Real world to FirstPrinciple!
Sure, zero growth would be great - well, a lot of soldiers would get screwed and tanks would run out of gas and helicopters would run out of maintenance parts but what the hey - is zero growth possible? (outside of string theory emergent possibilities) I mean, add the dream - elimination of the income tax, reduction of government to pre-1910 levels....
BTW - Budgets originate in the House. The President asks for an extremely rough proposal, which means only specific requests for immediate projects (missile defense, the blanks are all filled in by the House committees which more often than not completely ignore the President's requests. The only real pull a President has is the threat of a veto.
It is hard for a tiny Congressman to stand up against the power of the Presidency.
Tell that to Jumpin Jim. The President needs the Congressmen more than they need him and they know it.
Sarbanes-Oxley
What is it with you folks and Sarbanes-Oxley? Do you just like the way it sounds when you're eating marshmallows?
Sure budgets originate in the House. But the executive branch submits the budget it wants to have. Bush has been proposing tons of increases in all kinds of discretionary spending. That is why you get No Child Left Behind and Mediscare bill. If the President has no power in budget and spending, why bother having a Republican president. A Republican Congress is all we need to rein in spending. We wouldn't even need a Republican president. But we all know that the buck starts and stops at the Oval Office, except for Bush who is too afraid to touch the buck.
Yes, I would want a size of the govt before the 20th century. Unfortunately, it will not happen overnight. I will be a moderate and ask for incremental change. Hence, I want no new spending and zero growth in discretionary spending from last year.
If you like Sarbanes-Oxley maybe you should go join DU. Read Richard Epstein's take on it.