
A key test for the political establishment and the media this campaign cycle will be whether they accurately explain the Presidential candidates' budget plans to voters, or whether they allow the candidates to spin their way out of the severe implications of their own proposals. The election will hinge to a large extent on the two parties' visions for the role of the federal government and how to pay for it, and keeping the taxing and spending implication of those visions clear is the key to helping voters make informed decisions at the polls.
An event hosted Thursday morning by the fiscal discipline hawks at the Center for a Responsible Federal Budget offered this corner of the establishment an early critique of the GOP candidates' tax and spending plans -- all of which drew mixed reviews or worse.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
With the ink drying on a final deal, one of the highest profile Republicans in Congress said the December and February fights over extending the payroll tax cut and other expiring provisions through the end of the year have hurt Republicans -- at least in the short term.
"It's a tough issue because they had to compromise... But yeah, I think the payroll tax deal, from a political perspective, certainly caused damage because it muddled the differences [between the parties," House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) told reporters at a breakfast roundtable hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "It got us down into a skirmish, where the differences got muddled, which is I think what the President loves."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans have taken to describing President Obama's budget as "deficits built to last" -- a play on Obama's call for an economy built to last. The implication: hand the government over to us, and we'll rid the budget of this deficit scourge. Put aside for a moment that wiping out deficits too fast would be economically disastrous, leading to rocketing unemployment rates. The truth is there are plenty of budget proposals out there, including Paul Ryan's "Path To Prosperity," which was endorsed by nearly every Republican in Congress. And these also project significant deficits well into the future.
Of course, Obama's budget is very substantively different from Paul Ryan's Path to Prosperity. Obama's would draw down deficits over the coming decade with a mix of proposed tax increases on high income earners and corporations, already enacted spending cuts, and additional cuts to health care spending and other programs. But it maintains the basic shape of the existing safety net over the long term. Ryan's calls for huge cuts to the safety net, for making Medicaid a block grant program, and, after a decade, for phasing out Medicare. But he proposes significant tax cuts at the same time.
And even with all that slashing, just what does that do to the projected deficit? The chart below tells you quite starkly:
Turn on any cable news channel this week and you'll very likely hear a top Republican froth in anger over the fact that Senate Democrats haven't passed a budget in more than 1000 days.
This particular talking point has been around for months -- long before the Senate crossed the 1000 days threshold. Now that it's budget season, Republicans hope it pops, filters up into mainstream news coverage, and sows doubt in the minds of voters who don't understand the Congressional budget process, and don't realize how unimportant, and in most crucial respects false, the line is. Alternatively, they hope Senate Dems get spooked and move ahead with a budget document that exposes their differences and leaves them open to political attack -- but has no impact on policy whatsoever.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)President Obama's fiscal year 2013 budget envisions the economy healing steadily after years of hemorrhaging and stagnation -- and key government services surviving mostly despite the violence done to the federal ledger by the Bush tax cuts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the 2008 financial crisis.
It also shows federal deficits declining steadily over the coming decade, and the national debt stabilizing as a share of GDP over the same period.
These are the consequences of multiple, competing strategic ideas:
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Though required by law, White House budgets are largely political documents that tend to become more and more political as reelection time gets closer and closer.
This year's will technically be no different -- but the long-term stakes will be much higher than they usually are and clarifying that fact for voters will be key to President Obama's appeal in 2012.
It's shaping up to be spring 2011 redux. Just under a year ago, Republicans -- euphoric after a midterm election landslide, and overzealous in their interpretation of their mandate -- passed a budget that called for phasing out Medicare over the coming years and replacing it with a subsidized private insurance system for newly eligible seniors.
The backlash was ugly. But Republicans seem to have forgotten how poisonous that vote really was, and remains...because they're poised to do it again. This time they're signaling they'll move ahead, with a modified plan -- one that, though less radical, would still fundamentally remake and roll back one of the country's most popular and enduring safety net programs.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
