Comments about ‘Romney offers $500 billion federal spending cuts’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 3 2011 4:55 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
David
Centerville, UT

Maybe someone else can clarify my concern, but $500 billion does not seem to be deep enough spending cuts. It seems like congressional leaders are talking about 3-4 Trillion dollars over 10 years. So again, $500 billion over 4 years does not seem to be enough, in my mind.

JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt
Beverly Hills, CA

"Romney says that repealing President Obama's health care overhaul is among his top priorities."

Gee, the plan is just like the one in Massachusetts. Repealing it will result in more people being in Medicaid thus raising the prices on that program. But hey, let's just let people get sicker and sicker and sicker until they show up at the ER so sick and more expensive to treat. It's not like we have trillions in debt or anything...oh wait we do.

MPetrie
Salt Lake City, Utah

This is what I like about Romney. He looks at the big picture. Romney comes out and proposes cuts to programs that people never really talk about. Who has ever proposed cuts to Amtrak? Federal arts? Broadcasting programs? There is probably SOOOO much wasteful spending that goes unnoticed by the average politician. This is what Romney did. He examined corporations from top to bottom to eliminate duplication, unnecessary costs, etc. That's what we need right now. Someone who can come in and gut the government's wasteful ways.

Leo Femedlers
El Paso, TX

"Romney wants to make deep cuts to Amtrak, aid to foreign countries and federal arts and broadcasting programs"

An excellent start to a very large problem.

Amtrak - worthless. If a transportation business can't make it on it's own it should be out of business. Cut the gov't subsidies and let the market decide. (GM included but that's too late.)

Aid to foreign countries - Depends on which ones. If they serve current or future american intrests, pay on. If not cut the strings. Begin with NATO. Not a country but nevertheless a US $ flush.

Federal arts programs - maybe. Can state and local municipalities manage/fund their own arts programs?

Broadcasting Programs - NPR et al. Way too much liberal bias for my taste. Cut. Cut. Cut.

ObamaCare - Shouldn't have passed to begin with. Kill it.

Likelihood of any of the above happening if the next President is Romney? 20 - 30%

MAYHEM MIKE
Salt Lake City, UT

Wait a minute! Specific cuts to specific programs? Romney's violating the fundamental "pandering" principle of the other Republican candidates: give "sound bites" rather than precise remedies to the nation's problems.

Jared
Average, SE

Cue the people criticizing Romney of not supporting the arts or education. If funding to those programs is cut, they simply rely on more private donors - they do more fundraising. Personally, I'm opposed to cutting spending on the arts and broadcasting but it's not an anti-arts/education stance like some liberals believe it is. We should cut spending across the board though (including defense - although defense is Constitutionally mandated, unlike many other programs). We should increase education (through direct funds or vouchers) and science spending.

JohnJacob, the federal bill is not what was passed in Massachusetts. Romney has been consistent in stating that he is in favor of health care reform but the type of measures passed in Massachusetts should only be done on a state level. Further, in any case, the monstrosity that is ObamaCare, even if you are in favor of a federal healthcare bill, is a poor way to effect change in the healthcare system. We need to overhaul healthcare, not add to the insurance problems - there's a big difference.

Hank Pym
SLC, UT

@ MPetrie | 5:45 p.m. Nov. 3, 2011

Really? Mitt is the trendsetter. Really?

Ron Paul, Rand Paul, & even John Stossel have come up w/ deeper, more, & better cuts months ago.

The_Kaiser
Holladay, UT

Ron Paul's plan to Restore America calls for one Trillion dollars in government cuts in the first year.

Who is more serious about downsizing government?

Shaun
Sandy, UT

Well that is great Mitt. You do know that you can't do it without congresses approval, right? And since Democrats will have a majority in the senate again you are promising cuts you know that will not pass.

Fail.

Eric P
Boise, ID

We don't need to be talking about cuts, we need to be talking about the proper role of government. In the present political climate cuts are a natural result when we ask ourselves whether a particular act of government is necessary, proper and constitutional. When you look at at from that angle you end up with a trillion dollars of cuts as a start. Ron Paul understands the function of government and, as President, will help restore and protect the liberties guaranteed to be protected by the Constitution. Those liberties can only be protected in a small, limited government as envisioned by Paul.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@MPetrie
Actually republicans had cuts to amtrak, the arts, PBS, and other things similar to those in their recent budgets and continuing resolution debates. Democrats would then vote those budgets down. Romney is displaying 0 new ideas here.

sergio
Phoenix, AZ

Isreal is the number one benefactor of USA foreign aid, fat chance Romney will, or could, take it away from them.

oldschool
Farmington, UT

Mr. Steve Peoples, esteemed reporter, your four years of journalism school probably gives you the expertise to think that repealing Obamacare is unlikely, but please keep your opinions to yourself and out of news reports.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments