Broadcasting System, and support for the Federal Reserve as a good start.
  1. Tax laws need to be simplified so that businesses can free themselves from the wasted cost of dealing with a tax code that’s become so burdensome no single person can possibly understand it.
  1. Reductions of the types listed above would shrink the federal government to the point where Congress could once again manage it. After all, Congress’s prime responsibility is to pass laws including those funding the federal government. They failed year after year to pass budgets because its become far too big and far too complex. With the reduced size comes an increased ability to manage. When Congress is able to properly manage agencies and their budgets further waste, duplication and costs can be found.
  1. We commonly hear the term too big to fail. In the case of government it’s failing because its too big.

The federal government needs to prioritize its constitutionally mandated responsibilities first. All other missions are secondary and subject to reduction.

  1. The border must be sealed! Illegal immigrants who are committing murders, rapes, robberies, dealing drugs, involved in human trafficking, to gang warfare must be caught, jailed or sent back to their home countries for jailing. Penalties must be stepped up as an effective deterrent to these brutal thugs ever returning to the United States.
  1. The wall must be built and America’s border controlled. We must significantly reduce the number of illegal aliens, and know who enters and stays within our borders. You wouldn’t let strangers into your house, and we should not let them into our country. Fewer illegal aliens will reduce burdens on local, state and federal governments. The costs to America’s schools and law enforcement alone would be a significant savings.
  1. Energy subsidies must be stopped. Let companies and technologies compete on an equal footing. The strong will survive and the inefficient will not.
  1. Waste, fraud and abuse of government welfare programs must stop. Welfare should be tied to work for the able minded and able bodied. The goal is to use the social safety net as a temporary support system, not a way of life.
  1. Finally, we must reform programs like social security, in order to ensure they exist for the long term. Without reform, costs will continue to eat the budget, and our children will see nothing but the bills.
  1. Balancing the budget is a national imperative, and should be codified as a Constitutional Amendment. It wont be easy, and will require courageous politicians with the insight to see, analyze and solve Americas spending problems. No such leadership exists in the Democrat Party. It’s GOP or Bust…literally.

12 Reasons Why Trump And Cruz May Need Each Other

Rally Against Big Government, Washington D.C.

Rally Against Big Government, Washington D.C.

Donald Trump likely needs Ted Cruz, and Ted Cruz likely needs Donald Trump to win the White House in November. The Republican campaign has gotten personal, but they may each need the other before the convention ends. Given the radical leftist vent dominating today’s Democrat Politicians, America will need them both to restore our Constitutional Republic.

Why Cruz Needs Trump:

  1. Trumps campaign is bringing new voters to the GOP. He’s tapped into the blue dog working class democrats that propelled Ronald Reagan to victory. They’re essential for the general election, but many may not vote for Cruz alone.
  2. The Trump campaign believes that his campaign potentially opens up states like NY, and New Jersey that otherwise are solid Blue. The more states that are in play, the better the odds come November.
  3. Trumps campaign is a huge anti-establishment movement wave. The GOP needs to harness that energy.
  4. Trumps won most of states and delegates so far. He is the most likely to reach 1237 before the convention, and to win on the first ballot.
  5. Trump has lots of money to fund him. Freedom from financial corruption is unique to his campaign, and a powerful factor.

Why Trump Needs Cruz

  1. Cruz’s policy positions are much more detailed and thought out. His tax plan for instance is implementable, and wont drive up the debt.
  2. Cruz won the second most states and delegates so far. He is the most likely to reach 1237 in a second vote if needed at the convention. He’s also supported by significant part of the rank and file GOP, but many may not vote for Trump alone.
  3. Cruz has a massive, state-by-state organization and ground game, which Trump lacks. Such an organization is essential to win the general election, and his campaign is tactically way ahead of Trumps.
  4. Cruz can provide list of solid SCOTUS nominees, to replace devastating loss of Justice Scalia. Will be a big motivator for many GOP rank and file.

Why Each Needs The Other

  1. Each may need to other to prevent the GOP establishment from stealing the nomination in Cleveland.
  2. Together, they’ve received over 65% of all votes cast so far, and over 80% of all delegates. The GOP must come out of the convention united behind its nominee. The potential for that to happen without Cruz and Trump calling for it is unlikely.
  3. Success in November should kick off a long-term strategy to keep Democrats out of the White House for decades. It will take changing the GOP, thinking long term, sound conservative policies, and educating the population on why liberal policies are so destructive. The Establishment proved that it wont deliver, so it must returned to its limited government roots. That will take time, and failure is not an option.


  • Now that Donald Trump is sure to capture the GOP nomination, the calls for Ted Cruz to support his campaign are mounting, and for good reason.

Infographic: Where Does Hillary’s Email Scandal End?

Hillary Clinton, and the Democrat Party, are entering a very treacherous time while Hillary faces the pending FBI Primary over her illegal home-brew email server scandal. Her presidential ambitions, hinge on whether or not the FBI brings a case to the Justice Department, and subsequently, what the Justice Department does with that case. The potential paths, and likely implications, are traced through this Pitfalls Infographic:

Infographic Depicting Potential Events/Actions That Could Greatly Hinder Or Block Hillary Clinton's Nomination

Infographic Depicting Potential Events/Actions That Could Greatly Hinder Or Block Hillary Clinton’s Nomination

























The Presidential power to pardon, is a wildcard, as shown in the infographic. Per the Constitution:

The President…shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.


The Constitution provides the President the power to pardon once the offense is committed. It does not require a trial, conviction, etc. In theory, President Obama could have already pardoned Hillary Clinton, protecting her from any Justice Department prosecution. Whether such an event could be kept from the public, and for how long is unknown.

The damage to America that such a pardon would do is likely lost on President Obama. He is now motivated by his legacy, and continuing his radical leftist agenda once his presidency ends. Would he pardon Hillary Clinton if doing so achieved these objectives? Is it possible that he would use a pardon to get Hillary out of the way and open the door to a Joe Biden nomination? Only time will tell, but it appears a near certainty that the FBI will bring a case to the Justice Department. I’ve written why she is undoubtedly guilty of serious felonies.

Related Blogs:
Clinton Speak and Hillary’s Illegal Server

Why Criminal Risk Exposure From Hillary’s Home-Brew Server Is Increasing

What The Media Continues To Miss About Hillary’s Emails

The Massive Risk Posed By Hillary’s Emails

Clinton Email Releases the Key to Servers Legality

Judge Andrew Napolitano’s Latest Analysis

Latest (Prepping theBattle-space):

Hillary May Be Mortally Wounded Even Without Indictment

Hillary May Not Be the Democrat Nominee (Doug Schoen)

Democrats May Turn to Biden

What if Romney or McCain Were Running Part 2?

What if Romney or McCain were Running in the 2016 GOP Primaries? Mitt Romney unleashed a blistering condemnation of Donald Trump, the GOP front-runner, on Thursday, followed quickly by John McCain’s piling on. They speak from positions as elected Republicans, but also as the previous two Republican Presidential nominees, both of who were defeated in the general election by President Obama. It raises an interesting question: how would their nomination runs stack up in comparison to the 2016 GOP primaries?

So far, 15 states held their GOP nominating contests, with the 16th going today. CHART 1 compares the state-by-state vote totals between 2008, 2012 and 2016. Those comparisons show that the votes cast in all but 2 (Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia) of the second 15 contests in 2016 exceed the totals from either 2008 or 2012.

CHART 1: More Total Votes Were Cast In 13 of the second 15 Contests In 2016 Compare To Either 2012 Or 2008. Only Puerto Rico and The District of Columbia Are Outliers

CHART 1: More Total Votes Were Cast In 13 of the second 15 Contests In 2016 Compare To Either 2012 Or 2008. Only Puerto Rico and The District of Columbia Are Outliers

When the total votes from all 15 states are compared, as shown in CHART 2, the magnitude of 2016’s turn out is revealed. So far, 7.3 million more votes were cast in 2016 than in 2012 (up 57.7%), and 7.49 million more than in 2008 (up 59.6%). So how would Romney or McCain be doing if they ran in 2016 with the same vote totals from their winning 2012 and 2008 campaigns?

CHART 2: Total Votes Cast In First 30 GOP Nomination Contests: 2016 (20,053,961), 2012 (12,716,683), 2008 (12,522,162)

CHART 2: Total Votes Cast In First 30 GOP Nomination Contests: 2016 (20,053,961), 2012 (12,716,683), 2008 (12,522,162)

CHART 3 compares the winning candidate’s vote totals from each of the second 15 nominating contests. The data shows that with the same votes, the winner in 2016 would have won in 2008 and 2012 in 11 of the 15 states. When the first 15 contests are added in, the 2016 contest winners would have taken 23 of the first 30 contests compared against 2012 and 2008 winners combined.

CHART 3: 11 Of 15 States Had More Votes Cast In 2016 For The Winner Than In 2012 Or 2008 Combined. 23 Of The First 30 Contests Had More Votes Cast In 2016 Than 2012 Or 2008 Combined.

CHART 3: 11 Of 15 States Had More Votes Cast In 2016 For The Winner Than In 2012 Or 2008 Combined. 23 Of The First 30 Contests Had More Votes Cast In 2016 Than 2012 Or 2008 Combined.

TABLE 1 shows the raw vote totals for the second 15 GOP contests, and breaks out those won by Mitt Romney in 2012 and John McCain in 2008 in blue. Head to head, Romney would have lost all but three of the second 15 states. When the first 15 states are added in, Romney would have lost 25 of the first 30 GOP contests (Vermont, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, District of Columbia, and North Caroline). He would have likely dropped out by now.

Table 1: Mitt Romney Would Have Only Won 4 Of The Second 15 Contests, McCain Only 2.

Table 1: Mitt Romney Would Have Only Won 4 Of The Second 15 Contests, McCain Only 2.

When McCain’s totals are put to the test, he fares even worse. He would have been defeated in all but three contests out of the first 30 (Vermont, District of Columbia, and Kentucky), and also would have likely dropped out.

So what does this tell us?

  • First, it indicates that the 2016 GOP turnout is very high, up over 57% so far compared to the last two nominating contests. The GOP will need millions more votes in the general election to win than Romney got in 2012. So far, those voters are turning out.
  • Second, its now clear that both Romney and McCain would have been soundly defeated if they had run in 2016 and received their winning votes from 2012 and 2008 respectively. As a result, their moral positions as beaten GOP candidates is heavily blunted.
  • Republican voters soundly defeated establishment candidates. They are speaking, but the GOP establishment refuses to listen. The Trump and Cruz campaigns, along with their voters and the establishment must come together this fall in order to defeat whomever the democrat candidate is.
  • The opposite voting pattern is occurring in the Democrat Race, and the front runner has serious legal problems.

Data from USElectionAtlas.Org