Congress went crazy: why legislators do not prioritize national debt
Congress went crazy: why legislators do not prioritize national debt
I have noticed something strange lately. When friends or acquaintances are discussing politics, an appendix is usually attached if I am in the room.
"Oh, yes," someone will inevitably say, gesturing to me, "also fiscal issues."
While I appreciate the consideration, and perhaps the bleak understanding that I have become synonymous with silent screams of anger over the budget, something else is happening here.
Those of us who are full-time advocates for taxpayers like to say that the country is on our side.
But is it? Well a little bit.
To understand the problem, it is necessary to separate two problems that are grouped in most of the discussions: debt / deficit and government spending. In short, worrying about one does not mean caring about the other.
In September, the Peter G. Peterson Foundation published the most in-depth in-depth study of Americans' attitudes about the national debt, discovering that people are increasingly concerned and believe that Congress and the president should have "addressed the national debt "among its three main priorities (The complete survey and methodology can be read here.)
Regarding government spending, the Pew Research Center examined the country in the spring of 2017, finding that a growing portion of Americans (48 percent) wanted "a larger government that provides more services." However, there is a deep partisan divide in this general question, with 74 percent of right-wing Republicans and independents saying they want a smaller government.
Deepening the details makes the picture a bit more murky, with large majorities on both sides who want to increase spending on expensive items. While Republicans in general are less likely to support increased spending on certain issues than Democrats, most Republicans support the reduction of spending on a single element: financial assistance for foreigners.
In context, the broader definition of foreign aid It constitutes about 1 percent of federal spending in the United States. Or, in other words, many people want to fix the debt but not doing anything about it.
At this point, it is likely that some readers are already writing an angry comment about the recent tax cuts that limit the deficit. Opinions on fiscal policy are predictably varied and driven by partisanship, but shouting at each other about whether tax cuts will make things worse due to the impact of the deficit or improve them (or at least keep it) because economic growth hides a fact: there is no way to tax our way in the balance first.
It is fundamentally, mathematically impossible.
Tax the rich? As Brian Riedl of the Manhattan Institute has indicated Financing Social Security and Medicare only with taxes would require a rate of almost 200 percent for wealthy families.
The simple stabilization of debt levels requires hundreds of billions of dollars in reducing the deficit in the coming years, and still with imminent bankruptcy In the main trust funds, Congress is running in the opposite direction.
Government is in a spending spree , even with modest reforms abandoned and forgotten as full of tricksMass spending packages are forgotten almost as soon as they are approved.
For Republicans, fiscal conservatism is less a plank of Reagan's famous three-legged stools as a last-minute idea that does not reach the same room. Meanwhile, budgetary dysfunction undermines the other two legs. Just look at the continued funding for Planned Parenthood, or the actual and documented pressure on the preparation and future planning that occurs when defense spending is never more permanent than the next last minute budget agreement.
It's easy to point to Washington, but as national politicians continue to abandon fiscal restriction, their voters seem to be fine with that. As we move on to another election season, those of us (or maybe just me) who care about the budget must do what we can to make sure that these "single-minded reelection seekers" feel the only pressure it matters to most of them.
We must hold them responsible. Thanks to technology, we have the receipts , so use them. Refusing to donate to any candidate who does not take debt seriously. Organize your friends. Having crying wolf about disasters without a name, but talking about the real economic consequences to spend like drunken teenagers, screaming from the rooftops. Ask questions, publicly but also privately. Discuss your concerns with the employees that make most policies work anyway.
It is easy to blame Congress, but if the electoral consequences will come as a result of their failures, it depends on us: the voters who care about the issues that still matter, if we only do them.
Rebekah Bydlak is executive director of the Coalition to Reduce Spending, a one-issue organization dedicated to reducing spending and debt.
Image: Reuters
.
http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script',
'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js');
fbq('init', '369524843414444');
fbq('track', 'PageView');
.
SOURCE LINK ERESVIRAL.COM https://www.beviral.online
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario