 |
Oh what a feeling,
when we’re posturing on the ceiling
By Jim Surber
I apologize to Lionel Richie for this title, but for the last few weeks
we’ve witnessed an impending train wreck, caused by many irresponsible
people, that has been building to its inevitable collision for over a
decade. The latest political game of “chicken” over raising the debt
ceiling would be downright funny, if what depended upon it wasn’t so
serious. Much of what is occurring in Congress may be incomprehensible,
but the basic issue — that the United States needs to increase the
limit on its credit card or not be able to pay its bills — is
understood.
Forgetting all the fiscal shenanigans leading up to 1993, for all his
shortcomings, Bill Clinton left the federal budget on what can now
certainly be considered sound footing. This was systematically
undermined by the bursting of the internet bubble, starting two wars
after 9-11, the Wall Street debacle and housing crisis, and by the
folly of supply-side economics.
We have seen that large tax cuts do not necessarily provide larger
government revenues; but like runaway spending they can certainly help
to create large deficits. World domination is never cheap, and the only
fair tax is one that you and I don’t have to pay. Concurrently, the
only federal subsidies and entitlements that should be cut are those
that you and I don’t receive. Our current President, with the spending
increases of the past thirty months, has made it seem like the huge
deficits under Bush II were modest by comparison.
Add to the mix the emergence of the Tea Party, demanding the
impossibility of a balanced budget without tax increases. They also
strongly imply that low taxes are a national birthright, forgetting
that even Americans are subject to the realities of arithmetic.
Logic suggests that the only way to lower taxes is to first lower
spending; that is, if you have no debt. But debt, along with the
obligation to service it, is something we have in great supply, as well
as constantly-increasing funding requirements for Medicare and
Medicaid, Social Security, two on-going wars, and—well, you get the
idea. You could say, quite correctly, that we don’t have a debt ceiling
problem; we have a debt problem.
Much of the political discourse is all about how the government is
spending too much, and the government must tighten its belt. Since $1
of every $3 Congress spends is borrowed, this presents a problem. There
has been nothing said about individuals living beyond their means. In
no small part the current US deficit is founded on over-consumption,
made possible by too much consumer credit. In the current war of words
in Congress, there are no references to the immoral lending that
encouraged people, who could not afford it, to invest in the American
dream. That is what led to the real estate crash and a large part of
the financial crisis. This point has disappeared totally from political
argument. Congress is still more interested in being Democrats and
Republicans than in being statesmen.
In 2010, the American people voted for divided government, not
dysfunctional government. Both parties put us into this mess and, if we
are to ever get out of it, both will have to help along with all the
people. Nobody on either side (should I say, “nobody on any of the
three sides?”) is cheering the resolution, and with good reason.
Washington is littered with the bones of past failed committees that
were charged to reform spending. From all appearances, the “deal”
simply kicks the can a little farther down the road, accomplishing
little more than two political goals of not raising taxes and pushing
actually dealing with the problem past the 2012 election.
Beyond the sniping of opposing (and same-party) lawmakers, this
legislative crisis has reached deep into the layers of Washington,
perhaps even more than the protracted debate over health care. What is
unfortunate is that the debate on how to shrink government has
degenerated into name-calling. The truth is that D’s and R’s aren’t all
that far apart on their practical positions, but they are very far
apart on ideology, which is unfortunate but expected.
Sometime in the very near future the real work must begin, with all
members having a more serious discussion on where spending needs to be
cut and where revenue needs to be raised. Maybe straightforward debate
and negotiations, not posturing in front of the cameras, will be a good
thing for us all.
|
