> The shrinking of the federal government is much needed as there is no mechanism to remove dead wood
What do you mean?
The budget is voted on by Congress literally every single year. The mechanism absolutely exists. The political consensus to do so is harder to achieve, but that's only when people actually don't universally agree change is needed (or how specifically to change it).
The mechanism technically exists but we haven't had a budget vote in years. We get "continuing resolutions" and periodic government shutdown brinksmanship games.
“People” aren’t really involved. Thanks to the gerrymander (which has now been full-throatedly embraced by the party that used to rightly call it out), the people’s votes don’t really matter. The congresspeople’s votes theoretically do, but they’re mainly just bought by the lobbyists who fund their primary campaigns.
> The budget is voted on by Congress literally every single year.
A formal budget hasn't been voted on and passed by Congress in decades.
You're likely thinking of "continuing resolutions" and omnibus bills, neither of which are "budgets" by Congress's own defintions but function similarly:
The first - a continuing resolution - just continues spending as is, no chance to change or cut.
The second - an omnibus bill - is a big conglomoration of requests and projects with minimal chances to change things.
You are 100% correct on the lack of political will to be able to change things. Frankly, I believe that a) too many people have their hands in the pot or b) they fundraise off the real/perceived problems, so the motivation to fix anything is minimal.
What do you mean?
The budget is voted on by Congress literally every single year. The mechanism absolutely exists. The political consensus to do so is harder to achieve, but that's only when people actually don't universally agree change is needed (or how specifically to change it).