from spending. That is way, way way more than Reagan, Bush 41 or Bush 43. If he could do that it would be truly historic.

He also said he would deport Obama’s illegal alien uncle. Yeh baby!

from its present level of 25%of GDP to a more historic level of 20%. This is not as aggressive as Paul or even Perry, but it is a proposed reduction of historic proportions if he can pull it off.. It is one thing to get on a soapbox and say that you are going to eliminate the Department of Education and it is something else to actually do it. Not even Reagan could do that.

From his website:

Immediately cut non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent
Reform and restructure Medicaid as block grant to states
Align wages and benefits of government workers with market rates
Reduce federal workforce by 10 percent via attrition
Undertake fundamental restructuring of government programs and services

Cap and Balance the Federal Budget

We also must put controls in place to ensure that we never see a repeat of the explosive spending and borrowing of the past few years. As president, Mitt Romney will immediately move to cut spending and cap it at 20 percent of GDP. As spending comes under control, he will pursue further cuts that would allow caps to be set even lower so as to guarantee future fiscal stability. A Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution is also necessary to ensure that our nation embarks on a path of long-term fiscal discipline, and as president, Romney will introduce one in Congress and fight for its passage.
Cap federal spending at 20 percent of GDP
Pursue a Balanced Budget Amendment

Romney strongly opposed same-sex marriage during his governorship. He emphasized his desire to “protect the institution of marriage” while denouncing discrimination against gays and lesbians. “Like me, the great majority of Americans wish both to preserve the traditional definition of marriage and to oppose bias and intolerance directed towards gays and lesbians,” Romney said in 2004.[71]

On June 2, 2006, Romney sent a letter to each member of the U.S. Senate urging them to vote in favor of the Marriage Protection Amendment.[72] In the letter, Romney stated that the debate over same-sex unions is not a discussion about “tolerance”, but rather a “debate about the purpose of the institution of marriage”. Romney wrote, “Attaching the word marriage to the association of same-sex individuals mistakenly presumes that marriage is principally a matter of adult benefits and adult rights. In fact, marriage is principally about the nurturing and development of children. And the successful development of children is critical to the preservation and success of our nation.”

Upon entering office, Romney faced a $3 billion deficit. Facing an immediate fiscal shortfall, the governor asked the state legislature for emergency powers to make “9C” cuts to the fiscal year 2003 budget. Romney cut spending and restructured state government.

With the help of a reviving economy, Romney and the state legislature were able to balance the state budget and replenish the state’s “rainy day fund” through government consolidation and reform. As a result of the fiscal turnaround, Romney repeatedly pushed the state legislature to roll back the state income tax from 5.3% to 5.0% (Massachusetts has a flat income tax).[24] He also proposed a “tax-free shopping day”,[25] a property tax relief for Seniors,[26] and a manufacturing tax credit.

In 2006, the Massachusetts legislature approved a budget that required spending $450 million from the rainy day fund. Even though the state had collected a record-breaking amount of tax revenue in the fiscal year, the funds were needed to cover the increased spending.[27] Romney vetoed the transfer of funds from the contingency account and used his emergency “9C” cuts to balance the state budget. “One of the primary responsibilities of government is keeping the books balanced,” said Romney “The problem here is not revenues; the problem is overspending. The level of spending which we’re looking at would put us on the same road to financial crisis and ruin that our commonwealth has been down before.”[28] The veto was overturned by the legislature, and all 250 of Romney’s 2006 vetoes were overturned by the Massachusetts Legislature.[29][17]

In December 2004, Romney announced plans to file a death penalty bill in early 2005. The bill, filed April 28, 2005, sought to reinstate the death penalty in cases that include terrorism, the assassination of law enforcement officials and multiple killings. Romney’s legislation required the presence of scientific evidence such as DNA to sentence someone to death and a tougher standard of “no doubt” of guilt for juries to sentence defendants. The legislation called for a pool of certified capital case lawyers to ensure proper representation for the accused and allowed jurors who do not personally support the death penalty to serve in the guilt phase of the trial.[93] Romney said; “In the past, efforts to reinstate the death penalty in Massachusetts have failed. They have failed because of concerns that it would be too broadly applied or that evidentiary standards weren’t high enough or proper safeguards weren’t in place. We have answered all those concerns with this bill.”[94] The Massachusetts House of Representatives defeated the bill 99-53.

In May 2005, Romney presented a proposal to the Massachusetts General Court to crack down on repeat drunk drivers. Massachusetts had some of the weakest drunk driving laws of any state in the country, and the state was losing $9 million annually from its highway budget because existing laws were not in compliance with federal standards.[95] Romney called his proposal “Melanie’s Bill” in honor of Melanie Powell, a 13-year-old who was killed in 2003 by a repeat drunk driver while walking to the beach with friends. The bill included provisions that gave prosecutors greater power to go after repeat offenders with increased penalties. It also increased license suspensions, raised sentencing guidelines and required repeat drunk drivers to install ignition-interlock devices in their vehicles. The state House Judiciary Committee removed many of the bill’s provisions and sent the reduced version to an eventual conference committee.[96] Romney criticized the “watered down” bill, which he said reflected the interests of defense lawyers, and sent the bill back to legislators with amendments to restore some of the original provisions.[97] On October 28, 2005, Romney signed the amended version of the bill, which approved two of Romney’s three amendments and rejected Romney’s provision for increasing penalties for motorists who refuse to take a breathalyzer test.[98][99] Eleven months after the enactment of Melanie’s Law, arrests of repeat drunk drivers decreased by half, and the number of drivers agreeing to breathalyzer tests increased by more than 18 percent.[99]

Romney was the first governor in modern Massachusetts history to deny every request for a pardon or commutation during his four years in office. He denied 100 requests for commutations and 172 requests for pardons, including the request from a soldier serving in Iraq to be pardoned for a conviction at age 13 involving a BB gun.[101]

In February 2005, Romney filed legislation to increase benefits for Massachusetts National Guard members.[citation needed] Working with the state legislature, Romney developed the “Welcome Home Bill” which provides guardsman with reduced life-insurance premiums and free tuition and fees at Massachusetts universities and community colleges.[122] The bill also increases daily state active-duty pay rate from $75 to $100, and increases the death benefit paid to families of Guard members killed in the line of duty from $5,000 to $100,000.[

Romney vetoed a bill in 2004 that would have allowed illegal immigrants to obtain in-state tuition rates at state colleges if they graduated from a Massachusetts high school after attending it for at least three years and signed an affidavit affirming that they intended to seek citizenship. Romney argued that the bill would cost the state government $15 million and that Massachusetts should not reward illegal immigration Quite different from Rick Perry