Two major budget cutting measures: 1) get rid of the Department of Education; and, 2) get rid of the Department of Energy. Neither activity is constitutional and neither department has met the objectives that were articulated when they were established.

What they need to cut, and keep from happening anymore, are unfunded mandates. Cut the czars; the EPA; the Dept of ED; etc.

I agree with both McCaig and FranLG

Why is it that no one speaks of cutting U.S. foreign aid? It may be a small part of the deficit but any reduction helps.

I would be for limiting all foreign aid to food, medical supplies and general humanitarian aid for disasters.

I have not heard one politician from either party speak of cutting foreign aid.

Take the funds "earmarked" for foreign aid and use the funds to rebuild infrastructure and fund education. Stop funding countries that hate us and who mean us harm!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2623044/posts

This could prove to be huge.

The House of Representatives "holds the purse strings" of this nation.

If they refuse to fund something, it withers and dies.

The members of the new House, our representatives, need to be told that we expect them to de-fund certain programs and agencies; they are, after all, our representatives.

If Republicans Are Serious About Budget Cutting...

try cutting their own salaries. They need to set the example. Their obviously not serious or they'd do it. Everyone I know in the private sector has lost their job, lost commissions, lost hours, or taken pay cuts. Yet the govenment employees still expect us to pay more taxes to support their life styles. Getting real old! Too bad big corporations didn't take care of their employees and hogged up all the profits. Now all the ignorants are voting for socialist politicians to take care of them because the big corporations didn't.

Regarding Senate support for eliminating earmarks, it is true that Senators are elected for 6-year terms, but they would be smart to remember that we Tea Prtiers are in this game for life, and they had better tow the line from the population or their 6-year term will be their final term/only term. We are not happy with them and they will all too soon get that message if they continue in their old ways.

I am concerned about how we can prevent those in power from distorting the original intent of the constitution in order to accomplish their progressive goals. Even though they all take the oath to uphold and defend it,some have no intention to keep that oath. What can we, the people, do to make a difference?

You report that "...House Majority Leader-elect Eric Cantor, pledging overwhelming support for a measure to eliminate earmarks -- those small (merely $15.9 billion) and unrelated special-interest add-ons attached to spending bills." Surely you were jesting by describing as "small" and inserting that parenthetical phrase above. Congress must get back to a realistic spending plan by requiring a majority floor vote (with votes recorded and published) on ALL

I am nescient about the veracity of David Ignatius' statement about the "'carried interest' compensation paid to many hedge fund managers" (IndyStar, 11/18/2010). Ignatius calls tax breaks for high earners "billionaire populism." Please clarify this for me.

We should really be encouraged by McConnell's Damascus Road experience this week. His office said his phone lines were really lit up the day he turned around.

Your essay is a great rallying cry for Republicans in the months to come. Let's not let up.

From my perspective, Article IV is very clear as to what shall be supported....."...shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..". Key word being "this", not some other, imagined document that someone wishes would replace it.

Let the trimming begin.

We wouldn't need earmarks for our representatives "to bring home the bacon" if they would leave the bacon at home.

In addition to the cutting of congressional salaries, how about we get rid of their immense pensions and "perks"? Make them fly commercial to get to Washington, pay for their staffers out of their own budget, and for God's sake, pay for their own dinners once in a while.

Once and for all...please understand...the only meaningful part of the Constitution still being applied today is Article 4, Section 3, Paragraph 2. There the fed is given plenary power over everything in its jurisdiction (lands, people), without constitutional limitations. The only thing it needs to do is get the We the Sheeple to become part of its subject class of citizens, which it does through the offers of freebies such as social security and medicaid, among others. Contract to accept their welfare, enter their jurisdiction, incur their unfettered dominion. It is that simple.

I agree with John J O'Connor post. Thats where we should start......

I trust that all 535 members of Congress receive "complimentary" copies of Alexander's essays and all of the other Patriot Post publications. They should not be allowed to claim that they didn't know or had no warning of the end of their political careers.

Mr Cantor sponsored a monthly "Vote Now" campaign where spending cuts were proposed and voted on on-line by lots of us conservatives. The winning cuts were to be,and as far as i know were, entered as a bill in the House where the Dem's promptly voted them down. Is there a plan to re-introduce a) these old cuts and b) continue the Vote Now campaign ?

