Yes, and eliminate federal agencies that are unconstitutional

Government spending is driving higher inflation, which hurts everyone - especially those on fixed incomes, and adding more debt, which will burden future generations.

The federal debt is out of control (31 trillion), and these non-constitution agencies are a big part.

The fact that an agency is not mentioned explicitly in the Constitution does not mean it is unconstitutional. This is a spurious argument. The Constitution clearly gives the Executive the power to enforce laws passed by Congress, and the creation of an agency to write and apply rules for carrying out those laws is inherent in the grant of this power. The Constitution does not prohibit creating administrative structures, and the Supreme Court, despite bumping up against these agencies repeatedly through the decades, has never even hinted that the existence of these agencies is problematic cons…  Read moretitutionally. I am not an originalist, but even if I were, it belies belief to claim that the Executive should somehow manage all of that his/herself OR that Congress should sit down and write all the rules for administering broad, sweeping laws for themselves. This sort of approach would paralyze government--likely the goal of the "eliminate these unconstitutional agencies" argument.

Cutting public spending budgets will only hurt the everyday people and cities that rely on that spending to ensure their lives and homes can maintain a well-kept state. It will also put the families and people in tougher situations into even harder circumstances, creating more harm to lower-class citizens.