Tea Party Budget

400 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
400
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Tea Party Budget

  1. 1. Pre-Publication Version      The Tea Party Budget             A  Comprehensive  Ten-­‐Year  Plan  to  Stop  the  Debt,   Shrink  the  Government,  and  Save  Our  Country     Findings  and  Recommendations  of  the   Tea  Party  Debt  Commission     Delivered  to  Congress   November  17,  2011   Washington,  D.C.  
  2. 2. "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the publics money." Alexis de Tocqueville, 1840 Summary: Everyone BenefitsT he critics say the tea party is “all hat and no cattle” — that we have lots of talk, but no plan. Well, that’s about to change.Imagine a reform plan that makes dramatic moves toward restoring limited, constitutional government.Imagine a plan that slows the numbers on the National Debt Clock to a crawl, and then brings them to ahalt, and then shifts them into reverse.Imagine a plan that cuts, caps, and balances federal spending without raising taxes; that gives futuregenerations control over their own retirement security; and that lifts the massive debt burden from ourchildren’s shoulders so they can know the American dream of ever-higher freedom and prosperity.And on top of all that, imagine that it’s a serious, credible, plan generated by the grassroots.This is that plan.We call it the Tea Party Budget. Of course, we realize that the tea party is a broad, spontaneous popularmovement, without leaders or formal organization — so we won’t presume to speak for anybody butourselves. But if any plan offered to date has a fair claim to the “tea party” label, we think this is it.Four months in the making, this plan is the product of countless suggestions and comments fromthousands of local citizen-activists across the country and voting by tens of thousands more online. Unlikeother budget plans produced in Washington cubicles and quickly forgotten, this plan represents amilestone because it reflects real grassroots input.1The plan’s virtues are those of America herself: optimistic, practical, and bold.The contrast with President Obama’s budget plan could not be starker. His plan was unanimously rejectedearlier this year by the United States Senate, for good reason. It offered neither hope nor change. Instead,it would have saddled our children with more spending, taxes, and debt — more economic stagnation,unemployment, and decay.                                                                                                                        1  Our sincere thanks to the good folks at FreedomWorks for facilitating our work.     2  
  3. 3. We emphatically reject that vision for our future.Instead, we offer a bold — but, we believe, feasible — plan that: ü “Cuts, caps, and balances” federal spending. ü Balances the budget in four years, and keeps it balanced, without tax hikes. ü Closes an historically large budget gap, equal to almost one-tenth of our economy. ü Reduces federal spending by $9.7 trillion over the next 10 years, as opposed to the President’s plan to increase spending by $2.3 trillion. ü Shrinks the federal government from 24 percent of GDP — a level exceeded only in World War II — to about 16 percent, in line with the postwar norm. ü Stops the growth of the debt, and begins paying it down, with a goal of eliminating it within this generation.To achieve these goals, our plan, among other things: ü Repeals ObamaCare in toto. ü Eliminates four Cabinet agencies — Energy, Education, Commerce, and HUD — and reduces or privatizes many others, including EPA, TSA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. ü Ends farm subsidies, government student loans, and foreign aid to countries that don’t support us — luxuries we can no longer afford. ü Saves Social Security and greatly improves future benefits by shifting ownership and control from government to individuals, through new SMART Accounts. ü Gives Medicare seniors the right to opt into the Congressional health care plan. ü Suspends pension contributions and COLAs for Members of Congress, whenever the budget is in deficit.In short, the Tea Party Budget enables us to end chronic deficits and pay down debt, while moving us backtoward the kind of limited, constitutional government intended by our Founding Fathers.And it does all this without raising taxes. In fact, we make the so-called Bush tax cuts, and other expiringtax relief provisions, permanent.With these reforms, we can unburden the productive sector and get back to robust economic growth andrising living standards for all.With this plan, everyone benefits. 3  
  4. 4. The ChallengeA merica’s current economic and fiscal challenges are truly daunting. A $15 trillion national debt. Nine percent unemployment. Twenty-six million Americans out of work or underemployed. College graduates unable to find work, waiting tables, and moving back in with their parents.Businesses sitting on more than $2 trillion in cash rather than using it to create jobs, because of massiveregulatory and political uncertainty. Debt ceiling “deals” that don’t reduce the debt. Diminished credit.Downgrades.Meanwhile, the specter of inflation and higher interest rates is bubbling beneath the surface, preparing toexplode. It’s already visible in producer prices, and in the rising cost of staples like milk and gasoline.The press and political class may call it a “slow recovery,” but it surefeels like a depression to the millions of citizens who have lost theirjobs, their homes, their retirement savings. We are in the midst of theworst economic stagnation in a generation, certainly since the 1970sand perhaps since the Great Depression itself. Americans voted forchange in 2006, 2008, and 2010. But this wasn’t the change theywere asking for!At the root of these problems is our own federal government — its size, its reach, and many of its policies.Washington is simply too big. Our government is doing too many things it can’t do well, or shouldn’t doat all, with money it doesn’t have. We are borrowing 43 cents of every dollar we spend. Waste andduplication abound. A report published this past March by the Government Accountability Office countedno fewer than 47 job training programs, 56 financial literacy programs, 80 economic developmentprograms, 18 food assistance programs, 20 programs for the homeless, 82 teacher-quality programsspread across 10 agencies, and more than 2,100 data centers. All told, we have nearly 2,200 federalprograms. What human being could ever know or monitor them all? Who’s minding this mess?Perhaps the best summation of this lamentable state of affairs came at our field hearing in Indianapolis,from a young lady named Chloe Minor, age 15: “Government today is making a mess of things. Mygeneration has absolutely no say in the matter. Each of us owes over $44,000 to pay off the national debt.It is obvious to me what is needed in this country is some teenage supervision!”The QuestionsI n this, as in any, crisis, the question for Americans is not “How much government should we cut?” or “How much government is enough?” nor even “How much government do we need?” Rather, the first and essential question is, as it has always been, “What does our Constitution require?” — followedclosely by a second: “What does it permit?”Alas, our leaders in Washington seem as determined as ever to evade these essential questions. And thatis why the Tea Party Debt Commission was formed.The idea came about in late June of this year, at a summit of tea party leaders in Washington. Theconcept: Give the American people a platform to propose specific cuts in the federal budget and to put to 4  
  5. 5. rest the argument that our movement isn’t serious about specific spending cuts and that we “have noplan.” “The  only  way  we  will  ever  reduce  the  debt  and  balance  the  budget     is  if  America  beats  Washington  and  tea  party  activists     take  over  this  process.”     Matt  Kibbe    Washington,  DC  The Tea Party Debt Commission is, in a sense, our answer to the "deficit reduction super committee,” thatunique and remarkable creature of this summer’s Beltway debt ceiling deal.While the Super Committee is composed of twelve powerful Washington insiders charged with trimmingthe budget around the edges, we are a dozen shirt-sleeve Americans — volunteer activists and leadersfrom across the country — who want to help save our country from a Greece-style debt collapse.The Super Committee’s work product is super-privileged: it will receive fast-track consideration, with aguaranteed up-or-down vote in both Houses, no amendments, no extended debate, no filibusters. That’spower.We, of course, have no such power. And yet, the irony is that if the Super Committee succeeds, it willreduce spending by about $1.2 trillion over the next decade, from a steeply rising baseline. Our plan, bycontrast, would reduce spending by eight times that amount, $9.7 trillion. Or to put it in percentageterms, assuming they meet their full charge without gimmicks or double-counting, the Super Committeeplan would slightly reduce ten-year spending from $44 trillion to $43 trillion, a 2.3 percent trim. Our planwould reduce ten-year spending from $44 trillion to $34 trillion, a 23 percent reduction. And moreimportant, we would stop the debt.If we’re going to go to all this trouble to cut spending, why not achieve some lasting, meaningful gains forourselves and our posterity?In order to hear directly from the public, we undertook a national listening tour, holding field hearings intowns across the country, from Philadelphia, birthplace of American liberty, to tiny Logan in the remotereaches of northern Utah. We met in churches, public libraries, community centers, even a Denny’srestaurant.In addition to hearings, we surveyed the public online through a crowd-sourced poll at a website wecreated, www.TeaPartyDebtCommission.com, that allows voters to prioritize spending cuts. More than70,000 people have visited the site to date, and more than 50,000 have completed the entire survey,voting on more than 1,000,000 “matchups.” The point was to gauge priorities: If you had to cut spending,what programs would you cut first? What would you protect? From their responses, we were able toobtain a good sense of the priorities of people of all stripes — Republicans, Democrats, libertarians, andindependents. What struck us is how much consensus there is. Ninety-three percent of the time, for 5  
  6. 6. example, when folks are asked to choose between “Repeal ObamaCare” and any other randomly selectedbudget cutting idea, they will choose “Repeal ObamaCare.” Ninety-three percent.Also striking: results were very similar between those who describe themselves as “tea party supporters,”and those who don’t, which tells us that, far from being extreme, our movement is right in the mainstreamof American political opinion.In a sense, this report is the next logical step in the tea party’s progression from protest movement togoverning majority. Indeed, the Tea Party Budget builds perfectly on the CONTRACT FROM AMERICA(http://www.thecontract.org), the unofficial — and also grassroots-generated — platform of ourmovement: 1. Protect the Constitution 2. Reject Cap & Trade 3. Demand a Balanced Budget 4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform 5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government 6. End Runaway Government Spending 7. Defund, Repeal, & Replace Government-Run Health Care 8. Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above’ Energy Policy 9. Stop the Pork 10. Stop the Tax HikesIn 2010, a whole new class of tea-party backed freshmen was elected to Congress on this platform.Unfortunately, Washington remains resistant to these commonsense reforms. So in 2012 we will need tosend an even larger group of reformers to Congress — men and women who not only support the Contractbut also the kinds of bold, specific reforms needed to implement it. Reforms like the ones contained inthis budget plan. In assembling our plan, we decided not to reinvent the wheel. Instead, we took good ideas wherever we found them. We started with the compellingly simple framework of Rep. Connie Mack’s (R-FL) popular “One Percent Spending Reduction Act,” a.k.a. the “one cent solution” or Penny Plan for short. In the Penny Plan, federal spending is reduced by just one percent a year until the budget is balanced, and then capped at 18 percent of GDP. That’s it. With this approach, the budget is balanced within 10 years.With the Penny Plan as our inspiration, we built out a detailed, year-by-year path to balance. We tookbudget reform ideas, not only from the general public, but also from numerous specific plans proposed byvarious leaders we know and respect. We looked at the House-passed “Path to Prosperity” plan and theconservative alternative put forth by the House Republican Study Committee (RSC). Also worthy ofspecial mention in this context are a few members of Congress who have done outstanding work: SenatorsMike Lee (R-UT), Rand Paul (R-KY), Pat Toomey (R-PA), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), and 6  
  7. 7. Representatives Paul Ryan (R-WI), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Ron Paul (R-TX), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), MickMulvaney (R-SC), and Kevin Brady (R-TX).The Plan’s Four PrinciplesT he Tea Party Budget reflects four basic values: 1. Fiscal common sense. 2. Constitutional limits. 3. Economic freedom. 4. Personal self-reliance.By “fiscal common sense,” we mean the old, time-tested rules for keeping government from becoming aburden on the people: limit spending, tax lightly, borrow the minimum, maintain a surplus, pay off debt.Every household and business has to operate on these principles. So should government. ü Pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. Balanced budgets should be the rule rather than the exception. Congress should send a strong BBA to the states immediately. By “strong,” we mean a BBA carefully crafted to constrain Washington in as many ways as possible, consistent with the dictates of prudence. We favor Sen. Mike Lee’s (R-UT) strongly framed BBA proposal, which not only requires annual balance but also includes procedural reforms to make it harder for Washington to increases taxes, spending, or debt.By “Constitutional limits,” we mean the limits that the Founders took such great care to devise. The mostimportant, for our present purposes, is federalism. Of every program at the federal level (and everyproposal for a new federal program), we should ask two basic questions: 1) Is it constitutionallyauthorized? 2) Is it best carried out by the federal government, as opposed to states or private entities?Only when the answer to both questions is yes, should that program exist. “What  is  needed  in  this  country  is  some  teenage  supervision!”   Chloe  Minor,  age  15  Now, we recognize that good and reasonable people can disagree about where exactly to draw the linebetween the federal government on the one side, and the state governments and the private sector on theother. Even the Founders differed among themselves about that at times. But in most cases, the line ispretty clear. And even when it’s not, every federal office holder has a sworn duty to try to discern the linefor himself, and to bring to an end those programs that he finds to be on the wrong side of it. When indoubt, the burden of proof should be on those who say, “This is a federal issue,” rather than on those whosay it isn’t.Health, education, and welfare, for example, are clearly areas of life essentially local in nature; therefore,they should be addressed mostly if not entirely at the state and local level. When popular opinion makes 7  