I agree with Frank Soule in cutting foreign aid, except I'd cut it 100% worldwide. Why are we supporting anyone outside the USA? We have homeless vets, whole families, children, elderly, etc. We have soup kitchens in a few cities here and there. Our old and infirmed are without adequate heating fuel or medical supplies, etc. We have so many issues in this country that we need to address and quit 'helping' all these other countries whose leaders are getting fat off our dime and not doing squat for their people. Maybe if they had to fend for themselves they'd learn to be self-sustaining like the US had to learn.

If the Republicans truly heard our voice, they will not disenfranchise the freshmen Republicans by placing them in insignificant committees. Shame on them if they believe that they can co-opt these newly elected Constitutionalists into doing business as usual. Congress - wake up or we will wake you up! Represent us or you will be removed and replaced! We are sheepdogs, not sheep, and we will not tolerate tyranny anymore!

"A powerful Democratic senator, pointing the finger at cable news for a politically toxic climate in Washington, unleashed a stunning tirade in which he expressed his desire to see the Federal Communications Commission shut down Fox News and MSNBC." Fox News.Com

What he really wanted to say (do) is rid the US of FOX News, but the political savy communist in him included MSNBC to 'seem fair.'

After all, ridding the US of MSNBC is not a big loss for the socialists. And so they, the MSM or better known as Socialists Support Networks (SSN), still have a monopoly on leftist propaganda.

The day a communist in American government has the power to shut down freedom of speech, is they day he or she is forcefully removed from office by the American people.

And I am supporting MSNBC’s right for freedom of speech also.

In 1763, Benjamin Franklin was asked by the Bank of England why the colonies were so prosperous, and this was his response….

“That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one.”

The opponents of central banking were not pleased. In 1798, Thomas Jefferson said the following….

“I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution – taking from the federal government their power of borrowing.”

Here is a thought. About folks deciding that the Federal government, isn't that congresses (specifically the houses's job). I am talking in terms of a very old document called the Constitution? While we are dealing with restoring the Constitution as a major part of our governmental system, and straightening out our finances, would it be resonable to start only allowing the House to initiate all spending? I seem to see a lot of text that says this agency or that agency decided to spend. Seems Nancy P created a new position in the house and initiated a bit of spending to all that. Aren't all expence initiations to be done by the whole house?

There is no Compromise on Freedom, You have it or you don’t!

When another owns your sweat, i.e. you work almost 6 months of the year to pay taxes on your income; government owns you!

Don’t pay the demanded taxes and you will bare the brute force of government. A whip or the force of government dictate is all the same, you are a slave.

This country did great for 150 years without a federal income tax or national sales tax on its then, free citizens.

Our elected have become drunk on our tax money and they must be weaned from the public tax trough.

I pray those we have now entrusted once again with our liberty and the rule of law will get it this time.

Our patience as a free people is wearing very thin.

Want to cut the budget, eliminate every agency, bureau, department, law, regulation, rule, etc. not authorized by the Constitution. This includes the federal reserve board. Get the U.S. out of the ultimate foreign entanglement (UN).

The Constitution is very plain and clear. The government is authorized to raise funds to build roads & bridges, maintain a navy, to raise and support armies, but no where in the Constitution does it authorize anything about education, EPA, BATF (restriction nor registration of firearms), etc. I suggest that if this Republican Promise to America is genuine that this congress commence the elimination of each and every bureacracy and/or department that is not explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. It is one thing to say that you wish to cut spending to pre-stimulus levels of 2008, but real reform requires getting this nation back to the standards, controls and allowances of the document that founded and should be controlling this nations federal government. If they are not willing to do what it takes, it is time to abolish the petty little regimes that exist in Washington and We The People take back our country (before it is lost forever).

The interesting aspect of this is that many of the Freshman do not understand Constitutional intent nor have a clear definition of Constitutional free market Economics. My example is the new Freshman/woman from Wa's 3rd Congressional District. She has hired for her head transition person a former staffer of Slade Gorton. Slade is a mainstreamer that follows more Keynesian economics than Friedman or other true Adam Smith style Free Marketers.

My personal concern is that she does not have a Founders Constitutional foundation and has been politically mentored by Slade himself. Therefore, one can only conclude that she is a mainstreamer and hence not follow our expectations for Constitutionally based economics.

