The American taxpayers are facing a serious challenge. The officials we elected to manage the trillions of dollars that taxpayers contribute to the federal government annually have collectively overspent by more than $37 trillion. To stop this problem from worsening, the annual budget must be balanced. That means large cuts to government spending.

However, Congress has consistently resisted spending cuts. President Trump tried to cut government spending on his own. Those opposed to his spending cuts sought orders from the court, essentially forcing Trump to spend money where it may not be needed.

He was forced to comply until now, as the Supreme Court has affirmed that President Trump can indeed refrain from spending money that Congress has authorized.

To balance the budget, government spending must be reduced by $2 trillion annually. This is essential to prevent the huge and burdensome public debt from growing. While tax revenues will naturally increase, this increase will not come from higher tax rates, but from low tax rates that add growth to taxable income.

But the increase in tax revenue won’t be sufficient to eliminate the annual deficit.

Unfortunately, cutting government spending is a daunting task. According to DOGE, extensive audits revealed hundreds of billions of dollars of waste. fraud and abuse within government programs.

Despite the Republican majority in Congress, they managed to cut spending by a meager $9 billion.

President Trump says he has the authority to withhold funds appropriated by Congress if he believes that these expenditures will not benefit the nation. A lower court disagreed, blocking his attempts to withhold spending.

However, the Supreme Court has now reversed that ruling, allowing Trump to exercise this power and reduce government spending. This conclusion should seem obvious to all.

In any organization, budgeting is a vital process. Once a budget is approved, the organization must spend wisely. The organization’s president may refrain from spending any budget item if that spending is not needed.

If President Trump, as the leader of the government organization with a budget exceeding $7 trillion annually, determines that certain allocations are unjustified, it is his responsibility to refrain from spending those funds.

This brings us to a fundamental difference between the private sector and the government sector. Businesses and most organizations are driven to find ways to cut costs and enhance efficiency.

In contrast, government employees completely lack the incentive to reduce cost, resulting in a belief that all allocated funds must be spent.

President Trump has identified two major areas for potential cuts: foreign aid and Medicaid.

On Medicaid, DOGE’s findings indicated that nearly 10 million of the 70 million Americans currently receiving taxpayer-funded Medicaid benefits are either ineligible or are able-bodied individuals who should purchase their own healthcare coverage.

This could translate to a 15% reduction in Medicaid spending.

However, many elected officials maintain that their constituents oppose any downsizing of government spending, particularly concerning Medicaid and healthcare programs. In fact, some Democrats threaten to shut down the government to protect these expenditures.

Cutting Medicaid has become a politically sensitive issue. The proposed reductions would primarily affect those who are ineligible for benefits, which includes a significant number of illegal immigrants.

Yet, there remains staunch opposition to this, with many insisting that taxpayers should fund health insurance for all 70 million recipients, at an annual cost of around $650 billion.

Turning to foreign aid, the USAID program costs taxpayers roughly $35 billion each year. DOGE’s audits uncovered substantial waste, fraud, and abuse, suggesting that nearly half of this funding might be squandered. One particularly egregious example involved U.S. taxpayers funding a $20 million Sesame Street project in Iraq.

Amid the complexity of these programs, President Trump is advocating for a zero-based budgeting approach to fundamentally rethink and reduce USAID spending.

While much of this funding addresses genuine humanitarian needs — initiatives most taxpayers would support — Trump’s strategy is to initially cut all spending and then reintroduce essential humanitarian projects.

This will result in much larger cuts than the traditional method of just cutting some programs.

The Supreme Court’s decision to empower Trump to withhold funds ensures that, before any public money is spent, it must be justified and align with taxpayers’ expectations.

This pivotal ruling represents a critical first step toward reducing government spending, ultimately aiming to balance the federal budget. The goal is to cut trillions in expenditures while simultaneously fostering economic growth to increase tax revenue.

The Supreme Court has finally permitted President Trump to curtail spending, and this is a welcome development

Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!