Considering the rise in threat from Russia, China and North Korea, that 27 million Americans are still uninsured and tens of million more rely on federal health insurance subsidies, that our available workforce is shrinking, where should we reduce spending to the tune of $2 trillion as promised?
$1.8 trillion Medicare/Medicaid
$1.5 trillion Social Security
$1 trillion Interest on Federal Debt
$955 billion Defense
$428 billion Federal Pensions
$788 billion Income Security Programs
$281 billion Food and Agriculture Subsidies
$151 billion Waste, Fraud and Abuse 🤑
$108 billion Classified Programs
Estimates from the US Debt Clock
🤑 Quite a way to go to reach $2 trillion even if it all was eliminated 😃
Before we jump on the eliminate the Department of Education, let’s be clear what it spends and what it does and for whom.
Let’s maximize efficiency, but let’s not make things worse for millions of Americans in the process. And, keep in mind that some (much) of the federal programs cut will be shifted to the states.
My question is are we trying to reduce the deficit or merely the role of the Federal Government?
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
Here is a good candidate to get us more than 15% of the needed reduction in spend – the unfunded expansions in Medicare Part D and Medicaid/Public Exchanges.
Medicaid
All states did not expand Medicaid after Health Reform. Let those who did expand Medicaid pick up 100% of the cost if they want to continue that expansion. Remember, we are only talking about individuals who have incomes well in excess of the poverty line.
Public Exchanges
Similarly, 90+% of Americans enrolled in the public exchange receive a taxpayer subsidy, where 40% are paying less than $10 a month. For those states that want to continue the subsidy, let them step in.
Medicare
And, remember that President Bush II added Medicare Part D without adding any specific revenue source – where 75% is funded with general revenues. Clearly, poverty levels among seniors are less than poverty levels among Americans under age 65. Let seniors who want part D coverage shoulder the full cost of that coverage. Most of today’s retirees didn’t pay additional general revenue taxes while working (prior to 2006) to fund their Part D benefits.
Important to remember that we added $31+ Trillion to our national debt since Part D was added by the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, and we added $26+ Trillion since Health Reform was signed into law by President Obama.
Returning federal spending for those eligible under 2003 rules at levels indexed for inflation would require asking those Americans who benefit from having access to such coverage (where government engages in price fixing) to shoulder the cost of those entitlements – lowering annual federal spending in excess of $350 billion per year.
https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/trump-republicans-gop-medicaid-expansion-aca-obamacare-matching/?
LikeLike
Richard – You and I did just fine without the Dept of “Education.” It’s a worthless bureaucracy and a good place to start cutting the budget.
LikeLike
I didn’t know what it did, but when I looked it up it seemed several valuable programs for poor and disabled children.
LikeLike
What’s wrong with doing both ?
LikeLike
This isn’t about “maximizing efficiency” of the existing federal government behemoth. That is tactical thinking. Doing things right is a tactical approach – operations, human resources, structure, etc. The folks already in the federal government are excellent at doing things right per their statutory authorization. They are also very good at expanding their roles and actions in pursuit of doing things right. Read the 68 FAQ on Health Reform – none of which were in the enabling statute.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/laws/affordable-care-act/for-employers-and-advisers/aca-implementation-faqs
What the DOGE dudes are after, hopefully, is strategic thinking – doing the right things, and stop doing the wrong things.
This isn’t something that will be done with President Obama’s “phone and a pen”. Generally, there are no immediate rewards when you stop doing the wrong things and start doing the right things. I
This is all about being productive. Federal government activity is seldom the best option in terms of a cost-efficient solution. Private sector American citizens live in a world where productivity is required. It is long past time to focus the federal bureaucracy on that same goal – which, yes, will improve outcomes via deletion.
In terms of Social Security and Medicare, solutions should retain the current “social” wealth transfer burdens and benefits. Those of us who have been paying those taxes for 50+ years should not be called upon to take an additional cut in promised benefits – given our track record of subsidizing prior generations (who failed to pay sufficient taxes to fund their own benefits) AND subsidizing the least productive in our own generation. No need to make changes that exacerbate that already crappy outcome.
LikeLike
Both deficit and role of feds. Depth of Educational does what state block grants can do. Was created by Pres Carter as a payback for NEA and AFT endorsement.
Test scores and education attainment has been a big issue over last many years. We need Dept. Of Ed like we need a hole I’m the head
LikeLike