House Republicans introduce a bill that will cut $2.5 trillion in federal spending

   The Republicans who ran for seats in the House of Representatives campaigned on two main issues–repealing Obamacare and cutting the spending of the federal government.

  With yesterday’s vote on Obamacare, the Republicans made good on their first campaign promise as the first steps were taken in the repealing of Obamacare. This was a first step, and this is going to be long battle, but the Republicans in the House did do what they said they would do.With the repeal of Obamacare moving forward, and with the follow up to the repeal–an alternative replacement for Obamacare–now in the works the Republicans were able to set their sights on their second major campaign promise–spending cuts.

  And that is exactly what they did, as the House Republicans have introduced the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which aims to cut $2.5 trillion in federal spending over the next ten years. When a politician runs on the promise of cutting spending he or she is usually ridiculed by the opposition who claims something to the effect of, “you claim you are going to cut spending, yet you do not offer any specific programs which you are willing to cut.”

  Today the House Republicans undercut that argument with the introduction of a bill which includes specific cuts in federal funding to many programs, some of which are going to meet stiff opposition. Here is the full list of cuts proposed by Republicans in the House earlier today:

Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings.

Save America’s Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings.

International Fund for Ireland. $17 million annual savings.

Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings.

National Endowment for the Arts. $167.5 million annual savings.

National Endowment for the Humanities. $167.5 million annual savings.

Hope VI Program. $250 million annual savings.

Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.

Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.

U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings.

Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings.

Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.

John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings.

Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings.

Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings.

Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings.

Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings.

Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings.

Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings.

Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings.

Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings.

New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings.

Exchange Programs for Alaska, Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts. $9 million annual savings.

Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings.

Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings.

Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings.

Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings.

Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings.

Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings.

FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings.

Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings.

Economic Assistance to Egypt. $250 million annually.

U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings.

General Assistance to District of Columbia. $210 million annual savings.

Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings.

Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.

No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings.

End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.

Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually.

IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years.

Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings.

Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees. $1.2 billion savings over ten years.

Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.

Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress.

Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings.

Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings.

Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings.

USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings.

Subsidy to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings.

Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings.

Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings.

Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings.

HUD Ph.D. Program.

Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.

  There are certainly some controversial spending cuts proposed in this legislation, the most obvious being the defunding of Obamacare, and while I feel it is likely that this bill will pass the House mostly intact, we can rest assured this bill will never pass the Senate as constituted.

  There will be some negotiating once the reconciliation process begins. But the fact is that you have to begin somewhere and this is the first time in quite a long time that the House has actually moved forward on a plan to cut federal spending, and while it is not possible for all of these spending cuts to survive the reconciliation process this is one hell of a starting point.

  The Senate will have to vote on this bill at some point and they will have to go on record as being either for or against funding certain government programs. I think that we all know the Democrats will be defiant against the prospect of cutting any money from any program, but these politicians should remember that it is none other that people like Harry Reid and Barack Obama who constantly tell the American people that we must sacrifice during an economic downturn for the greater good.

   By this they mean that most Americans will have to pay higher taxes, but why should the American people sacrifice while our elected officials are flourishing? If this bill moves forward from the House–and I think it will–the Democrats in the Senate will he asked to sacrifice government programs for the greater good, and I for one cannot wait to see if the put our money where there mouths are.