In recent discussions about government spending, Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson has raised a rather interesting question: Why can’t the federal government manage its budget like a family or a private business? It seems that Johnson believes that if the average American can balance their household budget and make prudent financial decisions, so too should the government. In an op-ed, he highlighted the glaring differences between how individual families and the federal government handle their finances, which tends to involve a lot less scrutiny when money is flowing from taxpayers.
Senator Johnson points out that the current federal spending situation is somewhat comic—though certainly not in a good way. He draws a parallel between the government’s budget and a family that, having borrowed a hefty sum due to an unexpected illness, continues to live beyond its means instead of reverting back to a sustainable financial state. If families wouldn’t make such a wild decision, why should the government? The federal budget, in all its complexity, appears to operate on “automatic pilot,” with 76% of its spending categorized as “mandatory.” This means it happens without the same level of oversight and accountability that would be expected in a business or a household.
In his op-ed, Johnson elaborates on some staggering numbers. Federal spending soared from $4.4 trillion in 2019 to an astonishing $6.5 trillion during the pandemic, and it has yet to come down to a more manageable level. Johnson argues that a reasonable solution would entail reverting to pre-pandemic spending levels, suggesting a potential baseline of $6.5 trillion instead of the inflated $7.3 trillion. To illustrate his point, he even recalls a time in 1998 during President Clinton’s administration when the budget was more balanced, achieving a surplus and wide bipartisan support.
To tackle the nation’s budgetary woes, Johnson proposes a more structured process that mimics what happens in the world of business. He envisions panels where senators and House members would challenge administration officials, along with their chief financial officers, to justify their spending requests. Johnson’s intention is to scrutinize every slice of federal spending, asking officials to prove that their budgets are not exceeding necessary amounts. Such a structured inquiry could help ensure that spending aligns with what the government truly needs rather than a blank check mentality.
As Johnson explores ways to make his budget reform vision a reality, there is a sense that he is gaining traction within Washington. Conversations are emerging, and he plans to meet with key individuals to further discuss his proposals. While it may indeed be a challenging road ahead, the sentiment among many of Johnson’s supporters is clear: if they can manage their household budgets with care and attention, there’s no reason for the federal government to continue its reckless spending spree. Perhaps it’s time for Washington to learn a thing or two about financial responsibility from the families it serves.
