Reducing the defecit should be the United States primary economic concern

Let's get it on. Definitions. (Merriam Webster's) Reducing--(To reduce) To diminish in size, amount, extent, or number. Deficit--an excess of expenditure over revenue Should--used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency Primary--of first rank, importance, or value Concern--to be the business or affair of. The United States of America was founded as a nation for the people, of the people, by the people. The system of government instituted by the Constitution calls for a democratic republic, or representative democracy, in which groups of citizens are represented by elected officials. These officials then have the explicit responsibility to carry the will of their constituents with them on every piece of legislation they consider, debate, and/or vote on. The scope of interest demonstrated by the representative cannot diminish past a certain point or else the system of democracy breaks down. With regard to the massive, multi-trillion dollar deficit carried on the shoulders of this nation, the fundamental system of democracy has broken down. On a national level, the United States' representatives have promoted first, above the will of their constituents, national interest and self interest. These two category's appear to be too broadly separated to be grouped in the same sentence however this is the meaning: that National interest has dictated huge amounts of deficit spending (money the U.S. Congress does not have and must borrow from nations) on the war in the Middle East and by the Federal Reserve to control inflation and debt. These two policies outline what is good for a small scope (that being corporate America and America's National Interest) and not what is good for the larger scope of the American working/middle/lower-class; the scope of which the U.S. Congressmen and women are entitled to advocate. With that said, there are three observations that can be made from the focus of the Affirmative. The first one is quite simple. When United States government officials put aside the will of their constituents to address a national interest (which is not inherently wrong, however in the case of the Middle East it has done more harm than good) such as the War on Terror, it puts the American people in a debt they had absolutely no control over. Secondly, a continuation of deficit spending will have dire effects on the American economy and inevitably drive taxes up so as to re pay all the borrowed money the government, not the people, spent in the past decade. Thirdly, and most importantly, the home front is the foremost concern. Please allow this analogy to illustrate: If a person obtains the title of 'healthy' through mental stability and sound physical condition, then the United States as a country must maintain national security and a stable economic state to be considered 'healthy.' Essentially the United States must take care of itself first, just as you and I must maintain hygiene and physical state to be healthy, in order to be the best that it can be. Contention I: United States Government Officials have no right to put the American people into debt through factors of which their constituents cannot exclusively control. It is understood that taxes are a means by which a government can have funds to redistribute in the form of social services, defenses and anything else a nation may require. The intent of such a system is good and is not inherently wrong however the actual budgeting and spending of these funds does not always translate into an acquisition of good things for all the taxpayers. What a government ought to do with taxpayer money and what a government can do with taxpayer money carry two totally different meanings in all practicality--especially with regard to the United States Government. As my introduction stated, United States representatives have the obligation to adhere to the will of their constituents in order to ensure the functionality of a democratic system. When that obligation is disregarded, and the scope of interest shrinks to that of only the representatives in the House, Senate, and White House, (i.e., the three fundamental aspects of the United States' National Interest.) the representatives have ceased their representation of their constituents. When they have forfeited that function, they then no longer have the right to redistribute taxpayer funds in the fashion they so choose. It would be as if I told you to pay me a portion of your income and in return I will provide you with an education, full protection under my laws, and security. But then I took a good sum of your money and sent some of my personal representatives down to GameStop to reserve the last few copies of Halo Reach because I kept hearing they might run out soon (Crudely analogous to U.S. involvement in Middle East). This provides entertainment value only to myself and my close friends, not you (the one who paid for it), and there was absolutely nothing you could do about it. Government officials cannot neglect the fundamental essence of democracy by substituting the general will for National or self interest. Instead they should focus on maintaining a healthy home front and stable economy, not spending more money than they have and putting you and me, the taxpayer, in debt. This brings me to my next point: Contention II: A continuation of current government deficit spending will inevitably lead to higher taxes and place more pressure on an already sore and recently recovering economy. According to the U.S. Treasury Department, spending for the Department of Defense, Treasury Department, and Health and Human Services have each seen almost a two to three billion dollar increase since 2006. Moreover, Congress has had higher expenditures over revenue since 1969. [SOURCE: http://www.federalbudget.com...]. Thus, Congress continues to borrow money from lenders each year and pile up a more massive debt/interest rate annually. Using simple reasoning it is evident that if the United States Government prolong its spending trends, then taxes must be raised in order to compensate for an ever increasing interest rate so as to stave off bankruptcy. After suffering from the second worst recession in American economic history, the next few years are crucial to the revitalization of the American economy and higher taxes coupled with other government taxing programs, high unemployment rates, and dying industries are all direct indicators that the U.S. should be attempting to reduce the deficit rather than continue it. This can be partially accomplished through reducing expenditures for Treasury Department. In the years leading up to the recession the Treasury Department crafted a number of it's policies with anti-inflation in mind. These policies turned out to be expensive and ineffective actually leading to an increase in inflation which then put pressure on the housing bubble. Ultimately, there are four main U.S. Government instituted policies that failed and played a major role in most recent economic recession. Specifically: Misguided Intervention in the Housing Market; Loose Monetary Policy; Deposit Insurance; Financial Regulation. [SOURCE: http://www.cato.org...]. Contention III: The home front is the foremost concern. As in the instance of national security; without security, their could be no freedom and thus no United States of America. Therefore, just as national security comes primary with regard to the interests of this nation as a collective whole, so ought to the reduction of the deficit, as the deficit deals directly with issues related to the overall welfare of America and her people. There is no need, other than the National Interest of maintaining control of oil, for the United States to be present in the Middle East. Although Afghanistan may be destabilized, the threat of another terrorist attack is a low probability. I await my opponents case.