Bob Beauprez Quotes

The goal is to reduce the size and scope of government spending, not to focus on the deficit. The deficit is the symptom of the disease.

I'm coming to Washington, D.C., to do the people's work. And the people's work has to do with reducing spending and cutting budgets and, and trying to get a grip on the size of government.

The American people are tired of the out-of-control spending, and they want Washington to get their act in order and stop spending money we don't have.

In a clean break from the Obama years, and frankly from the years before this president, we will keep federal spending at 20 percent of GDP, or less. That is enough. The choice is whether to put hard limits on economic growth, or hard limits on the size of government, and we choose to limit government.

If you ask people do you think that government should spend less money than what it takes in, most people agree with that.

I think you're going to see a number of Democrats that do want to see us grapple with spending.

You eventually have to figure out how to balance the books. So that's the reason I gave up my day job to come do this was to go fight to create the space where spending matches America's capacity to tax, and that means economic growth and a smaller, humbler federal government.

Not in the constitution, but I would propose a law to the French parliament that provides for reducing the budget deficit year by year, until we have reached a balanced budget by 2017.

If we don't get a grip on government spending, there will be no growth.

Cutting budget deficits can never be just an exercise in economics.

What you really want to do is sit down and find a place that you can control government spending and raise more revenue.

I came to Congress to help reduce spending.

The real goal should be reduced government spending, rather than balanced budgets achieved by ever rising tax rates to cover ever rising spending.

Our morbidly obese federal government needs not just behavior modification but bariatric surgery.

Look, I'm very much in favor of tax cuts, but not with borrowed money. And the problem that we've gotten into in recent years is spending programs with borrowed money, tax cuts with borrowed money, and at the end of the day that proves disastrous. And my view is I don't think we can play subtle policy here.

I, for one, believe that revenue has to increase. I think every American would pay more if they thought spending was going to be cut and the budget brought to balance.

Now make no mistake, I think we need a strong dose of fiscal conservatism in Washington, D.C.

Even with not having a balanced budget at this time, I support tax cuts. That will help limit spending.

Well, a deficit reflects an imbalance between spending and revenue, and so narrowing it requires acting on one, the other or both.

But the debt limit obviously is something that needs to and will be passed. That is not inconsistent with a process and a belief that we have to get significant deficit reduction.

As a fiscal conservative, I believe one of the most important roles the federal government can play in assuring that our economy remains strong is to keep our fiscal house in order.

The deficit only became a big problem in the Reagan-Bush years. For 12 years, Republican presidents talked about balancing the budget, but failed to propose one.

Government spending clearly needs some adjusting. But a budget is a statement of our priorities, and balancing our spending on the backs of our nation's seniors is not the right approach.

The Gillard government must give up its addiction to wasteful spending borrowing and taxing.

Most of the major increases in the debt ceiling have been accompanied by structural changes in the way we raise and spend money.