Are you daft?
A reduction of $112 Billion, or roughly 4% cut, in total Federal outlays, would represent the largest absolute or percentage cut in the Federal Budget in over 50 years.
And that's just the savings from the Departments he would eliminate; we haven't even discussed the savings from Departments which he would vote to simply reduce.
But even just looking at the proposed Department eliminations, in saying "In other words he's not serious", you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Fact is, even a 4% cut in the Federal Budget would be BY FAR the largest Fiscal Conservative victory against Federal Spending in the last half-century.
Read a history book, for once in your life. Sheesh.
And even if enacted, something we both know would never happen, is absolutely meaningless in terms of the problem at hand. A $112 billion cut from a $1.6 trillion deficit is not even a good first start. It is sticking your finger in a hole the size of a pencil while the water pours in from the garage door-sized hole two feet away. It's a sound bite, nothing more and nothing less. It totally ignores the real problem while proposing a feel-good patch. If Rand Paul is serious about addressing the fiscal mess that is Washington then he had better come up with plans to rein in entitlements. Until then he's no more a part of the solution than any other bonehead in Congress.
And that's just the savings from the Departments he would eliminate; we haven't even discussed the savings from Departments which he would vote to simply reduce.
You could totally defund every single discretionary program the government has except for Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs, wipe out every agency and department from Agriculture thru the National Zoo and you would still have a budget deficit of a triliion dollars. We're past the point for sound-bite solutions. We need Senators who will tackle the real problems.