Effecting change in Washington: Big spenders need not apply
There are two big issues at the top of nearly every American’s mind: the economy and out-of-control government spending in Washington. We are asking ourselves when and how the economy will get back on track. And we wonder when, if ever, will the politicians in Washington wake up and realize that the American people expect them to be good stewards of our money, not spend more of it.
In looking for the right solutions to these challenges, my state—California—is a good example of what not to do. A tax, spend and borrow mentality reigns on both sides of the aisle in the Golden State. As a result of this cycle of dependency involving big spending and massive government growth, the state is now teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Meanwhile, Californians are losing their jobs and our unemployment rate is in excess of 12 percent.
To avoid this kind of complete meltdown at the federal level, Washington needs a fresh perspective. We need people who will stop talking and act. We need Congress to do what we have hired them to do: make the tough choices and put an end to maxing out the national credit card. Its a better solution than what we have now—a Congress all too willing to raise the federal debt limit and allow the cycle of taxing, spending and borrowing to repeat itself.
It’s time for our government to start living within its means, just as families and businesses across this country are forced to do every day. It’s time to fix the problem, rather than hand out money to special interests so the politicians can win re-election or fatten their campaign bank accounts. It’s time for Congress to do its job and that might mean adding a new word to their political vocabulary: no.
Unfortunately there is an effort in Washington now to punt this problem to yet another commission to “study” the nation’s deficit. We don’t need a commission to study the federal deficit, what we need is a commitment to cut federal spending. We know why we have a deficit: Congress spends too much money. It’s Congress’ job to address the deficit and if they can’t, or won’t, then the people need to replace them with leaders who will.
What’s even more astonishing about the deficit reduction commission proposal is that it contemplates the option of raising revenue (read: raising taxes) as a potential solution to our deficit. Giving the government more money won’t lower the deficit, in fact, it will only make it worse. We need to cut spending, aggressively go after the waste and abuse in the federal budget, and we need leaders who are not afraid to take the steps to do it.
We know there exists hundreds of billions of dollars in well-documented fraud, waste and abuse in the federal budget. This is money American taxpayers shouldn’t have to spend. It is frustrating that too many people in Congress, like my opponent Barbara Boxer, have been there so long that they lack the real world experience or commitment needed to root out further unnecessary and wasteful spending.
Those of us who have run businesses, rather than make a career out of running for public office, know that in a huge unaccountable bureaucracy there is plenty of opportunity to cut spending and actually improve performance. We need people representing us who can spot that kind of thing without needing a protest or major media exposé to bring it to their attention. We need people representing us who are willing to consistently scrutinize every piece of major legislation and every agency budget and tell us when the taxpayers are getting a raw deal.
It’s time to affect real change in Washington by holding government accountable. We have this opportunity in November. I believe this will be the year in which we start turning things around, for real and for everyone, by electing people to serve in Congress who are not afraid to make the tough calls, to say no to the special interests and to lead responsibly rather than shift responsibility to another commission.
Carly Fiorina is a former Fortune 500 CEO. She is running for U.S. Senate in California. For more information about Carly and her campaign visit http://www.carlyforca.com .
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
So a former CEO is running for the Senate. And the Supreme Court ruled that corporations can give unlimited amounts of money to candidates. She’s concerned about big spending and I’m concerned about big taking. From the likes of her. Sorry, I don’t want this woman making decisions in government affect my life. She is evil.
During the 8 years of George Bush and a Republican controlled Congress our national debt went from $5 trillion to $10 trillion. Yet, Republicans still expect us to believe that they are a party that is fiscally conservative and they can control spending. Yesterday, the Senate passed PAYGO and not ONE Republican Senator voted for it. So Republicans, why I should believe you.
I hope she wins.
(I think it’s –effecting– not “affecting”)
It would be nice to have someone in DC that actually worked in the dreaded private sector. Carly also presents a problem for the Democrats as they have trouble with their attacks when the candidate is a woman….
Fiornia says all the “right things” we’ve heard for 2 decades-blue ribbon commissions, end fraud and waste, bipartisanship. But we’ve heard all this before. Heck, Obama often says much the same. None of this MCcain type stuff has improved things even a bit. She would be preferable to Boxer, but only marignally.Suspect there wouldn’t be any real change if any empty suit like Fiorina won.
Are you going to stop the wars, which are costing us billions?
What programs are you going to cut? What departments can be eliminated? The Department of Education, the NEA, HUD? What are you going to cut? Will you demand the Fed be audited? Where were you when in September 2008 your candidate, John Mccain, agreed to Stimulus 1?
I made the mistake of buying HP products while Fiorina ran the company. ANd it’s hard to take someone seriously when their big idea to save money is to send customer service 2 continents away.
“What programs are you going to cut?” … The Department of Education, YES!, the NEA, YES! HUD? YES! “Will you demand the Fed be audited?” YES!
Repeal/close, one by one all agencies created after 1913 when income tax was enacted and Senators became voted into office instead of appointed. That’s when the pandering and the explosion of government occurred.
AMEN! Walter Williams estimates that 70% of all federal programs lack any direct constitutional authority. I would set up something like the BRAC (which closed the military bases). The Government Agency Evaluation Commission (or whatever you want to call it) would place agencies on the chopping block in groups and Congress would vote up or down on the group. My early nominees are: Education, Energy, EEOC, HUD, Nuclear Regulatory, NEA, NASA, NIH. But there must be dozens of others . . .
This all sounds good. However, we have heard it before and the results remain the same. It will likely take a bankruptcy of CA to solve the problem, including a haircut for public workers and retirees. When things get this far out of hand, conventional “living within our means” rhetoric does not give justice to the problem.
I’ve recently wondered just how much negative connotation the terms republican and conservative have but after visiting Carly’s website it seems pretty clear.
Not one time on any page does either word show up.
Things that make you go hmmm…
Hope you go after Boxer, the same way you went after breast CA. Best of luck.
Two thumbs up to this post!!!