  8. 8. it difficult for the being to devolve an unconstitutional program, Congress should at least make thatprogram as constitutional as possible, as quickly as possible. ü Assess the constitutionality of every federal program. When we began this project, we set out to carefully and thoughtfully assess the constitutionality of all 2,200 federal programs — program by program. Time and resource constraints made this impractical. We hope, however, that, as a follow-up to this report, the tea party movement at large will take up the task and carry out a wholesale “tea party constitutionality review process.” Let’s start with a blank sheet of paper and ask, “What, if we were starting over, would we want Washington to be doing?” And then next to that, let’s set out the list of all 2,200 programs and ask our two basic questions about each: “Is it authorized?” and “If authorized, is it prudent?” And then let’s see where our two lists overlap, and keep only what’s on both.   “Require  all  elected  officials  to  read  the  Constitution  and     then  take  a  test  on  it.  Include  essay  questions!”     William  E.  Keeling    via  email  By “economic freedom,” we mean getting the government off the back of this economy and lettingindividual entrepreneurs innovate and create jobs. In particular, we think Congress should immediatelyundertake the following economically crucial reforms. ü Scrap the Tax Code. We should not raise taxes. We are taxed enough already. Tax hikes would only destroy jobs. Instead, we should make the tax burden lighter. And at the same time, we should make the tax code fairer, flatter, simpler, and more pro-growth. Many bold ideas have been proposed to achieve this, such as a flat-rate income tax, a national retail sales tax, or even going back to the traditional, pre-1913 system of tariffs and excises (i.e., abolishing the income and payroll taxes altogether). Since our focus in this report is stopping the debt by restraining spending, we decided to take no position on fundamental tax reform, except to say that: 1) we endorse it enthusiastically, and 2) it will never happen in the absence of massive spending cuts.   “The  United  States  is  the  Saudi  Arabia  of  coal  and  natural  gas.”       Bill  Bigelow    Punta  Gorda,  Florida   ü Stop the Regulatory Train Wreck. Massive over-regulation is killing this economy. To lift that heavy burden, Congress should: 1) Place an immediate moratorium on all pending federal regulations. 2) Provide a full audit of all regulations passed since 2000 to determine their need, impact, and effect on job creation. 3) Pass the REINS Act to rationalize the regulatory process, going forward. And 4) Repeal the Dodd-Frank, “too big to fail” bailout scheme. 8  
  9. 9. ü Replace ObamaCare with Patient-Centered Care. Excessive health care cost inflation is the number one driver of federal spending and deficits. It’s also the biggest reason why 15 percent of the population is uninsured. It’s imperative that we replace ObamaCare and other federal distortions of the doctor-patient relationship with a patient-centered system. And that means addressing the root cause of medical inflation and the uninsured, which is the federal tax code’s unfair treatment of people who buy insurance with their own money out of pocket. When the subsidy playing field is level, patients will be back in charge, cost growth will abate, and health care quality will improve. To be healthier, we must be freer. ü Tap America’s Massive Energy Reserves. Our country is blessed with abundant natural resources that could allow us to attain near total energy self-sufficiency within 10 to 15 years, if we can just overcome the extreme environmentalists and liberal politicians. The job-creating power of these resources is staggering. Unleash it. ü Ensure Sound Money. It is too easy for politicians to evade the government’s debts by simply inflating the currency — a moral and economic blight. Unfortunately, Congress has been inflating the currency ever since it set up the Federal Reserve to buy and sell its debt back in 1913. Over the past century, thanks to Congress and the Fed, the dollar has lost 97 percent of its value. Recent congressional stimulus spending and the Fed’s “quantitative easing” policies are now inviting a disastrous bout of hyperinflation. To prevent that, Congress should: 1) Conduct a true and complete audit of the Fed with an eye to reforming or replacing that failed institution. 2) Give citizens a sound alternative to cheap Federal Reserve Notes by letting them transact business in U.S. minted precious-metal coins and U.S. issued gold-backed notes. “In  the  long  term,  I  think  the  tea  party  should  push  for  deep  structural  reforms  [such  as   repeal  or  revision  of  the  16th  and  17th  Amendments  to  the  Constitution].  Without  such   reforms,  I  think  our  efforts  to  cut  budgets,  shrink  the  government,  and  protect  liberty  will   continue  to  be  an  uphill  battle  at  best.”     Edward  Hyde    Cincinnati,  Ohio 9  
  10. 10. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Tenth AmendmentThe PlanN ow we are ready to spell out the specifics of our plan. Before we do, we want to highlight some of its big-picture benefits. Here’s how the Tea Party Budget dramatically changes Washington: 1. Balances the budget in 2015, and keeps it balanced. Almost all of the proposed reforms take place in the first year, 2012, rather than after a phase-in, because it’s legally impossible to bind future Congresses. The best way to ensure reforms never happen is to postpone them till “tomorrow.” 2. Reduces total federal outlays by about 15 percent in the first year. This may sound like a deep cut, until we recall that spending went up by 19 percent in 2009. 3. Shrinks the government by 30 percent, relative to current law. Outlays shrink from today’s 24 percent of GDP to a more affordable 16 percent of GDP. 4. Reduces gross debt from 99 percent of GDP to 75 percent of GDP. 5. Reduces the publicly held portion of the debt from 68 percent of GDP to 47 percent of GDP.Reducing the debt is extremely important, because it’s the key to ensuring lower future interest rates andmore robust economic growth.The Obama budget, by contrast, goes in the opposite direction on all of the above measures.We divided the federal budget into five roughly equal segments, and found savings within each, as shownin this table. Tea Party Budget Savings (in dollars) 1st Year (2012) 10 Years (2012-2021)Annually Appropriated 386,684,000,000 3,583,965,000,000Social Security 23,000,000,000 230,000,000,000Medicare & Medicaid 676,000,000 2,030,843,000,000Auto-Pilot Programs 119,720,772,800 1,770,094,138,500Defense 31,643,000,000 2,085,136,000,000TOTAL 561,723,772,800 9,700,038,138,500 10  
  11. 11. And here are the specific proposals, grouped as follows: 1. Annually Appropriated 2. Social Security 3. Medicare & Medicaid 4. Auto-Pilot Programs 5. Defense 6. Receipts 7. Budget Process Reforms 1. Annually Appropriated Currently represents: 19% of spending Contributes: 38% of savings Save, first year: $391,684,000,000 Save, 10 years: $3,760,962,242,653End all foreign aid to countries that don’t support us.2 Save, first year: $11,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $110,000,000,000Eliminate all earmarks. Save, first year: $18,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $180,000,000,000Trim annually appropriated spending to 2010 levels (one-time, 2.5% across-the-board savings, prior toother reductions). Save, first year: $32,875,000,000 Save, 10 years: $32,875,000,000Eliminate the Department of Education. Save, first year: $95,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $950,000,000,000Eliminate the Department of Energy (transfer nuclear research and programs to Defense). Save, first year: $21,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $210,000,000,000Eliminate HUD. Save, first year: $53,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $530,000,000,000                                                                                                                        2 Actual savings could differ from our estimate, due to subjectivity. 11  
  12. 12. Eliminate Commerce Department business & economic development subsidies. Save, first year: $2,400,000,000 Save, 10 years: $24,000,000,000Eliminate Department of Commerce ethanol & unproven energy technology subsidies. Save, first year: $17,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $170,000,000,000Eliminate the Legal Services Corporation. Save, first year: $398,000,000 Save, 10 years: $3,980,000,000Devolve most EPA duties to the states, cut the agencys budget by 50%, and fold it into the Interior Dept. Save, first year: $5,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $50,000,000,000Privatize the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA). Save, first year: $8,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $80,000,000,000Shutter the Small Business Administration. Save, first year: $1,400,000,000 Save, 10 years: $14,000,000,000Privatize air traffic control Save, first year: $3,800,000,000 Save, 10 years: $38,000,000,000Eliminate certain federal job training programs. Save, first year: $4,300,000,000 Save, 10 years: $43,000,000,000Retire the AmeriCorps paid-volunteerism program. Save, first year: $1,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $10,000,000,000Eliminate Title 10 family planning grants. Save, first year: $327,000,000 Save, 10 years: $3,270,000,000Eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts. Save, first year: $150,000,000 Save, 10 years: $1,500,000,000End urban mass transit grants. Save, first year: $5,200,000,000 Save, 10 years: $52,000,000,000 12  
  13. 13. Privatize Amtrak and end rail subsidies.3 Save, first year: $3,100,000,000 Save, 10 years: $31,000,000,000Repeal Davis-Bacon labor rules. Save, first year: $6,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $48,000,000,000End the welfare payment component of the Child Tax Credit program. Save, first year: $26,500,000,000 Save, 10 years: $265,000,000,000Reduce Bureau of Land Management by 50% from FY 2010 level. Save, first year: $578,000,000 Save, 10 years: $5,780,000,000Eliminate the Bureau of Reclamation. Save, first year: $1,100,000,000 Save, 10 years: $11,000,000,000Reduce U.S. Geological Survey by 20% from FY 2010 level. Save, first year: $556,000,000 Save, 10 years: $5,560,000,000Reduce number of federal workers to the 2008 level. Save, first year: $1,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $35,000,000,000Cut the federal employee travel budget to $4 billion (half of FY 2000 spending). Save, first year: $10,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $100,000,000,000Cut federal employee pay by 10 percent. Save, first year: $20,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $200,000,000,000Consolidate 2,100 federal data centers and server warehouses down to 1,100 over 3 years. Save, first year: $5,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $176,997,242,653Reduce unused or under-used federal building space by 25%. Save, first year: $24,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $240,000,000,000                                                                                                                        3 This should also increase receipts. 13  
  14. 14. By legislation, terminate all of the Presidents policy "czar" positions.4 Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 years: $0End all “green” technology initiatives. Let the private sector do the innovating.5 Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 years: $0 2. Social Security Currently represents: 20% of spending Contributes: 2% of savings Save, first year: $23,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $230,000,000,0006Create optional SMART Accounts for new workers born after 1981.7 Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 years: $0Increase the number of work-years used to calculate a seniors Social Security benefit level at retirement. Save, first year: $14,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $140,000,000,000Tighten eligibility for Social Security Disability Insurance. Save, first year: $9,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $90,000,000,000ExplanationThe Challenge. Social Security is going broke, and beginning about 25 years from now will only haveenough funds to pay about 75 percent of promised benefits. Benefits are also comparatively meager, andcannot be passed down to one’s heirs, should one die before reaching retirement age.                                                                                                                        4 No separate savings because positions funded out of other, existing accounts.5 Initiatives sprinkled across government. No unified savings estimate available.6 Estimate does not include effect of SMART Accounts, which affect receipts rather than outlays.7 Budgetary effects of SMART Accounts are displayed in the Receipts section, below.   14  
  15. 15. “The  ‘Galveston  model’     is  a  superior  alternative  to  traditional  Social  Security.”     Noel  Griffin    Mohnton,  Pennsylvania    Our Answer. Successful experiments have proved that we can make this program sustainable and actuallyimprove benefits. How? By harnessing the power of compound interest.Three decades ago, Chile embarked on a bold transformation of its retirement security system. Today, thatsystem is the envy of the world, giving seniors far better benefits than the old, government-run systemever did.Soon after the Chilean reform got underway, three Texas county governments opted out of Social Securityin favor of personal accounts. Today, county workers in those three jurisdictions retire with much moremoney and have significantly more generous death and disability supplemental benefits than do SocialSecurity participants. And those three counties—unlike almost all others in the U.S.—face no long-termunfunded pension liabilities. All state and local governments should have the option of opting into the“Galveston model.”And all young people should have the option of opting into a better future with personal accounts likethose found in Chile.The Tea Party Budget embraces the Chilean / Galveston approach, specifically by enacting a modifiedversion of Rep. Jeff Flake’s (R-AZ) SMART Act. That bold reform allows new workers born after 1981 toinvest one-half of their payroll taxes (7.65%) in a SMART Account, which they can use to fund theirretirement and health care costs in retirement. If they prefer, they can give up their account and opt backinto traditional Social Security at retirement.Thanks to this modern approach, our plan: ü Improves benefits. ü Doesn’t increase the retirement age. ü Doesn’t means-test benefits. ü Doesn’t cut benefits for people in or nearing retirement. ü Doesn’t touch the existing Social Security Disability Insurance program. ü Shores up the long-term solvency of traditional Social Security by slowing the growth of benefits (with “progressive price indexing”).This reform — which we expect to be very popular — reduces federal payroll tax receipts by about $500billion over the ten-year period—an excellent investment on a better system, and one that is fully paid forin this plan. 15  
