Cato Institute’s Chris Edwards succinctly explains that not only does Rep. Boehner’s budget plan fail to cut spending $1 trillion over the next ten years — as advertised — but it “doesn’t actually cut spending at all.”
Zilch. Spending goes up.
“Why doesn’t the House leadership propose real cuts?” asks Edwards. He means identify specific line items that can be cut back — now, as in today or this week — rather than setting optimistic and unenforceable spending caps on future congresses. This especially goes for “caps” that don’t actually cap spending, but allow it to grow by, say, $7 – 8 trillion over the next decade.
Boehner’s plan allows debt to continue to pile up at historically huge levels. But he’s not alone. Obama has no plan. Reid’s plan? Calling it “smoke and mirrors” gives smoke and mirrors a bad name.
The Penny Plan, introduced by Florida Rep. Connie Mack and endorsed by Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, has some merit. It would cut the budget by one percent for six years and then cap federal government spending at 18 percent of GDP.
Yes, cutting federal spending by only one penny on each dollar (one percent) for six years, rather than increasing spending by upwards of 7 percent a year under the Congressional Budget Office’s baseline budget, would balance the budget in eight years.
But to restore balance and end the debt crisis, a penny cut has to actually be a cut.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
6 replies on “Don’t Spend that Penny”
Paul, your comments, taken if those reading understand that your complaint doesn’t actually mean what it says, are not serious. The Republicans are already catching it from the mainsteam media, the liberals and 90% of the
Democrats in Congress, as well as the President, who, you will have to admit, would sooner cut his own throat than consider any cuts of any kind in the budget, whether or not listed. You know who has caused the problems in the economy so please get off flogging this dead horse.
Charlie
Counterpoint.
Nicely flogged, Mr Jacob.
[…] Debt Ceiling Debate: Much ado about nothing var addthis_product = ‘wpp-254’; I wish I could get excited about the ongoing debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, while they talk a good game, the Republicans’ supposedly draconian plans (according to Harry Reid and Barack Obama) is weak tea indeed. […]
The budget could be frozen at today’s dollar amounts and it would be considered a “cut”. Anyone whose check didn’t go up next year would complain about “cuts” in benefits or wages.
governmentese:
“raping and pillaging”
“cutting and gutting”
translation: anything that does not allow continuing to do exactly what I want
I have no problem with shutting the whole mess down. I also have no problem with removing every single Senator now in office. Neither will happen, thanks greatly to a lot of know nothing economists who have their own dogs in the fight. It is the price that will be paid for having an incompetent, socialist for President and probably the dumbest democrats in recent history. The real focus should be taking over the Senate and increasing the House numbers to be veto proof, then throw out the useless socialist. Maybe then, but probably not, things can get done.