October 1, 2016

Posts on elections

Subscribe to this feed Subscribe to this feed

 

Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 10:31 AM

The first segment of the first presidential debate between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump was dedicated to achieving prosperity.

That provided an opportunity for the moderator to ask about -- and the candidates to talk about -- their respective plans for putting the nation’s projected debt on a sustainable path. It’s hard to see how prosperity can be achieved, or long maintained, with a debt that is projected to reach unsustainable levels.

Unfortunately, the subject was not discussed.

Trump made a couple of passing references to the debt and Clinton noted that Trump’s plan might increase the debt, but neither of them made a connection to the debt as an economic issue, much less described what they would do about it.

That’s too bad because one of these two candidates will become president in 2017 and will immediately be confronted with having to submit a budget to Congress against the backdrop of rising deficits and debt.

Each has made some expensive proposals that would have to be paid for and the American people have a right to know how they plan to do this without making the debt problem worse.

Consider what awaits the next occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue:

  • For the first time since 2009, the budget deficit is projected to increase this year,...
Friday, September 16, 2016 - 2:13 PM

The penny plan to reduce spending by one cent on every dollar (one percent a year) has been bouncing around Washington for years but is now getting a higher profile with versions supported by the Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi and the Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump. 

While the plan sounds simple, it allows politicians to duck any responsibility for explaining to voters which federal programs should be cut and why. Furthermore, the size of cuts required are much larger and more unrealistic than one might think from the characterization built around the idea of “one percent."

That is because government spending on programs like on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (which alone make up nearly half the budget) grows to take into account population changes, aging and inflation. Thus the actual amount that the government would have to cut in spending is much larger than one percent relative to that built-in growth.

In the plan’s most basic iteration, where all government spending aside from interest payments would be subject to cuts, spending would have to be cut by almost 40 percent from where it would be otherwise in the tenth year of the budgeting period. That would mean dramatically large cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and everything else. Exempting a program from...

Monday, April 4, 2016 - 11:25 PM

In an interview with Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump estimated last week that he could pay off the nation’s $19 trillion debt within eight years.

This claim demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of the debt and its impact on the economy. It is also inconsistent with the tax and spending proposals Trump has espoused on the campaign trail, which are far more likely to grow the debt rather than eliminate it.

What’s important about the debt is not its size in dollar terms but its size relative to the economy (GDP) and whether it is on a sustainable path. While the debt is indeed very high by historic standards and is projected to grow at an unsustainable rate over the coming decades, there is no need to eliminate it within eight years. Attempting to do so, however, would require spending cuts or tax increases that risk substantial harm to the economy.  

A better goal would be to stabilize the debt as a share of the economy and then begin to reduce it over time. That is what happened following World War II when the debt in 1946 was $242 billion or 106 percent of GDP. By 1974, the debt had grown in dollar terms to $344 billion but had shrunk to 23 percent of GDP -- the post World War II low.

Moreover, no plausible set of policy...

Monday, October 27, 2014 - 10:36 AM

An interesting poll this month in the Des Moines Register shows that Democrats and Republicans have very different opinions on the relative importance of the federal deficit versus unemployment and jobs as campaign issues. It might be, however, that the two sides just have different ways of expressing concern over the same issue: our nation’s economic future.

Almost one-quarter of Republicans in the poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers ranked the deficit as the top issue (23 percent). Only 11 percent of Republicans ranked unemployment/jobs as the top issue.

On the Democratic side, the numbers were nearly the reverse with 21 percent of likely caucus-goers ranking jobs as their top priority and 9 percent ranking the deficit first.

Taken together, roughly one-third of likely caucus-goers in both parties ranked these two issues at the top. 

The Register poll, though limited to Iowans, suggests that there could be a path to consensus if Democrats and Republicans reject the premise that concern about the deficit implies indifference to unemployment and jobs, and vice versa.

It is possible, and indeed it is perfectly...

Tuesday, October 7, 2014 - 10:11 AM

On a recent day in Florida, hundreds of people gathered to examine federal budget issues, question former members of Congress and push for sustainable fiscal policy. For me, that sparked hope for our nation’s future, even in the face of mounting federal debt and changing demographics.  

The Concord Coalition and Fix the Debt partnered with two universities and eight former congressmen on Sept. 23 to present the programs and to help give members of the Millennial generation a larger voice on fiscal issues.

About 200 people -- mostly high school students -- attended a  program during the day that was part of the Lou Frey Institute’s fall symposium at the University of Central Florida in Orlando. That evening about 50 people attended a fiscal forum on the University of South Florida’s Tampa campus.

