• terminate programs that provide direct grants to businesses; • eliminate programs that provide research and other services for industries; • end programs that provide subsidized loans or insurance to businesses; • eliminate trade barriers designed to protect U.S. firms in specific industries from foreign competition at the expense of higher prices for American consumers; • base defense procurement contract decisions on national security needs, not on the number of jobs created in key members' districts; and • eliminate the income tax loopholes carved out solely for specific companies or industries and substantially lower the tax rate so that there is no net revenue increase.
The federal government currently spends roughly $65 billion a year on programs that provide subsidies to private businesses. Seven years ago both Congress and the Clinton administration pledged to attack that pervasive corporate safety net. They have had very little success. Virtually every corporate welfare program that existed in 1994 is still squandering taxpayer dollars today. Many have had their budgets increased. If the size and cost of the federal government are ever going to be reduced, these taxpayer rip-offs must be eliminated.
Everyone seems to be opposed to corporate welfare. The problem is that not everyone defines it the same way. Corporate welfare should be carefully defined as any government spending program that provides