  16. 16. 3. Medicare and Medicaid Saves, first year: $676,000,000 Saves, 10 years: $2,030,843,000,0008 Currently represents: 21% of spending Contributes: 21% of savingsLet individuals opt out of Medicare (currently prohibited) (Sen. Jim DeMint’s “Retirement FreedomAct”).9 Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 year: $0Let all new Medicare beneficiaries enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program (FEHBP),after 2013 (Sen. Rand Paul’s “Congressional Health Care for Seniors Act”). Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 year: $1,253,483,691,378Reduce Medicare subsidies to actual cost of hospitals’ graduate medical education. Save, first year: $1,000,000,000 Save, 10 year: $205,000,000,000Maintain Medicares physician payment rates at the 2011 level.10 Spend, first year: $12,024,000,000 Spend, 10 year: $297,557,000,000Convert the open-ended Medicaid program into a capped block grant to the states. Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 year: $750,000,000,000Call on all states to reform their medical malpractice and product liability systems (tort reform).11 Save, first year: $0 Save, 10 year: $0                                                                                                                        8 This is a net figure that includes the increased spending associated with a permanent Medicare “doc fix.”9 No savings estimate available. Likely to be negligible.10This item, which increases spending, is commonly called the “doc fix.” It forestalls an automatic cut in Medicare physicianpayments that would otherwise occur at beginning of each calendar year, due to a quirk in a statutory formula. Forestalling theseyearly automatic cuts “costs” money from a budgetary perspective. We have included a permanent fix in our plan because, althoughCongress has passed a temporary one every year since 2003, there is no guarantee it will do so in the future.11 Savings not counted, because policy not mandatory. 16  
  17. 17. ExplanationMedicareThe Challenge. The second-largest federal program, Medicare is also the most important single factor infuture deficits and debt. If we don’t slow Medicare’s growth, we won’t be able to balance the budget, long-term. Currently comprising 13 percent of the budget, it is growing at an unsustainable rate of 7 percent ayear. Beyond its fiscal impact is its enormous effect on the entire health care sector. The Medicarebureaucracy focuses all its efforts on trying to control medical prices, rather than on preventing fraud —and fails miserably at both tasks. Designed in the mid-1960s, Medicare has never been adequatelyupdated to reflect changes in medicine, and, while it represents a very generous benefit relative to theamount of payroll taxes collected for it, Medicare in fact offers seniors and the disabled a benefit that ispoorly designed, wasteful, and in many ways inadequate. On top of all this, President Obama and hisliberal allies in Congress have decided to use Medicare as a piggy bank to create an entirely new,unsustainable entitlement program, ObamaCare. Their favorite method of taking money out of Medicareis to simply reduce reimbursement rates for doctors, hospitals, and other health service providers; thismeat-ax approach only reduces patients’ access to care, without improving efficiency or slowing theprogram’s rapid underlying cost growth. The great challenge for policymakers, then, is to find smarterways to slow Medicare’s unsustainable growth rate without rationing patients’ access to care or stiflingmedical progress and innovation.Our Answer. We believe true reform will begin with a return to the tried-and-true market principles thatmake life better in every other area of our lives. Medicare is too bureaucratic, top-down, and government-centric. To save and improve Medicare, we must give patients more choice and control. We must make itpatient-centered. Whose health is it, anyway? While we think the private sector can and should providehealth care for older citizens, we do not propose ending Medicare or sending it back to the states. Rather,we propose to make Medicare more efficient, sustainable, and optional, as follows. “To  get  health  care  costs  under  control,  we  should  follow     common  sense.  Do  things  that  reduce  demand,  increase     supply,  increase  competition,  reduce  waste,     and  promote  prevention.”       Alan  Guillaudeu    Denver,  Colorado  We preserve the existing Medicare program for those who prefer to remain in it. But we allow individuals,after 2013, to opt into the popular and successful Federal Employees Health Benefit Program (FEHBP).This is the same program enjoyed by current and former Members of Congress. (A separate risk poolwould be set up within FEHBP to minimize the upward pressure on federal workers’ premiums.)The Congressional health care program relies on competing private insurers to provide benefits, and as aresult has very little of the fraud and waste problems that plague today’s outdated and poorly designed 17  
  18. 18. Medicare system. With somewhere between 10 and 20 percent of Medicare’s $450 billion annual budgetbeing attributable to waste, fraud, and abuse — and no, that was not a typo — the potential savings fromthis reform are huge.This approach will also make the system more patient-centered, because it will give beneficiaries moremodern insurance plans with more rational cost-sharing, co-pays, deductibles, etc., and thus greater cost-consciousness as patients and consumers.MedicaidThe Challenge. Medicaid, the joint federal-state health care program for the poor (and the third largestfederal program), has exploded into a semi-middle class entitlement that is bankrupting the states whileproviding low-quality care to poor families. Some 40 percent of physicians will not take new Medicaidpatients.Our Answer. To relieve state and federal taxpayers and improve the quality of care for low-incomeAmericans, we propose that Medicaid be block-granted. The amount of funding would be fixed. Stateswould have maximum flexibility to determine benefits, eligibility, and reimbursement rates for health careservices. As with the hugely successful welfare reform of 1996, this would give states the incentives andflexibility to focus scarce resources on those who truly need help.Tort ReformThe Challenge. Excessive medical malpractice awards drive up medical costs for everyone.Our Answer. We call on states to reform their medical malpractice (and product liability) systems. Suchreforms as the commonsense “loser pays” rule are saving money for patients, customers, and taxpayers inmany states. However, because this is a state rather than a federal issue under the Constitution, we do notinclude any savings from med-mal reform in our estimates; we do note, however, that the CongressionalBudget Office (CBO) has estimated that federal legislation imposing it on the states would save around$54 billion over 10 years. 4. Auto-Pilot Programs Save, first year: $119,720,772,800 Save, 10 years: $1,770,094,138,500 Currently represents: 20% of spending Contributes: 18% to savingsRepeal ObamaCare. (This line breaks out just those savings related to insurance coverage provisions.) Save, first year: $6,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $1,042,000,000,000 18  