The Orlando program featured a panel that included Reverend John Allen Newman and former U.S. House members Bill Zeliff, Jason Altmire, Allen Boyd, Cliff Stearns and Tom Tauke.

“No political issue is more critical than the federal debt and deficit,” Altmire said. Boyd echoed that sentiment, saying today’s fiscal issues will determine what kind of America we and the next generation will live in.

Added Tauke: “The longer we wait to...

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 11:01 AM

Congratulations to the Election Day winners. So what do Tuesday's results mean for the fiscal outlook?

Think of it this way.

If the country is on an unsustainable fiscal path, which it is, and if continued partisan bickering will not solve this problem, which it won’t, and if divided government has been re-elected, which it has, then the only choices are calamity or compromise.

The Concord Coalition urges compromise.

That must begin immediately as the two parties negotiate a responsible alternative to the “fiscal cliff” – a combination of tax increases and spending cuts that will hit with such suddenness that it could throw the still-fragile economy back into recession.

But they can’t just kick the can down the road -- again. The year-end fiscal cliff is bad, but eventually we will need the longer-term deficit reduction produced by the policies comprising the fiscal cliff. It just needs to be phased-in in a more rational way, as proposed by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles and Domenici-Rivlin recommendations.

The key is to agree on a process for dealing with the serious and structural imbalance between spending and taxes that, if left on autopilot, will damage the economy, stress the social safety net, diminish our world leadership and leave future generations saddled with a debt burden...

Wednesday, October 31, 2012 - 9:32 AM

This is Part II of a two-part series of posts on the presidential candidates' fiscal policies. Part I examines Governor Romney's plans.

The first part of this blog post series looked at the unanswered questions in Governor Romney’s overall fiscal policy, tax reform plans and health care reform plans. This second part will look at President Obama’s budget plans in addition to some areas of uncertainty.

Simply by virtue of being the President, with the requirement to submit an annual budget, Obama has had to provide more details about his fiscal plans. Yet, what those details clearly show is an inadequate long-term fiscal goal. Over ten years, federal debt held by the public would only stabilize temporarily, and at a higher level than it is today.

To the President’s credit, he supports negotiating a long-term, bipartisan “grand bargain” on fiscal issues with both spending cuts and new revenues. Yet, such explicit support has come only after his initial tepid reaction to the Simpson-Bowles report when it was released. Nevertheless, if Obama is re-elected, the upcoming...

Wednesday, October 31, 2012 - 9:31 AM

This is Part I of a two-part series of posts on the presidential candidates' fiscal policies. Part II examines President Obama's plans.

As election day approaches, it is appropriate to look at what we know and what we don’t know about the two candidates’ fiscal policy proposals -- especially since it is unlikely we will get any more details prior to election day.

In many respects, the crucial differences between the two candidates are defined by their fiscal policies, and it is almost certain that the winning candidate’s fiscal policy choices will be as immediately consequential as any president’s in history.

In this blog post, I will review Governor Romney’s proposals and in Part II, I will cover the President’s proposals looking at three key areas: The overall budget goal, tax policy and health care.

It is difficult to overstate how little we know about where Governor Romney’s policies will lead. The basic problem is that he has...

Monday, October 15, 2012 - 10:36 AM

Watching the recent Strengthening of America forums online from my office in Wyoming, I was encouraged by how former Democratic and Republican members of Congress, Cabinet secretaries and other national experts could find such so much common ground on a course for fixing the national debt.

As the western states regional director for The Concord Coalition, I was struck by how this matches what Concord has found working with local leaders and the public here in the West and across America.

It also matches recent statements by national associations of mayors and state officials. While there remain some differences on details, it became evident that there is a much more bipartisan agreement than one sees from watching the 2012 political campaigns.

Four public forums were presented in Washington and New York City between September 12 and October 1 by Strengthening of America – Our Children’s Future, a bipartisan initiative co-sponsored by The Concord Coalition.

These forums featured a diverse collection of business leaders, former members of Congress and former government officials. They identified the key components to a comprehensive fiscal solution: tax reform that generates more revenue for deficit reduction, slower growth in health care costs, sustainable Social Security and Medicare programs,...

Saturday, August 11, 2012 - 4:30 PM

Here are links to some previously published material by The Concord Coalition on proposals by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, who was named Saturday as Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's running mate.

Politico Op-Ed by Robert L. Bixby (April 17, 2012)

Concord Coalition Analysis of Ryan Budget Plan (March 20, 2012)

Blog Post by Robert L. Bixby on Wyden-Ryan Medicare Plan (Dec. 20, 2011)

Blog Post by Robert L. Bixby on Medicare Proposals (May 31, 2011)

Blog Post by Robert L. Bixby Comparing Obama and Ryan Budget Proposals (April 12, 2011)