How many of the other Freshman are like her and most likely will follow what their establishment mentors dictate? We must get all the Freshman on the same Constitutional Intent page or there will be confusion in the caucus. To accomplish what you propose requires a Founders Constitutionally educated elected and more so, a Founders Constitutionally educated Electorate. We The People need to understand and return to our first principles.

I've seen many comments here about the new people in the congress making changes. While I hold out some hope things will change in Washington, I'm not optimistic. Despite conservative gains this past Nov. 2, still more than 85% of incumbents were returned to office. This should tell everyone the problem is not just in Washington. The problem is in every district in every state. It's a simple case of NIMBY; my guy is okay, but your guy has to go. Until this attitude changes, things in Washington will not change. It's time to keep the good 15% and sweep out the remaining trash.

11/18/10

I AGREE WITH"Frank Soule"STOP FOREIGN AID TO

SPECIALLY ISLAMIC COUNTRIES! HAVE THEM PUT THEIR

GUNS AWAY AND FERTILIZE the DESERTS,& LEARN TO FARM

& GROW THEIR OWN FOOD

Here is a thought. About folks deciding that the Federal government, isn't that congresses (specifically the houses's job). I am talking in terms of a very old document called the Constitution? While we are dealing with restoring the Constitution as a major part of our governmental system, and straightening out our finances, would it be resonable to start only allowing the House to initiate all spending? I seem to see a lot of text that says this agency or that agency decided to spend. Seems Nancy P created a new position in the house and initiated a bit of spending to all that. Aren't all expence initiations to be done by the whole house?

In 1934 and again in 1935, FDR's hand-picked Supreme Court ruled that the "general welfare" clause (Article 1:8) gave Congress authority to spend where and when it chose. That's when our present troubles began and they won't end unless and until the Supremes reverse themselves.

Since the Senate solons might decide to eliminate earmarks, what is to keep the honorables from sending letters or offering suggestions for expenditures directly to the bureaucrats? Defund all the bureaucracies -- Education! Energy, Health and Human Services, Transportation, EPA. We need a department of War (back to the old name), State and perhaps Commerce though it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see that go as well.

Does anyone remember what the Department of Energy was for? Eliminate dependence on foreign oil. Set up by the peanut farmer himself. It now has over 100,000 employees and a budget in the 10s of billions. What a government.

BT

Reidl's cuts are interesting, however I missed where he cut the defense budget?

Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of his proposed cuts (with exception to cutting the Pell Grants (education is good) and to cutting the State Department cultural programs (spreading American values of Democracy and freedom is a good thing)) but we spend nearly 3 times that $343 Billion on defense. There's no excuse that a new fighter jet would cost a billion dollars to build and fly.

We should be able to cut at least $100Billion out of the defense budget WITHOUT closing bases. Instead cut dead-end projects those damn earmarks were used as bribes for. At the very least divert some of it back to a streamlined NASA or some other PUBLIC research/space initiative, as that's where internet, television, electronics, much of our medical tech, food storage tech, etc, got its start.

Cut, Baby, Cut!

Start with cutting aid to NPR, PBS, etc. Have you ever heard a program announcement "this program was underwritten with support from the American Taxpayer"? They take it for granted. End support for all partisan groups that push Leftist agendas, e.g. Planned Parenthood, ACORN, & the like. ED (education dept) was a payoff from Jimmy Carter to the teacher's unions. Have any positive results come from the billions spent there? Close it down and pass the savings along to the states. Ditto Energy Dept., we are more dependent on foreign oil now than we were in Jimmy Carter's term. Why? Restrictions on building refineries & drilling. And end all "green" initiatives to stop enriching Al Gore & his hoaxster cronies with taxpayer funds. Privatize Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, & student loans.

There' a new sheriff in town.

I'm not sure how provisions in the Constitution impact what I'm about to type, but I think there's an obvious difference between 1)the decisions congress makes on what to spend taxpayer money on, and 2)the overall total amount that all levels of government are taking, and therefore spending.

Again, regardless of what the Constitution says, or how it's being interpreted (that allows all this obscene spending), our problem is that congress spends first, then searches for pockets to pick second. And oftentimes the second stage doesn't happen, for fear of pissing off taxpayers, which then causes this debt.

