Admittedly, this is not the easiest question in the world to answer. The simple part is to stop new spending, and then cut old spending. How exactly to do that is the tricky part, since every cut will affect somebody. A tax increase at this point would damage the economy, so I do not favor that - in general, it is better to save tax increases for when there is no other choice.
Back in my Senate term, I voted to approve a series of cuts to the budget. So did everyone else, a sign of the pragmatism of the Sixth Senate.
I also voted for the Waste Reduction Resolution (also a unaminous vote
), the Budget Amendment (ditto), and to repeal the Education and Care for Children in Poverty Act - not without controversy, but the financial situation was dire. So I do have a record of working to bring the deficit under control in a responsible manner (e.g., no 'bring the deficit under control by eliminating the entire government', as much as some people would like that
).
Now that I've tooted my own horn, some specifics might be nice. Given that by far the largest chunk of government spending is on Social Security and Medicare, these simply have to be reformed, and at the
least we can keep future benefits
at the same levels as today's recipients get, although I see that raising the wage cap will very likely be required as well. I fully support reforming the farm subsidy system so that it is both leaner and targeted to actual family farmers and not large agribusinesses. All this must be done carefully, as the raucous Senate debates on these issues indicate.
The current Senate has moved in this direction, although there is still work to be done, else this question wouldn't have been asked, now would it?
Discretionary spending should be cut where possible as well, but it doesn't make up the bulk of the budget so that by itself wouldn't be enough.
As Vice President, I would support any rational efforts to get rid of the budget deficit, and would throw what influence I have toward that goal.