  19. 19. Repeal ObamaCare. (This line breaks out just those savings related to “other direct spending” in the act.)12 Spend, first year: $10,000,000,000 Spend, 10 years: $732,000,000,000End TARP subsidies to failing financial institutions. Save, first year: $4,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $18,000,000,000Break up the giant, taxpayer-backed housing banks Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Save, first year: $30,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $300,000,000,000End farm subsidies. Save, first year: $29,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $290,000,000,000Convert the open-ended Food Stamps program into a capped block grant to the states. Save, first year: $35,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $350,000,000,000Reduce and limit the growth of federal payments to the states for cash welfare programs. Save, first year: $1,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $14,000,000,000Eliminate the ethanol tax credit subsidy. Save, first year: $22,650,000,000 Save, 10 years: $226,500,000,000Reduce number of troops deployed for certain overseas military operations to 45,000 by 2015. (This linereflects the debt service effect of this policy change, only.) Save, first year: $205,441,600 Save, 10 years: $201,993,644,600Maintain Medicares physician payment rates at the 2011 level. (This line displays the debt service effect ofthis change, only.) Spend first year: $134,668,800 Spend, 10 years: $53,399,506,100Withhold COLAs for retired federal workers until they reach age 62. Save, first year: $1,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $17,000,000,000                                                                                                                        12This item increases spending. ObamaCare was funded in part with $500 billion in 10-year cuts to Medicare, via deepreimbursement cuts to doctors, hospitals, and other health service providers. If not reversed, those reimbursement cuts will reducepatients’ access to medical care. Reforms are needed to make Medicare more affordable, but government rationing is the wrong wayto do it. 19  
  20. 20. Use a more accurate measure of inflation for all government programs.13 Save, first year: $1,000,000,000 Save, 10 years: $96,000,000,000ExplanationWhat we are calling auto-pilot spending is better known inside the Beltway as “mandatory” spending.Whatever you call it, it means “No one is minding the store.” Auto-pilot spending is especially problematicwhen – as in the case of so-called “entitlements” like Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and SocialSecurity – it is also open-ended and uncapped. That’s a formula for explosive cost growth.The obvious first step to putting our fiscal house in order is to repeal the newest open-ended, uncappedentitlement, ObamaCare. It’s a program we cannot afford and a majority of the public does not support.Repealing just the new spending in that controversial law would, by itself, produce 85 percent of the $1.2trillion the Super Committee is charged with saving.Politicians love to prop up banks and businesses with subsidies, and then, when the props fail, withtaxpayer bailouts. Enough! No more bailouts. In particular, the Wall Street bailout, TARP, has to end. Soshould further government support of the two giant housing banks, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whichtogether have already cost taxpayers in excess of $100,000,000,000 in bailout costs. The Department of Agriculture is one of the largest agencies of the federal government. With fewer than1,000,000 farmers in the United States, USDA has over 110,000 employees, or roughly one employee forevery 9 farmers! USDA currently provides up to $29,000,000,000 in farm and crop support programseach year, and also administers food stamp and supplemental nutrition programs that account for morethan half of all agriculture spending. Meanwhile, the government is subsidizing ethanol fuels thatconsumers don’t want or need. These short-sighted policies distort markets, drive up food prices, andhave even led to food shortages in parts of the developing world. We should lower food prices by gettingback to basic economic freedom. We should eliminate farm subsidies altogether, while converting theopen-ended Food Stamps program into a capped block grant to the states.Switching to a more accurate measure of inflation — “chained CPI” — makes sense, and would savemoney; but it should be applied neutrally to all government programs, not selectively as part of somepolitical compromise. 5. Defense Save, first year: $31,643,000,000 Save, 10 years: $2,085,136,000,000 Currently represents: 20% of spending Contributes: 21% of savings                                                                                                                        13  Moving to chained CPI also affects receipts. Receipt effects are not broken out separately.   20  
  21. 21. Reduce waste and duplication by implementing Sen. Tom Coburns “Back in Black” defense reforms. Save, first year: $13,300,000,000 Save, 10 years: $963,300,000,000Reduce number of troops deployed for certain overseas military operations to 45,000 by 2015 . Save, first year: $18,343,000,000 Save, 10 years: $1,121,836,000,000ExplanationIf there is one function of government clearly addressed and permitted in the U.S. Constitution, it isdefense. Defense protects all of the other functions of government, and our freedoms. “Our  national  debt  is  our  biggest  national  security  threat.”     Admiral  Mike  Mullen   Chairman  of  the  Joint  Chiefs  of  Staff  Still, as the largest military establishment on earth, America’s defense community can afford to contributeto debt reduction. We approach this challenge with the following basic goals: ü Preserve weapons systems and personnel investments that our commanders, after careful review, have deemed vital to the nation’s security. ü Cut out all obviously wasteful spending, such as duplicative purchases of Pentagon supplies. ü Eliminate or move from the Pentagon budget all programs that have nothing to do with national defense. ü Prefer specific cuts over across-the-board reductions or sequesters. (Avoid a meat-ax approach.)Having looked at a number of studies, reports, and white papers issued by experts both in and out ofgovernment, we believe the recommendations of Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) in his “Back in Black” reportrepresent an excellent opportunity for cost reduction, saving approximately $1 trillion over the next 10years while still providing the defense infrastructure and capability necessary to adequately defend thenation.We also endorse and call attention to the March 2011 GAO Report on “Opportunities to Reduce PotentialDuplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars and Enhance Revenue.” This report confirms thesoundness of many of the savings proposals in the Coburn plan.The Budget Control Act of 2011, which created the Super Committee, will impose an automatic across-the-board cut in defense and other spending, to make up for any shortfall in the savings produced by thatCommittee. We are worried that such a sequester, if large, could weaken our defenses, perhaps to a 21  
