Most of those would not work to lower anything or are not nearly as bad as they sound.
Eliminate the Marines? Fat chance, they have more PR power than Hollywood, and in the real world the Army and the Marines do not, in fact, do the same thing, though there is a significant overlap...from which both services learn and improve in their own mission envelopes during war. Besides, who would us doggies have to make fun of, the Air Force and Navy are just too easy. I might add that this idea doesn't save a damned cent, it just moves all the slots and MTOE from one service to another, which is purely an accounting change that doesn't affect the bottom line.
Eliminate military contractors and increase the size of the Army to compensate? A stupid idea because the benefits tail that goes with lower-level contract workers replaced by military (With families) is staggeringly more expensive and less flexible. At the other end of the spectrum, the contractors we hire as subject matter experts or technicians cannot be replaced by any number of first-term conscripts, and growing them within the military (I.e. having field-grade officers and senior NCOs do this) means planning to have them and their families around for an entire career plus retirement, which is incredibly expensive as opposed to hiring contractors for a few years when you actually need them.
Road subscriptions? Well, if it means doing away with the fuel taxes that fulfill that function now, there really isn't a lot of difference.
Eliminate tax exemption for churches and eliminate tax deduction for charitable giving? Since the churches' operating expenses are all 'Above the line' on their nonprofit org tax returns, all you're talking about is taking away the money they would have otherwise used for 'Good works,' so the net effect of both ideas is to punish the poor, not the churches.
