How's this for something straight up the middle? If you want to reduce government spending is there a valid choice available?

There really isn't.

The two major parties love to spend it.

The only purpose of money is to be spent. Even when it's saved, it's saved in order to be spent later. If no money was spent, we'd have a barter economy.

If a government spends less it can clamp down it's income in the form of taxes and inflation. There's also bond issuance and debt spending. Arguably debt is the new liquid money system in the modern World. That's a whole other can of worms.
Suffice to say our elected officials have choices on when to spend, how much to spend and what to spend on. My point is both major parties are interested in increasing spending. The differences lie mostly on where to spend it.

It's a radical idea, but imho the Federal Reserve should send the money it prints to the government for spending rather than sending it to banks for loaning. Then the money supply would be tied to real value (work the government does) rather than debt, and we might be able to eliminate income taxes altogether. Maybe.

What you're talking about is bypassing the Cantillon effect which is a start. My more radical idea is the Federal Reserve shouldn't print money at all. It debases the currency everybody else is holding. You're right though that the status quo enriches the elite. But I digress....