  22. 22. dangerously unacceptable level. We should avoid a meat-ax approach. And happily, we can easily do so.The Super Committee can avert our having to pull that trigger – and incidentally meet almost all of its$1.2 trillion savings target — simply by adopting the Coburn defense proposals. 6. Receipts Changes from CBO baseline Collect, first year: +$48,849,540,313 Collect, 10 years: -$5,509,670,654,408Extend Bush tax cuts and index Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) to inflation. Collect, first year: -$11,335,000,000 Collect, 10 years: -$3,949,251,457,122Extend Bush tax cuts and index Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) to inflation. (This line displays the debtservice effect of this change, only.) Collect, first year: -$1,269,520 Collect, 10 years: -$697,643,183,248Extend other expiring tax provisions. Collect, first year: -$12,505,740,276 Collect, 10 years: -$761,341,914,813Extend other expiring tax provisions (This line displays the debt service effect of this change, only.) Collect, first year: -$140,064,291 Collect, 10 years: -$158,786,409,507Repeal ObamaCare. (This line breaks out the budgetary effect on receipts of repealing the acts tax hikes.) Collect, first year: -$20,000,000,000 Collect, 10 years: -$520,000,000,000Sell off certain currently unused non-defense-related land and mineral rights in the West. Collect, first year: +$0 Collect, 10 years: +$519,972,544,000Sell off a portion of the U.S. held loan portfolio, across the government. Collect, first year: +$0 Collect, 10 years: +$355,645,022,618Sell a portion of U.S. Government gold holdings. Collect, first year: +$95,000,000,000 Collect, 10 years: +$189,814,453,125 22  
  23. 23. Modified SMART ACT: Let workers born after 1981 deposit 7.65 percentage points of payroll tax intopersonal retirement accounts. Collect, first year: -$2,168,385,600 Collect, 10 years: -$488,079,709,461ExplanationThe Tea Party Budget avoids tax hikes. Instead, it would significantly reduce federal receipts from theCBO current law baseline by repealing the ObamaCare tax hikes, extending expiring tax relief, andcreating SMART Accounts for younger workers (although the latter reform is really a long-terminvestment for the taxpayers, and not a short-term “tax cut”). This plan would also increase receiptsthrough sales of certain U.S. Government assets. 7. Budget Process ReformsAs we’ve recommended above, Congress should pass a strong Balanced Budget Amendment. But whetheror not the states ratify the BBA, Congress must make tough choices to stave off the coming debt collapse.The current budget process is clearly broken. It has been more than two years since the Senate passed abudget. Budget gimmicks and double-counting are rife, with ObamaCare being only the most notoriousrecent example. Increasingly, instead of doing the basic work of budgeting, Washington is stalemated,resorting to “continuing resolutions,” threats of partial-government-shutdowns, and tepid last-minutecompromises — in short, our representatives just keep kicking the can down the road. It’s time to end thiscycle of failure. ü Pay for performance. Workers in the private sector suffer financial penalties when they fail to “hit their numbers.” So should lawmakers. We should suspend pension contributions and COLAs for Members of Congress whenever the federal budget is not in balance. Period. ü Sunset outdated programs and agencies. Enact Rep. Kevin Brady’s (R-TX) “MAP Act,” which includes a Sunset Commission for federal agencies, tough spending caps backed up by the threat of sweeping automatic sequesters, and other excellent reforms. ü Make budgeting more honest. We need to thwart the gaming, gimmicks, and double-counting that is endemic to the current, broken budget process. A good way to do that is to enact Senator Jeff Sessions’s (R-AL) “Honest Budget Act.” “I  used  to  work  for  the  Federal  government.  .  .  .  I  cannot  overemphasize  the  need  for  a   change  in  the  basic  federal  culture,  from  one  of  frowning  on  saving  money     to  one  of  rewarding  saving  money.”     Alan  Bosler    via  email   23  
  24. 24. ü Manage out waste and duplication. Adopt sensible modern management reforms, including Strong America Now’s “Lean Six Sigma” method, in order to root out billions in waste across the government. This could be especially useful in the Defense Department. ü End baseline budgeting. Stop assuming every program gets automatic, built-in increases each year. Instead, make each program regularly justify any increase, as well as its continued existence. To put our money where our mouth is, our plan takes a big step in this direction. In the 40% of the budget that is annually appropriated, we include reductions and terminations that make possible an effective freeze. In the 60% of the budget that is on auto-pilot, we include reforms consistent with a freeze. But that’s not enough. Over the next few years, Congress should go through the entire budget, program by program — all 2,200 of them — and reform each, so as to shift it from auto-pilot to annually appropriated status. If Congress had to review all 2,200 federal programs every year, we are pretty sure it would look for ways to have fewer programs. ü Crowd-source government. We think it’s time to harness the decentralized power of “crowd- sourcing” to prioritize government itself. We propose a Designated Tax Allotment option that would work as follows. Each taxpayer, on his annual tax return, would be allowed to earmark 10 percent of his tax payments to go to up to three agencies of his choice. Agencies so selected would receive the money on top of their current annual budget, but no agency would see more than a 10 percent “top up.” Any funds left over each year, after allocations, would revert to the general fund. This option would create a powerful incentive for federal bureaucrats to become more efficient by rewarding agencies that can win popular support. At the same time, it would help Congress identify unpopular agencies for future reductions, mergers, or termination. (Safeguards would be needed to keep bureaucrats from trying to win more funding through advertising campaigns and the like.) In the spirit of this proposal, we also commend to readers’ attention Rick Raddatz’s thoughtful “cap and grade” concept, spelled out at his website, winwinrevolution.org. 24  
  25. 25.   “Go  bold  or  go  home.”     Greg  Fettig    Noblesville,  Indiana  ConclusionA merica’s present challenges are so great — her economic future is so dire — that we must make tough choices. But with tough choices come great opportunities for reform and renewal, and for getting back to first principles.These difficult times demand that we lay aside conventional thinking for a bolder course, based on theenduring principles of economic freedom and limited government that made our nation great.It’s time for Washington to: ü Stop the debt. ü Cut, cap, and balance federal spending. ü Get out of whole lines of business that Washington shouldn’t be doing, or can’t do well. ü Eliminate or privatize all agencies and programs that are unconstitutional, outdated, or unaffordable. ü End earmarks, corporate bailouts, and counterproductive foreign aid. ü Improve future generations’ retirement benefits through individual ownership and control. ü Enact strong budget reforms to make our government small, lean, limited, and affordable.If our leaders can’t or won’t do these things, why are they our leaders?Are you listening, Washington?Go bold or go home. 25  
  26. 26. Appendix A       Designated  Tax  Allocation    This   is   a   tax   reform   program   which   will   permit   every   American   Citizen   to   vote   with   his   or   her   tax   dollars  every   year   on   April   15th.     Under   the   terms   of   this   program   every   individual   taxpayer   (businesses   and  corporations  are  excluded)  shall  be  permitted  to  designate  up  to  ten  percent  of  his  or  her  federal  taxes  to  the  federal  government  agency,  department,  or  program  of  their  choice.    In  this  manner,  any  such  designated  federal  government  agency,  department  or  program,  as  determined  by  the  congress,  may  receive  up  to  a  ten  percent  increase  in  their  budget  in  the  coming  fiscal  year.    They  will  accomplish  this  by  becoming  more  responsive  to  the  needs  of  the  tax  paying  citizens  they  serve.    Historically,  the  temptation  that  has  plagued  federal  government  lawmakers  and  bureaucrats  is  that  of  furthering   their   own   careers   and   agendas,   instead   of   those   of   the   citizens   they   are   pledged   to   serve.    Now,   with   the   implementation   of   a   Designated   Tax   Allocation   program,   a   profit   incentive   can   be  initiated   that   will   affect   the   paychecks   of   the   bureaucrats   in   direct   proportion   to   the   amount   of  Designated  Tax  Allocation  their  agency,  department  or  program  receives,  by  permitting  a  small  portion  of  that  allocation  to  be  paid  out  as  a  bonus  to  their  key  personnel.    The  ultimate  goal  of  this  program  is  to  give  government  a  bottom  line  to  look  after  each  year.    It  will  also  force  government  to  be  accountable  to  the  citizens  they  serve  as  a  way  to  increase  their  budget  each  year.     In   this   manner,   we   create   a   capitalist   government   to   govern   a   capitalist   society.     If   ever   a  government  has  served  a  free  enterprise  system,  this  is  a  government  structure  which  will  nurture  and  support  that  system.    This   program   will   invite   abuse   by   opportunists   and   therefore   must   have   certain   specific   safeguards   built  in.    Limits  on  the  amount  each  government  agency,  department  or  program  can  spend  on  advertising,   26  
  27. 27. public  relations,  and  poll  taking,  will  need  to  be  in  place  limiting  these  activities  to  a  very  small  portion  of  their  annual  budget.    You  can  be  certain  the  number  of  advertising  agencies,  public  relations  firms,  and  pollsters  will  increase  exponentially  in  Washington,  DC,  with  the  implementation  of  this  program.    A  government  that  will  support  free  enterprise  is  what  is  needed  most  in  the  United  States  today,  and  in  the   future,   if   our   country   is   to   flourish,   prosper,   and   remain   a   world   power.     If   we   can   makeover   our  federal   government   into   a   body   that   supports   a   free   enterprise   system   of   business,   commerce   and  accomplishment,  and  do  so  willingly  and  eagerly,  we  will  continue  to  be  one  the  greatest  nations  in  the  world.    Phil  Henry  PO  Box  151115,  Ely,  NV  89315  Phone:  702-­‐456-­‐9664  Email:  mail@philhenry.com       27  
  28. 28. 28  
  29. 29. 29  
  30. 30. 30  
  31. 31. 31  
  32. 32. 32  
  33. 33. TEA PARTY BUDGET 2012-2021 (billions of dollars) 2012-­‐ 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021     GDP 15,663 16,182 16,974 18,132 19,110 20,028 20,948 21,901 22,856 23,801 195,624   RECEIPTS 2,684 2,778 2,955 3,236 3,331 3,487 3,602 3,743 3,876 4,020 33,710   OUTLAYS 3,056 3,114 3,086 3,144 3,322 3,449 3,566 3,742 3,834 3,863 34,176   DEFICIT -372 -336 -131 90 9 37 36 1 43 157 -­‐466   PUB H DEBT -10,767 -11,165 -11,331 -11,361 -11,439 -11,465 -11,475 -11,507 -11,487 -11,344   -­‐113,346   GROSS DEBT -15,430 -15,947 -16,257 -16,477 -16,780 -17,086 -17,395 -17,704 -17,996 -18,101 -­‐169,138   SAVINGS 553 578 717 843 928 1,001 1,070 1,171 1,327 1,546   9,734             As Percent of GDP               RECEIPTS 17.13%   17.17%   17.41%   17.83%   17.43%   17.41%   17.20%   17.09%   16.96%   16.87%     17.25%   OUTLAYS 19.51% 19.24% 18.18% 17.34% 17.38% 17.22% 17.02% 17.09% 16.77% 16.21% 17.60%   DEFICIT -2.38% -2.07% -0.77% 0.50% 0.05% 0.19% 0.17% 0.00% 0.19% 0.66% -­‐0.35%   - - -   PUB H DEBT -68.74% -69.00% -66.76% -62.66% -59.86% -57.25% -54.78% 52.54% 50.26% 47.61% -­‐59.95%   - - - GROSS DEBT -98.51% -98.55% -95.78% -90.88% -87.81% -85.32% -83.04% 80.84% 78.56% 75.96% -­‐87.52%  Source: Tea Party Debt Commission, 11/172011Figures may not total due to rounding.Negative figures indicate deficit or debt. 33  
  34. 34. Credits / Acknowledgements Commissioners     Ed  Bell   Cincinnati,  Ohio   Pre-­‐press  services  professional;  OurTP.org,  Eastern  Hills  Tea  Party     Deneen  Borelli   Eastchester,  New  York   Project  21  fellow,  FreedomWorks  fellow     Sam  DeMarco   Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania   Businessman;  Veterans  and  Patriots  United     Greg  Fettig   Noblesville,  Indiana   Small  business  owner;  America  ReFocused     Andrew  Hemingway   Bristol,  New  Hampshire   Business  owner;  Republican  Liberty  Caucus  of  New  Hampshire     Phil  Henry   Ely,  Nevada   Formal  naval  officer,  current  Marine  Corps  leadership  trainer;  White  Pine  Tea  Party     Bob  Howard   Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania   Retired  business  executive;  Pennsylvania  Coalition  for  Responsible  Government     Lawrence  L.  King   Vienna,  Virginia   Retired  project  manager;  NoVA  Tea  Party  (Taxed  Enough  Already)     David  Kirkham   Provo,  Utah     President,  Kirkham  Motorsports;  Utah  Tea  Party     Bob  MacGuffie   Fairfield,  Connecticut   Insurance  agent;  RightPrinciples.com     Alfred  C.  Maurer   Colorado  Springs,  Colorado   IT  consultant,  former  military  officer;  publisher,  The  Voice  of  Liberty;  member,  Pikes  Peak  9-­‐12     David  A.  Zupan   Avon  Lake,  Ohio   Community  organizer  for  the  Constitution;  North  Shore  Patriots;  West  Shore  Tea  Party;  Lorain  County  Tea  Party  (LoCo47TP);   Lorain  County  9-­‐12   34  
  35. 35. Working GroupsPrinciples Alfred C. MaurerSocial Security Greg Fettig, Ed BellMedicare and Medicaid Sam DeMarcoAuto-Pilot Programs David A. ZupanDefense Phil Henry, Sam DeMarcoAnnually Appropriated Deneen Borelli, Bob MacGuffieStaff Dean Clancy, FreedomWorks Legislative Counsel and VP Health Care Policy Celia Bigelow, FreedomWorks InternField Hearings (“Stop the Debt!” Tour 2011)9/01 Salt Lake City, UT9/23 Orlando, FL9/26 Ogden, UT9/27 Logan, UT9/28 St. George, UT9/29 Philadelphia, PA9/30 Provo, UT10/06 Cincinnati, OH10/08 Louisville, KY10/15 Columbia, SC10/21 Indianapolis, IN11/17 Washington, DCSourcesBudget plans and comparisons the Tea Party Debt Commission took into account include: • Congressman Connie Macks "One Percent Reduction Act" (Penny Plan) • Congressman Paul Ryans "Path to Prosperity" Plan (House-Passed Budget) • Congressman Ron Pauls "Plan to Restore America" • Senator Tom Coburns "Back in Black" Plan • Senator Rand Pauls 5-Year Budget Plan • Senator Pat Toomeys "Restoring Balance" Budget Plan • House Republican Study Committee "Honest Solutions" Budget Plan • Simpson-Bowles Commission Bipartisan "Moment of Truth" Plan • President Obamas Official Budget Submission for FY2012 • Cato Institute "Balanced Budget" Plan • Heritage Foundation "Saving the American Dream" Plan • Esquire Magazine Bipartisan Budget Plan • NTU-USPIRG "Toward Common Ground" Budget Plan • Jackson Security Plan (JSP) (Medicare and Social Security accounts) • FreedomWorks Report Card: Grading the Budget Plans 35  
  36. 36. 36  

×