aid not just for the volume of procedures they crank out, but whether people are actually getting healthier and getting better," Pawlenty told The Des Moines Register. He also told ABC's "This Morning" that he would support Ryan's proposal to privatize Medicare if his only choices were Ryan's plan or doing nothing. Pawlenty, who launched his bid for the Republican presidential nomination last week in Des Moines, had stops planned later in the day in Boone and Fort Dodge. He is scheduled to visit Sioux City on Tuesday and Council Bluffs on Wednesday. Former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer, considered to be another possible GOP presidential hopeful, joined Pawlenty at the Waukee event, laying out a detailed plan to create jobs by overhauling the nation's trade, energy and tax policies. He said America is addicted to Middle Eastern oil, corporations that don't back taxes and special interests that have cost the nation jobs. "We've stood by and let our best jobs go to China and Mexico," he said. "We are a nati over the next decade, but they just won't tell anyone where those reductions will take place.  The Democrats' strategy is simple. State loudly that they are cutting the deficit, but don't tell people what programs are being cut. When the Republicans actually put forward a specific plan, falsely scream that Republicans are going to "abolish Medicare" and leave poor people out in the cold.  Despite the dire problems we face with the nation’s debt, some in the media, such as at The Washington Post, have actually been defending Democrats' decision not to put forward a specific plan.  A little perspective is needed on the cuts. Federal spending soared by 28 percent from 2008 to 2011, rising from $2.98 to $3.82 trillion.  In February, Obama proposed spending $46 trillion over the next ten years. Cutting $2 trillion, as the Senate Democrats say they plan doing, is only a 4 percent cut.  The "draconian" House Republican budget cuts spending by less than 10 percent, still leaving government much bigger than in 2008 even after accounting for inflation and population growth.  But more can be done. Five separate think tanks have come out with ways to control government debt over the last couple of weeks. Two are conservative organizations, the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. Two are liberal ones, the Economic Policy Institute and the Roosevelt Institute. And one is moderate, the Bipartisan Policy Center.  Only the Heritage Foundation would balance the budget in the next ten years. The other proposals never get a balanced budget, they just hope that if government spending grows at a slightly slower rate than the economy, that we can grow our way out of the deficits.  There are big differences in their approaches. The liberal groups cut defense spending, while the conservative groups slow the Pentagon's growth rate.  The Heritage Foundation has the most ambitious plans for Social Security and Medicare, returning them to what they originally promised: programs that would keep the elderly out of poverty. The programs would be eliminated for individuals making over $110,000 a year.  The liberal groups would leave Social Security alone and control government costs by making government bigger -- creating a government option for health care.  Alas, these proposals don’t question whether many programs should be eliminated altogether. Instead, the approach is keep the existing programs and impose an across the board freeze or cut everything by the same amount.  With the Federal debt of $14.3 trillion amounting to $185,000 for every family of four, at some point we have to concede that the federal checkbook has its limits. Cuts in spending are only a start, other programs need to be abolished or radically changed.  The Social Security and Medicare reforms proposed by the Heritage Foundation are much more radical than anything that Republicans are proposing. These programs have long gotten away from being a safety net. Their benefits have grown much faster than inflation over the last several decades. If people want more than a guaranteed minimum retirement plan, they can save for it.