Battle Lines Remain
And Budget Needs Passing
Posted: November 15, 2012
To riff off an old bluegrass standard, “the boys (and girls, too) are back in town.” Yes, Congress has returned to Washington for its biennial exercise in irony — a lame-duck session in which, predictably, galactically serious issues await resolution.
This go-round, as we noted in this space Tuesday, the matter of colossal import is the “fiscal cliff,” namely that combination of tax increases and spending cuts that, come Jan. 1, could send a delicate economy into a tailspin, literally as well as figuratively.
In all truth, the battle lines have hardly softened on this issue. President Obama and the Democrats still want to raise taxes on “the rich,” so much the better to make them pay their “fair share.” Republicans view this as a non-starter; in their mind, higher taxes are a sure-fire way to short-circuit an economy just beginning, perhaps, to show some signs of genuine life.
Still, something must be done to prevent what some call a looming “Taxmageddon.” And something, we contend, will be done — more than likely the application of a Band-Aid that will get Washington beyond the New Year and give lawmakers time to fashion a more comprehensive and long-standing solution. There’s just so much that can realistically be done between now and Christmas. So Congress will act minimally and get out of town.
But here’s a novel idea that should be floated now, in hopes that it might take hold when the negotiating and horse-trading commences in earnest. Why not ... wait for it ... pass an actual budget by which official Washington will be expected to abide? Geez, we haven’t had one in, what, going on four years?
OK, all facetiousness aside, how can we ever expect to rehabilitate the national fisc without fashioning a blueprint for spending? Stumbling along from one continuing resolution to another encourages not sobriety but profligacy.
Put another way, how do you think some $800 billion of additional federal spending became institutionalized between 2007 (when government expenditures were in the $2.7 trillion range) and today, when spending routinely exceeds $3.5 trillion? Failure to approve a budget has something to do with this lamentable state of affairs, we contend.
Unfortunately, few within the beltway take the time to address this concern. Indeed, it scarcely arose during the interminable election season just completed. And yet, to us, it seems so fundamental, so requisite.
Are we in a post-budgetary as well as post-constitutional age? We would like to think we’re in neither.
This go-round, as we noted in this space Tuesday, the matter of colossal import is the “fiscal cliff,” namely that combination of tax increases and spending cuts that, come Jan. 1, could send a delicate economy into a tailspin, literally as well as figuratively.
In all truth, the battle lines have hardly softened on this issue. President Obama and the Democrats still want to raise taxes on “the rich,” so much the better to make them pay their “fair share.” Republicans view this as a non-starter; in their mind, higher taxes are a sure-fire way to short-circuit an economy just beginning, perhaps, to show some signs of genuine life.
Still, something must be done to prevent what some call a looming “Taxmageddon.” And something, we contend, will be done — more than likely the application of a Band-Aid that will get Washington beyond the New Year and give lawmakers time to fashion a more comprehensive and long-standing solution. There’s just so much that can realistically be done between now and Christmas. So Congress will act minimally and get out of town.
But here’s a novel idea that should be floated now, in hopes that it might take hold when the negotiating and horse-trading commences in earnest. Why not ... wait for it ... pass an actual budget by which official Washington will be expected to abide? Geez, we haven’t had one in, what, going on four years?
OK, all facetiousness aside, how can we ever expect to rehabilitate the national fisc without fashioning a blueprint for spending? Stumbling along from one continuing resolution to another encourages not sobriety but profligacy.
Put another way, how do you think some $800 billion of additional federal spending became institutionalized between 2007 (when government expenditures were in the $2.7 trillion range) and today, when spending routinely exceeds $3.5 trillion? Failure to approve a budget has something to do with this lamentable state of affairs, we contend.
Unfortunately, few within the beltway take the time to address this concern. Indeed, it scarcely arose during the interminable election season just completed. And yet, to us, it seems so fundamental, so requisite.
Are we in a post-budgetary as well as post-constitutional age? We would like to think we’re in neither.