Don't usually get my posts directly inspired by a TV show, but sometimes The Rachel Maddow Show will do that to you. She had a great topic last night, with polling that demonstrated that the one area that people perceived Romney as slightly better than President Obama is in the area of the deficit.
The idea that Republicans are better at reducing or eliminating deficit is neither logically or factually correct. It can be clearly demonstrated, that over the last 32 years, that the debt has grown substantially more under Republican presidencies than it has Democratic ones.
Many seem to block out that huge swarms of debt were accumulated under Reagan/Bush, Sr. They further forget that that debt was substantially reduced by Clinton, and had actually left office with the nation in surplus. This was completely reversed by Bush, Jr., engendered by the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars, a Medicare giveaway to private business, and a whole attitude that spending didn't need to match revenues. A belief, as expressed by Vice President Dick Cheney, that "deficits don't matter".
Along comes President Obama, stuck with the worst economic slump since the Great Depression, and who, like all Presidents before, organize stimulus to try to lead us out of it. Other than that, the direction of the deficit has been downward, and the number of federal jobs has been shrinking. I'm not bragging that he did this. Cutting government spending and jobs is not necessarily the smartest thing to do when we're still mired in a painfully slow recovery, but that's what's happening.
So now Governor Romney comes up with a plan that will add $5 trillion to the deficit in reduced tax revenue, and rapidly accelerate defense spending. So, on the surface, his plan will not reduce the deficit, but will instead substantially increase it. So how will he get things back in alignment? How will ha eliminate the current deficit, AND make up for the increased shortfall he will create?
By roasting Big Bird on a spit?
That's like trying to eliminate a beach by removing one grain of sand.
This is what he will have choose from to balance the budget:
He says he will cut tax loopholes. But he has ruled more out than he has ruled in (okay, in actuality he's ruled nothing in - it's all smoke and mirrors). To really close the gap he will have to attack middle class deductions and credits, such as the mortgage deduction, child care credit, charitable deductions, and much more. He'll have to. He'll have no choice - if he's sincere about the deficit.
He may think he doesn't have to worry about it because the economy will just grow so gosh darn fast that it eliminates the deficit. That is an iffy proposition at best. You can't just say you can balance the budget simply by wishing the GDP higher. And his deliberately increasing the budget gap just makes the ability to do this tougher.
He may go the Ryan way and strip the government of all benefits, entitlements whatever you want to call it, aimed at the middle class, the working poor and the truly destitute. Except for picking on the truly impoverished I wish him luck with that politically. The "Keep your government hands off my Medicare" crowd might suddenly wake up and realize the goose they smell being cooked is their own tea-party drenched selves! As Pogo would say, "We have the met the enemy and he is us!"
Finally, he may decide, as past Republican Presidents have, that what the hey? Deficits don't really matter after all. And with Fox News not bleating about them every few minutes, maybe people will buy it.
Will you?
No comments:
Post a Comment