Alito Tells the Usual Suspects to Pound Sand Over Recusal Demands
Here's What Caused Cracker Barrel's Stock to Tumble
Brace Yourselves for a Trump Conviction Because the Judge Just Tilted the Scales
The Media Guide to Shooting Joggers
'Incredible Victory': Former Trump Campaign Spox Unseats Incumbent in Texas State House Pr...
European Union Member States Are 'Yearning for Changes' Ahead of Parliamentary Elections,...
Trump and Biden Are Tied in This Democratic Stronghold
Chairman Jordan Reiterates Demand for Answers From AG Garland on Mar-a-Lago Raid
An Illegal Alien Who Was Removed From the U.S. Several Times Was Arrested...
‘Misogynistic’: Drag Queen Promotes Irreversible Transgender ‘Top Surgery’
What Really Worries Me About a Potential Guilty Verdict
Memorial for Iran’s Raisi Betrays the Core Principles of the United Nations
What Was the AP Thinking Admitting This About That NYC Biden Campaign Press...
Did Trump's Trial Help His Chances? Let's See What the Markets Suggest
Massachusetts Man Accused of Secretly Giving Girlfriend Abortion Pill
Tipsheet

When is a mere 1 out of 100 significant? How about out of 100?

In dealing with the 12 appropriations bills that make up the discretionary portion of the federal budget, we are discussing billions of dollars. Amendments have been offered and voted on for 4 of the appropriations bills considered over the past month to reduce the growth of spending in each of these bills by just 1% and all have been defeated.

Advertisement

Why is this significant to the American taxpayer? If we could reduce the growth of spending in the federal budget by a mere 1%, we could save the taxpayer $30 billion dollars next year and that is a significant number.

Well, perhaps 1% was a little too much to ask for, so some of my taxpayer money-saving colleagues thought that perhaps we should try and reduce the growth of spending in each of these appropriations bills to only of a percent and offered amendments to the past 4 appropriations bills to do just that. I would take $15 billion in savings to the taxpayer anytime. But with nearly all of the Democratic caucus opposing these amendments to save the taxpayers money, they all have gone down in defeat.

Maybe of a percent would be more appealing?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement