Issues:

Mitt Romney will rebuild the foundations of the American economy on the principles of free enterprise, hard work, and innovation. His plan seeks to reduce taxes, spending, regulation, and government programs. It seeks to increase trade, energy production, human capital, and labor flexibility. It relinquishes power to the states instead of claiming to have the solution to every problem.
Any American living through this economic crisis will immediately recognize the severity of the break that Mitt Romney proposes from our current course. He is calling for a fundamental change in Washington’s view of how economic growth and prosperity are achieved, how jobs are created, and how government can support these endeavors. It is at once a deeply conservative return to policies that have served our nation well and a highly ambitious departure from the policies of our current leadership. In short, it is a plan to get America back to work.

To learn more about Mitt's plan, select an issue below:

 TAX-FAIRER, FLATTER AND SIMPLER:

 

We are in the midst of yet another great American discussion about taxation. Perhaps no policy area has become more sensitive or controversial. At stake are two vital concerns for the American future: How will we generate sufficient revenue to balance our budget without discouraging economic activity, and will the burden of taxation fall equitably on all Americans?
Tax policy shapes almost everything individuals and enterprises do as they participate in the economy. With bad design, tax policy can discourage economic activity. With good design, it can encourage it. Yet our current tax system is an accretion of decades of patchwork decisions that came into being with no systematic thought for their implications for job creation or economic growth. Every year, individual taxpayers are forced to confront a Rube Goldberg contraption of bewildering complexity that leads to a range of undesirable outcomes, including the fact that millions of Americans have to pay hundreds of dollars to have their tax returns prepared by a professional who understands the rules. Corporations, for their part, are subject to rules and regulations that all too often encourage tax gamesmanship while discouraging reinvestment in the American economy.

Obama's Failure

In approaching the nation’s fiscal challenges, President Obama has repeatedly called for a “balanced approach,” by which he means cutting spending but also raising taxes. That may sound appealing on the surface. However, the reality is that before President Obama exploded the size of the federal government, our existing tax rates were more or less adequate to pay for the government we needed. President Obama claims now to be offering a compromise. In fact, by undoing only some of the harm he has inflicted on our fiscal health over the past three years, he would ratchet up permanently the size of government and the tax burden on the American people.
President Obama’s proclivity for fostering uncertainty about the long-term shape of the tax code is particularly troublesome. He has embraced one temporary solution after the next while rejecting permanent adjustments that would bring some predictability and stability to investment decision-making. The result is a business climate marked by hesitation. When President Obama complains about banks refusing to lend and businesses refusing to hire, he should consider the impact of his own policies on that state of affairs.
No discussion of President Obama’s tax policies would be complete without a reference to Obamacare and its $500 billion in tax increases. Whenever President Obama discusses the need for more tax revenues, Americans should remember that he already got them and spent them on a health care scheme that is itself proving to be hugely disruptive to the economy.

Mitt's Plan

Reducing and stabilizing federal spending is essential, but breathing life into the present anemic recovery will also require fixing the nation’s tax code to focus on jobs and growth. To repair the nation’s tax code, marginal rates must be brought down to stimulate entrepreneurship, job creation, and investment, while still raising the revenue needed to fund a smaller, smarter, simpler government. The principle of fairness must be preserved in federal tax and spending policy.

Individual Taxes

America’s individual tax code applies relatively high marginal tax rates on a narrow tax base. Those high rates discourage work and entrepreneurship, as well as savings and investment. With 54 percent of private sector workers employed outside of corporations, individual rates also define the incentives for job-creating businesses. Lower marginal tax rates secure for all Americans the economic gains from tax reform.

• Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
• Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
• Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
• Eliminate the Death Tax
• Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

Corporate Taxes

The U.S. economy’s 35 percent corporate tax rate is among the highest in the industrial world, reducing the ability of our nation’s businesses to compete in the global economy and to invest and create jobs at home. By limiting investment and growth, the high rate of corporate tax also hurts U.S. wages.

• Cut the corporate rate to 25 percent
• Strengthen and make permanent the R&D tax credit
• Switch to a territorial tax system
• Repeal the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

 REGULSATION-CUTTING RED TAPE

Multiple factors contribute to America’s faltering performance. But a major part of the problem over successive presidencies, and one that the Obama administration has sharply exacerbated, is the regulatory burden on the economy. Regulations function as a hidden tax on Americans, with the federal government’s own Small Business Administration placing the price tag at $1.75 trillion annually—much higher than the entire burden of individual and corporate income taxes combined.
How did we reach this state of affairs? A look across the landscape shows that federal agencies today have near plenary power to issue whatever regulations they see fit. Though most are nominally controlled by the president, in actual practice agencies are frequently able to act autonomously with little or no presidential oversight. The end result is an economy subject to the whims of unaccountable bureaucrats pursuing their own agendas. A new regulation can suddenly transform a profitable investment into an unprofitable one or render employees unproductive. This produces uncertainty with all its attendant economic ills.

Obama's Failure

President Obama’s expansive agenda has brought the costs of excessive regulation into high-resolution focus. A number of his major initiatives like Dodd-Frank and Obamacare represent a quantum increase in the scale of the regulatory burden on the American economy. Bizarrely, in the face of our economic travails, the most active regulator is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Obama administration’s war on carbon dioxide—what Time magazine has called “the most far-reaching environmental regulatory scheme in American history”—is the highest-profile EPA effort. But the EPA also continues to issue endless new regulations touching on countless other forms of economic activity—regulations that drive up costs, hinder investment, and destroy jobs.
In late August of 2011, Cass Sunstein, the White House’s regulatory czar, wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal proudly announcing the results of an “unprecedentedly ambitious government-wide review” of regulations. The total annual savings? Approximately $2 billion. To put in context just how small this savings is, compare it to the more than $9 billion in new regulatory costs proposed or implemented by the Obama administration in just the prior month. Even worse, compare it to the estimated $1.75 trillion in regulatory costs that the federal government itself estimates are borne by the American economy each year. If the Obama administration can do no better than a one-tenth-of-one-percent reduction in regulation, it is past time to give up hope that they will ever understand the severity of our economic crisis and the need for fundamental reform.

Mitt's Plan

Mitt Romney will treat regulatory costs like other costs: he will establish firm limits for them. A Romney administration will act swiftly to tear down the vast edifice of regulations the Obama administration has imposed on the economy. It will also seek to make structural changes to the federal bureaucracy that ensure economic growth remains front and center when regulatory decisions are made.

Eliminate Undue Economic Burdens

One of the greatest problems with the federal bureaucracy is that each incoming presidential administration leaves in place much of what its predecessor constructed. The result is layer upon layer of often unnecessary or inconsistent regulation. President Obama has compounded this problem with unprecedented federal power grabs over wide swaths of the economy. Obama-era laws and regulations must be rolled back, and pre-existing ones must be carefully scrutinized.

• Repeal Obamacare
• Repeal Dodd-Frank and replace with streamlined, modern regulatory framework
• Amend Sarbanes-Oxley to relieve mid-size companies from onerous requirements
• Initiate review and elimination of all Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy

Reform Environmental Regulation

As president, Mitt Romney will eliminate the regulations promulgated in pursuit of the Obama administration’s costly and ineffective anti-carbon agenda. Romney will also press Congress to reform our environmental laws to ensure that they allow for a proper assessment of their costs.

• Ensure that environmental laws properly account for cost in regulatory process
• Provide multi-year lead times before companies must come into compliance with onerous new environmental regulations

Adopt Structural Reforms

An agency may be able to conceive of ten different regulations, each imposing costs of $10 billion while producing at least as much in social benefit. Moving forward might sound like a great idea to the typical regulator. But imposing those regulations, no matter what the social benefits, has a similar effect to raising taxes by $100 billion. Regulatory costs need to be treated like the very real costs they are.

• Impose a regulatory cap of zero dollars on all federal agencies
• Require congressional approval of all new “major” regulations
• Reform legal liability system to prevent spurious litigation

TRADE: OPEN MARKETS ON TERMS THAT WORK FOR AMERICA

Open markets have helped make America powerful and prosperous. Indeed, they have been one of the keys to our economic success since the country was founded. Approximately 95 percent of the world’s consumers live beyond our borders, and selling our world-class products and services to them is the next great frontier for economic growth. The fewer the barriers to cross-border commerce, the more economic growth we enjoy and the greater the number of American jobs brought into being.
Of course, opening markets must be a two-way street. For America truly to benefit in global commerce, we need to ensure that our entrepreneurs can sell their high-quality products and services around the world. This means that agreements must create a level playing field for competition.
American workers and businesses have unparalleled strengths. If we open new markets to what they produce and ensure that they are treated fairly, we can foster an environment for rapid economic growth and job creation.

Obama's Failure

Under President Obama’s watch, America has sat on the sidelines while our major trading competitors have been moving forward aggressively. Thus, since the last trade agreement signed by President Bush in 2007, the European Union has successfully signed agreements with nine countries and pursued negotiations with sixteen others. China, for its part, has signed agreements with four countries and pursued negotiations with fifteen others. In August 2011, a group of Asian nations – including many with whom President Obama has stalled progress on trade – announced their goal to create an economic bloc that would include China but not the United States.
President Obama has also singularly failed in handling commercial relations with China, which has adopted a deliberate policy of building up its own economy by misappropriating western technology, blocking access to its market, and manipulating its currency. The Chinese government facilitates this behavior by forcing American companies to share proprietary technology as a condition of their doing business in China. Instead of responding forcefully, the Obama administration has acted like a supplicant. Having borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars from Beijing to pay for its agenda, it has placed America in a weak position at the very moment when we need to stand tall.

Mitt's Plan

Mitt Romney believes that free trade is essential to restoring robust economic growth and creating jobs. We need to open new markets beyond our borders for American goods and services on terms that work for America.

Opening New Markets

Every president beginning with Ronald Reagan has recognized the power of open markets and pursued them on behalf of the United States. George W. Bush successfully negotiated eleven FTAs, encompassing sixteen countries. He also had the vision to commence negotiations with a number of allies around the Pacific Rim to expand significantly the Trans-Pacific Partnership. All told, these agreements have enabled people across the world to come together and build a better future. Economists estimate that the agreements have led to the creation of 5.4 million new American jobs and support a total of nearly 18 million jobs. Looking beyond just our FTA partners, our total exports support nearly 10 million American jobs. These are not just jobs; they’re good jobs, paying significantly above average, and more than one-third are in manufacturing.

• Reinstate the president’s Trade Promotion Authority
• Complete negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership
• Pursue new trade agreements with nations committed to free enterprise and open markets
• Create the Reagan Economic Zone

Confronting China

China presents a broad set of problems that cry out urgently for solutions. It is time to end the Obama administration’s acquiescence to the one-way arrangements the Chinese have come to enjoy. We need a fresh and fearless approach to that trade relationship. Our first priority must be to put on the table all unilateral actions within our power to ensure that the Chinese adhere to existing agreements. Anyone with business experience knows that you can succeed in a negotiation only if you are willing to walk away. If we want the Chinese to play by the rules, we must be willing to say “no more” to a relationship that too often benefits them and harms us.

• Increase CBP resources to prevent the illegal entry of goods into our market
• Increase USTR resources to pursue and support litigation against unfair trade practices
• Use unilateral and multilateral punitive measures to deter unfair Chinese practices
• Designate China a currency manipulator and impose countervailing duties
• Discontinue U.S. government procurement from China until China commits to GPA

TRADE: OPEN MARKETS ON TERMS THE WORK FOR AMERECIA

Open markets have helped make America powerful and prosperous. Indeed, they have been one of the keys to our economic success since the country was founded. Approximately 95 percent of the world’s consumers live beyond our borders, and selling our world-class products and services to them is the next great frontier for economic growth. The fewer the barriers to cross-border commerce, the more economic growth we enjoy and the greater the number of American jobs brought into being.
Of course, opening markets must be a two-way street. For America truly to benefit in global commerce, we need to ensure that our entrepreneurs can sell their high-quality products and services around the world. This means that agreements must create a level playing field for competition.
American workers and businesses have unparalleled strengths. If we open new markets to what they produce and ensure that they are treated fairly, we can foster an environment for rapid economic growth and job creation.

Obama's Failure

Under President Obama’s watch, America has sat on the sidelines while our major trading competitors have been moving forward aggressively. Thus, since the last trade agreement signed by President Bush in 2007, the European Union has successfully signed agreements with nine countries and pursued negotiations with sixteen others. China, for its part, has signed agreements with four countries and pursued negotiations with fifteen others. In August 2011, a group of Asian nations – including many with whom President Obama has stalled progress on trade – announced their goal to create an economic bloc that would include China but not the United States.
President Obama has also singularly failed in handling commercial relations with China, which has adopted a deliberate policy of building up its own economy by misappropriating western technology, blocking access to its market, and manipulating its currency. The Chinese government facilitates this behavior by forcing American companies to share proprietary technology as a condition of their doing business in China. Instead of responding forcefully, the Obama administration has acted like a supplicant. Having borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars from Beijing to pay for its agenda, it has placed America in a weak position at the very moment when we need to stand tall.

Mitt's Plan

Mitt Romney believes that free trade is essential to restoring robust economic growth and creating jobs. We need to open new markets beyond our borders for American goods and services on terms that work for America.

Opening New Markets

Every president beginning with Ronald Reagan has recognized the power of open markets and pursued them on behalf of the United States. George W. Bush successfully negotiated eleven FTAs, encompassing sixteen countries. He also had the vision to commence negotiations with a number of allies around the Pacific Rim to expand significantly the Trans-Pacific Partnership. All told, these agreements have enabled people across the world to come together and build a better future. Economists estimate that the agreements have led to the creation of 5.4 million new American jobs and support a total of nearly 18 million jobs. Looking beyond just our FTA partners, our total exports support nearly 10 million American jobs. These are not just jobs; they’re good jobs, paying significantly above average, and more than one-third are in manufacturing.

• Reinstate the president’s Trade Promotion Authority
• Complete negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership
• Pursue new trade agreements with nations committed to free enterprise and open markets
• Create the Reagan Economic Zone

Confronting China

China presents a broad set of problems that cry out urgently for solutions. It is time to end the Obama administration’s acquiescence to the one-way arrangements the Chinese have come to enjoy. We need a fresh and fearless approach to that trade relationship. Our first priority must be to put on the table all unilateral actions within our power to ensure that the Chinese adhere to existing agreements. Anyone with business experience knows that you can succeed in a negotiation only if you are willing to walk away. If we want the Chinese to play by the rules, we must be willing to say “no more” to a relationship that too often benefits them and harms us.

• Increase CBP resources to prevent the illegal entry of goods into our market
• Increase USTR resources to pursue and support litigation against unfair trade practices
• Use unilateral and multilateral punitive measures to deter unfair Chinese practices
• Designate China a currency manipulator and impose countervailing duties
• Discontinue U.S. government procurement from China until China commits to GPA

LABOR: FREE ENTERPRISE, FREE CHOICE, FREE SPEECH

Over the years, unions have made extraordinarily important contributions to American society. Many of the protections and benefits enjoyed by workers in the 21st century are the result of sacrifices and struggles and hard-won battles fought by unions in an earlier era. But today, the effects of unionization have changed in ways that need to be recognized. Too often, unions drive up costs and introduce rigidities that harm competitiveness and frustrate innovation.
The statistics tell an unkind story. Studies conducted by non-partisan scholars have shown that labor unions reduce investment and slow job growth. Right-to-Work states have added millions of jobs over the past decade while states with pro-union policies have shed nearly a million jobs. In a recent Gallup poll, a majority of Americans said that labor unions “mostly hurt” the American economy.
Yet as unionization becomes less and less popular—union membership in the private sector has declined from 36 percent in the 1950s to less than 7 percent today—Big Labor is fighting harder and harder to maintain its power. The question is: whose interests should come first, those of workers and businesses or those of organized labor?

Obama's Failure

In the midst of an economic crisis, with 24 million people needing work, policies that strengthen the hand of labor unions at the expense of both businesses and workers are probably the last thing the country has needed. But President Obama, in political debt to labor leaders who have funneled union funds to the coffers of the Democratic Party and who are vital to his reelection bid, is willing and eager to press forward with Big Labor’s agenda.
He pursued “Card Check” legislation that would have stripped workers of the right to vote by secret ballot on whether to unionize. He issued an order requiring workers on stimulus projects to become union members. He appointed Big Labor cronies to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) where they have wreaked havoc on the law. Perhaps the best known example is the agency’s decision to bring charges against Boeing—the nation’s largest exporter—for opening a billion-dollar manufacturing facility and hiring over 1,000 new workers in a Right-to-Work state.
Far from contributing to economic recovery, the Obama administration’s highly politicized labor policies have instead dampened business investment and made the employment climate worse. Overall, it is a familiar story from the annals of American politics: favors were given and favors were repaid, and the American people lost out in the transaction.

Mitt's Plan

Mitt Romney, with his extensive experience in both business and government, has a keen understanding of labor relations. He recognizes, as he himself has written, that “[a]t their best, labor unions have always fought for the rights of workers, and generations of Americans have been better off for it.” But he also recognizes that the interests of union management can diverge from those of the very workers they purport to serve.

Free Enterprise

As president, Mitt Romney’s first step in improving labor policy will be to ensure that our labor laws create a stable and level playing field on which businesses can operate. As they hire, businesses should not have to worry that a politicized federal agency will rewrite the rules of the employment game without warning and without regard for the law.

• Appoint to the NLRB experienced individuals with respect for the rule of law
• Amend NLRA to explicitly protect the right of business owners to allocate their capital as they see fit
• Reverse executive orders issued by President Obama that tilt the playing field toward organized labor

Free Choice

Mitt Romney believes in the right of workers to join a union or to not join a union. To exercise that right freely, workers must have access to all the relevant facts they need to make an informed decision. This means hearing from both the union about the potential benefits and from management about potential costs. This also means being able to act on that decision in the privacy of the ballot booth.

• Amend NLRA to guarantee the secret ballot in every union certification election
• Amend NLRA to guarantee that all pre-election campaigns last at least one month
• Support states in pursuing Right-to-Work laws

Free Speech

As matters currently stand, unions can take money directly from the paychecks of American workers and spend it on politicking—each election cycle, unions spend hundreds of millions of dollars. In non-Right-to-Work states, employees have little choice but to watch their money go toward such expenditures, even if they do not support the union and its political agenda. The result is the creation of an enormously powerful interest group whose influence is disproportionate to its actual support and whose priorities are fundamentally misaligned with those of businesses and workers—and thus with the needs of the economy.

• Prohibit the use for political purposes of funds automatically deducted from worker paychecks

HUMAN CAPITAL: A 21ST CENTURY WORKFORCE

The dynamism of the American workforce is our country’s greatest renewable natural resource. Jump-starting economic growth therefore requires that American workers have the skills that are needed to unleash their potential. One of the troubling features of the American economy today is the mismatch between the skill set of the American workforce and the requirements of the employment market. The gap between the two lies at the heart of our jobs crisis.
Over two centuries American workers have repeatedly proven themselves to be the most productive and the most capable at adapting themselves to changing economic conditions and embracing new technologies that come on stream. During that time, the American economy has also been the beneficiary of the extraordinary contributions made by the best and the brightest from around the world who have chosen to make our country their new home. This combination has propelled the American economy to heights envied across the world. It can do so again.

Obama's Failure

President Obama’s approach to human capital is, here as elsewhere, to let government take the lead. The federal government has been pouring money into retraining programs. In fiscal year 2009, the sum total was $18 billion for 47 separate employment and job training programs administered by nine different federal agencies. Seven of the 47 programs account for three-fourths of the spending, but all except 3 of the 47 programs overlap with at least one other program.
Only 5 of the 47 programs have had their results thoroughly evaluated since 2004. According to the General Accounting Office (GAO), “little is known about the effectiveness of most programs.” It also turns out that the little we do know has not been particularly heartening. A 2008 study found that one of the five, the Workforce Investment Act Adult and Dislocated Workers program, produced only “small to nonexistent” results.
This is the kind of government waste, political horse-trading, and administrative chaos that has brought discredit on the federal government. We cannot afford to squander taxpayer money in this way. President Obama’s job retraining record is a live, ongoing demonstration of why federal spending in so many areas needs to be scaled back.

Mitt's Plan

Mitt Romney sees two important objectives that America can pursue immediately to build on the extraordinary traditional strengths of its workforce. The first is to retrain American workers to ensure that they have the education and skills to match the jobs of today’s economy. The second is to attract the best and the brightest from around the world.

Retraining Workers

Mitt Romney will approach retraining policy with a conservative mindset that recognizes it as an area where the federal government is particularly ill-equipped to succeed. Retraining efforts must be founded upon a partnership that brings together the states and the private sector. The sprawling federal network of redundant bureaucracies should be dismantled and the funds used for better purposes. One particularly promising approach that Romney supports and believes states should be encouraged to pursue is a system of Personal Reemployment Accounts for unemployed individuals. These accounts would facilitate programs that place individuals directly into companies that provide on-the-job training—as governor of Massachusetts, Romney helped create just such a program.

• Eliminate redundancy in federal retraining programs by consolidating programs and funding streams, centering as much activity as possible in a single agency
• Give states authority to manage retraining programs by block granting federal funds
• Facilitate the creation of Personal Reemployment Accounts
• Encourage greater private sector involvement in retraining programs

Attracting the Best and the Brightest

To ensure that America continues to lead the world in innovation and economic dynamism, a Romney administration would press for an immigration policy designed to maximize America’s economic potential. The United States needs to attract and retain job creators from wherever they come. Foreign-born residents with advanced degrees start companies, create jobs, and drive innovation at an especially high rate. While lawful immigrants comprise about 8 percent of the population, immigrants start 16 percent of our top-performing, high-technology companies, hold the position of CEO or lead engineer in 25 percent of high-tech firms, and produce over 25 percent of all patent applications filed from the United States.

• Raise visa caps for highly skilled workers
• Grant permanent residency to eligible graduates with advanced degrees in math, science, and engineering

 SPENDING: SMALLER, SIMPLER, SMARTER GOVERNMENT

Getting our fiscal house in order has become more than just an economic issue; it’s a moral imperative. Every dollar of deficit spending must be borrowed, with the bill sent to our children to pay back. As president, Mitt Romney will ask a simple question about every federal program: is it so important, so critical, that it is worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?
Excessive government spending is also harming the economy by skewing the market place and creating high levels of uncertainty. As federal funds slosh through the economy, they lift up some enterprises at the expense of others. In an environment where the government is picking winners and investing huge sums in projects of questionable value, private entrepreneurs across the economy cannot have confidence that their own investments will pay off. Aware that such spending cannot continue indefinitely, business owners also have a difficult time predicting how demand will shift from year to year and how to invest accordingly. The only recipe for fiscal health and a thriving private economy is a government that spends within its means.

Obama's Failure

Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history, taking us from an already staggering $3.5 trillion in federal spending in 2010 to a projected $5.6 trillion within the next decade. This sharp rise has been entirely a matter of choice. Even as federal spending remains wholly within our control, Washington is spending money in an out-of-control fashion.
One traditional yardstick for gauging whether government is living within its means is spending as a percentage of GDP. Since the 1950s, federal spending as a percentage of GDP has hovered around 20 percent. When President Obama took office, it shot up to 25 percent, a level not seen since World War II. Before the recession, the federal government spent $25,000 per household. That number has now soared past $30,000 and is on track to hit $35,000 within the next decade.
Our untenable spending habits were at the root of this past summer’s crisis over the debt ceiling. President Obama’s insistence on a “balanced approach”—by which he meant a combination of spending cuts and tax increases—would have put a seal of congressional approval on a baseline level of spending significantly higher than when he took office. That is precisely why the President’s approach had to be soundly rejected. He wanted to move the country in the wrong direction of more taxes and more spending at a time when both are smothering the economy.

Mitt's Plan

After three years of President Obama, many now question whether we can ever return to fiscal sanity, let alone fiscal strength. A point of no return may well be approaching — a decade of huge deficits could drive our principal payments and interest rates beyond our reach while starving the economy of the capital it needs to grow.
Fortunately, the American economy’s tremendous capacity for growth gives the country one more chance to correct course. Mitt Romney has spent his career executing turnarounds in the private sector, the Olympics, and state government. He will bring to Washington the turnaround philosophy it so badly needs.

Set Honest Goals: Cap Spending At 20 Percent Of GDP

Any turnaround must begin with clear and realistic goals. Optimistic projections cannot wish a problem away, they can only make it worse. As president, Mitt’s goal will be to bring federal spending below 20 percent of GDP by the end of his first term:

• Reduced from 24.3 percent last year; in line with the historical trend between 18 and 20 percent
• Close to the tax revenue generated by the economy when healthy
• Requires spending cuts of approximately $500 billion per year in 2016 assuming robust economic recovery with 4% annual growth, and reversal of irresponsible Obama-era defense cuts

Take Immediate Action: Return Non-Security Discretionary Spending To Below 2008 Levels

Any turnaround must also stop the bleeding and reverse the most recent and dramatic damage:

• Send Congress a bill on Day One that cuts non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent across the board
• Pass the House Republican Budget proposal, rolling back President Obama’s government expansion by capping non-security discretionary spending below 2008 levels

Follow A Clear Roadmap: Build A Simpler, Smaller, Smarter Government

Most importantly, any turnaround must have a thoughtful, structured approach to achieving its goals. Mitt will attack the bloated budget from three angles:

1. The Federal Government Should Stop Doing Things The American People Can’t Afford, For Instance:
   • Repeal Obamacare — Savings: $95 Billion. President Obama’s costly takeover of the health care system imposes an enormous and unaffordable obligation on the federal government while intervening in a matter that should be left to the states. Mitt will begin his efforts to repeal this legislation on Day One.
   • Privatize Amtrak — Savings: $1.6 Billion. Despite requirement that Amtrak operate on a for-profit basis, it continues to receive about $1.6 billion in taxpayer funds each year. Forty-one of Amtrak’s 44 routes lost money in 2008 with losses ranging from $5 to $462 per passenger.
   • Reduce Subsidies For The National Endowments For The Arts And Humanities, The Corporation For Public Broadcasting, And The Legal Services Corporation — Savings: $600 Million. NEA, NEH, and CPB provide grants to supplement other sources of funding. LSC funds services mostly duplicative of those already offered by states, localities, bar associations and private organizations.
   • Eliminate Title X Family Planning Funding — Savings: $300 Million. Title X subsidizes family planning programs that benefit abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.
   • Reduce Foreign Aid — Savings: $100 Million. Stop borrowing money from countries that oppose America’s interests in order to give it back to them in the form of foreign aid.
   If pursued with focus and discipline, Mitt’s approach provides a roadmap to rescue the federal government from its present precipice. But that respite will be short-lived without a plan for the looming long-term threat posed by the unsustainable nature of existing entitlement obligations. Learn more about Mitt’s proposals for entitlement reform: Medicare and Social Security.
   
2. Empower States To Innovate — Savings: >$100 billion
   • Block grants have huge potential to generate both superior results and cost savings by establishing local control and promoting innovation in areas such as Medicaid and Worker Retraining. Medicaid spending should be capped and increased each year by CPI + 1%. Department of Labor retraining spending should be capped and will increase in future years. These funds should then be given to the states to spend on their own residents. States will be free from Washington micromanagement, allowing them to develop innovative approaches that improve quality and reduce cost.
3. Improve Efficiency And Effectiveness. Where the federal government should act, it must do a better job. For instance:
   • Reduce Waste And Fraud — Savings: $60 Billion. The federal government made $125 billion in improper payments last year. Cutting that amount in half through stricter enforcement and harsher penalties yields returns many times over on the investment.
   • Align Federal Employee Compensation With The Private Sector — Savings: $47 Billion. Federal compensation exceeds private sector levels by as much as 30 to 40 percent when benefits are taken into account. This must be corrected.
   • Repeal The Davis-Bacon Act — Savings: $11 Billion. Davis-Bacon forces the government to pay above-market wages, insulating labor unions from competition and driving up project costs by approximately 10 percent.
   • Reduce The Federal Workforce By 10 Percent Via Attrition — Savings: $4 Billion. Despite widespread layoffs in the private sector, President Obama has continued to grow the federal payrolls. The federal workforce can be reduced by 10 percent through a “1-for-2” system of attrition, thereby reducing the number of federal employees while allowing the introduction of new talent into the federal service.
   • Consolidate agencies and streamline processes to cut costs and improve results in everything from energy permitting to worker retraining to trade negotiation.
         
            http://www.mittromney.com/jobs