In response to:

Rand Paul’s “Monstrous” and “Nasty” Budget Got 16 More Votes than Obama’s Budget

Dr. Wood Wrote: May 18, 2012 10:27 AM
As a concerned citizen I am continually disturbed as I read continuously about the huge spending for domestic purposes and the attempts to reduce defense spending, but I have next to no reporting of what all the spending has been for. How come the vast amounts are not reported for the benefit of us taxpayers? The non-specifics of it all are truly disconcerting. D.L. Wood
D G Wrote: May 18, 2012 1:43 PM
Hello Dr. Wood.... When you have some spare time, you may review the Monthly Treasury Statement at:

http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/index.html

You can find a monthly report including year-to-date totals for any month for recent fiscal years. There are also projected year-end totals.

All of the departments are reported, DOD, DOE, DOJ, etc. ... In particular, I suggest looking at Department of Health and Human Services. Look at the recent month's year-to-date, and then go back 10 years to see the year-to-date back then. H&HS has been doubling its spending every 10 years. Add ObamaCare and retiring Baby Boomers and it gets worse. Revenues can not grow fast enough to keep up with spending.

Cheers

A few months ago, I wrote some very nice things about a budget plan put together by Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, noting that:

Senator Paul and his colleagues are highlighting the fact that the plan generates a balanced budget in just five years. That’s a good outcome, but it should be a secondary selling point. All the good results in the plan – including the reduction in red ink and the flat tax – are made possible because the overall burden of federal spending is lowered.

Not surprising, one of the columnists at the Washington Post has a different...

Related Tags: Budget