I don't care who spearheads the change we need (Boehner, DeMint, McConnell, Mighty Mouse, Tiny Tim, or maybe Alice Cooper, whomever) but that change must limit congress's ability to spend, most logically as a percentage of taxpayer income. With this in place, American familys' budgets will be protected. Then the nimrods in congress can argue over how the money is spent, subject to public scrutiny. We can then throw out the criminals who misappropriate taxpayer money, and the dopes who attempt to blow it on bridges to nowhere.

WE the People now have spoken,

and you (Republicans) had better listen well !!

We are taking notes on our scoreboard

and it is up for "Show and Tell" !!

I do realize how "dumb" my statement is, and I do not suggest it for US budget/financial purposes, but...

I suggest that Pelosi return all costs to the US Citizens for her exhorbitant military travel over the past 2+ years, and that the Obamas (all) return all costs for their exhorbitant "vacations" since being elected. These are not "usual and reasonable" expenses or actions.... these are all elitist.

I also agree, remove funding for all of the illegal entities in this government.

I keep reading more articles on George Soros & the Financial power he has exerted on entire countries. Now I have read that he owns the entire Democratic party & a large part of the Republician party. How is it that he can do this & remain in relative obscurity? Why have I not seen any reference to him within this letter? He apparently wants to own the world.

Amen!! Republicans had better get it through their collective heads that until We start hearing them question the constitutionality of existing or proposed programs BEFORE they talk about "cutting spending" or "paying for" such things, I will be suspicious of whether they really understand what voters (at least informed ones) were saying on election day.

It is good that we may start moving power back from federal govt to the states. Can we do the same with responsibilty? Where is the authority for the federal government to make loans to the states? Start with California If they want high and early retirement pay for state employees let them pay for it.

S. Hall wrote, "Once and for all...please understand...the only meaningful part of the Constitution still being applied today is Article 4, Section 3, Paragraph 2. There the fed is given plenary power over everything in its jurisdiction (lands, people), without constitutional limitations."

This is a misconstruction of the Constitution in the same manner as "general Welfare of the United States" in Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 1 is often misread. In both cases, "United States" refers not to the nation-state as a whole, but to the entity we call the Federal Government. In fact, "the Territory ... belonging to the United States" is nothing other than the District of Columbia.

Nicholas, you are still part of the problem. First, federally funded government research did not invent television, electronics, "much of our medical tech, food storage tech" etc. True, radar was a military development - based on the discoveries of private or corporate research. NASA and the Defense Dept. have played key roles in the development of space technology, but so have the communications and space sensor businesses. All of these other things you mention were developed primarily in non-government laboratories for non-government purposes. It is even debatable whether NASA is now the most effective means to what it does.

Nor should the federal government be funding college tuition. That is NOT a federal function! If you want government grants for education, talk to your state legislator or county commissioner. Better yet, talk to them about cutting costs at state colleges so people can actually afford to attend without running up monstrous debts or begging for handouts from the taxpayers.

When you start making exceptions for one unconstitutional program, you break down the walls against all of the others. Remember, a lot of these things can be done by the states. A sizable portion of current federal operations should not be done by government at any level - they are individual responsibilities.

Here's another unconstitutional expense that should be eliminated: National Disaster Area relief. That sounds heartless until you realize that the money for this is taken by force of government (which is also heartless).

I propose instead a National Government Insurance Corporation. The premiums will be apportioned by state, and the payouts will cover state and local infrastructure damaged by natural catastrophes. Then, instead of jacking up the national debt or debauching the currency every time a tornado roars through a town somewhere, there will be a fund in place based on sound actuary principles. This would be a legitimate endeavor of the Federal government insofar as Congress has the authority to ratify any agreement between States (Article I, last paragraph).

""...the Territory ... belonging to the United States" is nothing other than the District of Columbia."

...and the island territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, etc., there being no mainland territories remaining. I didn't recall those until after I posted the earlier comment on Art. IV Sec. 3 of the U. S. Constitution.

If you are serious about cutting the budget then just after a 1.4% raise to all Government employees across the board,all in Government should pledge to cut their across the board 15% to 20 %.This would be the best gesture to the American people that they are at least trying to be serious.How could a raise be given at least time when senior citizens did not even get the cost of living increase 2 years in a row? Explain that one.Think about this.

Frank Soule

"Why is it that no one speaks of cutting U.S. foreign aid? It may be a small part of the deficit but any reduction helps.

I would be for limiting all foreign aid to food, medical supplies and general humanitarian aid for disasters.

I have not heard one politician from either party speak of cutting foreign aid.

Take the funds "earmarked" for foreign aid and use the funds to rebuild infrastructure and fund education. Stop funding countries that hate us and who mean us harm!"

Years ago, on a Local talk-show, I suggested to a conservative host, "We can eliminate Foreign aid" to start with, to solve one of the "hot button issues that was going on at that time", I was told very informatively that to drop foreign aid was "stupid for it was "drop in the bucket"???? I suggested we needed to stop all the drops going into the bucket, because all the drops in the bucket, makes a "bucket full" over a process of time.

THE CONGRESS had better be "intimidated by we, the people" instead of their "go along to get along" peers. I think the Tea Parties sent that LOUD message to the incumbents and it will be of benefit to the incumbents to understand, the Bounds of the Constitution and their Oath of Office, should be of more importance than "intimidation of their "go along to get along" peers".

I might suggest that the Stopping of "Foreign aid" "drop in the bucket" might be applied to the "Make Social Security Voluntary Plan"

1. Cash settlement with interest to all who are "FORCED" to participate NOW and make the system VOLUNTARY.

2. Choice to those who were "FORCED" to participate but now are retired.

1. Cash Settlement with interest

OR

2. They can continue on the program as they have

been "FORCED" during their working years and

they should have the choice about this, for

this to be settled "honorably."

It is time to "settle some scores". I have some more ideas and they are simple, but they would effectively settle these violations of our Beloved Foundations and restore our "Liberty in Law", like REPEAL and REVERSE, UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS.

For God & Country

The American

Cut the Defense Budget. And start with those countries that don't allow their soldiers to get into actual combat, then resign from the United Nations, stop giving defense weapons to countries that are on their way to becoming our enemies, eliminate US Aid, DOE, Energy and TSA. Merge all intelligence departments into one, same thing for our military. And now that Karzai has shown his true colors and more that likely has billions in forgeign banks, get out Afghanistan, cut the salaries of those elected to office for doing the unforgiveable; passing law without reading them. Limit all other foreign aid to food, medical, and humanitarian needs. Take the troops out of Germany, Italy, Korea, Japan,they can stand on their own. And the next time we get into some conflict, make sure you don't leave the Congress any wiggle room, like we just did. America should support only those countries that support it, period.

Jimmy Carter started the Energy Dept. to get us off foreign oil. We need to get rid of this boondoggle. Also the Education Dept. is worthless.

Prescient individuals in authority are comfortable with their control just so long as energetic discussion continues in the lower echelons, but when things turn precariously silent in the ranks that's when those in authority become concerned. So it is with our government. All this discussion, from the perspective of the elite, dissipates dangerous energy and they can continue on with business as usual, but when thinking people become truly disenchanted and a pregnant silence prevails, then and only then will you see our representatives take heed and seriously engage with us.

The original Constitution was changed by the Act of 1871 by the Congress and by doing so they committed Treason, because nothing in the Constitition permitted them to do such a thing. I have an email that I would gladly send an attachment of the Act of 1871 to you Mr. Alexander but I don't have an address to send it to. It would explain a whole lot of things the Congress does and they are not required to tell the public about anything. grc

Most people are not aware the changes made in The Constitution by the Act of 1871 which only gives those in the ten mile square Washington D.C.the control of whatever the Congress does. And no control of anything in the 48 states. Even the Federal Income tax in actuality is no law that gives Government the right to collect taxes from people residing outside that 10 mile square. The people have been dumbed down so that they only believe it does.

I wish Federal (and State) Legislatures would take a hard look at SSDI and its guidelines. I am astounded at how many people I know who are on SSDI, yet manage to run businesses or hold jobs.

One gal I know has a landscaping business. She's perfectly able to most of the work required, and still collects SSDI. She's been shacking up with some guy (who earns a very good living) for upward of ten years because if she marries him, there goes her hand-out. (What he earns would probably more than make up for what she gets in SSDI, anyway.)

Another one collects SSDI because "my back hurts." It doesn't bother her enough to keep her from going camping or hunting with her son, though.

If someone is genuinely unable to do any sort of work AT ALL, that's one thing. Guess if someone is persistent enough in visiting doctor after doctor, or hiring some as-seen-on-TV disability lawyer, they'll sooner or later get their "gimme."

Harsh? Perhaps...and if I knew someone who was an honest soul and needed help, I'd offer it--without the Government telling me to, either.