PAYGO

Swiss-Cheese-GO: When the Exceptions Swallow the Rule

It was to be a new era of fiscal responsibility. In 2006, Nancy Pelosi promised that “the first thing” Democrats would do when they were in control was to reimpose Paygo rules that “Republicans had let lapse.” That didn’t quite happen. By 2008 those rules had “lapsed” twelve times for a total of $400 billion in new deficit spending. Ok, well that didn’t stick, but on the campaign trail Barack Obama promised to “reinstate pay-as-you-go budget rules, so that new spending or tax cuts are paid for by spending cuts or revenue elsewhere.” He subsequently engaged in a trillion dollar spending binge that painted the nation’s ledger red with deficit spending. Well, that was a slip up, but now he’s was super serious when he said in his weekly internet address,

“Now, Congress will have to pay for what it spends, just like everybody else. . .  After a decade of profligacy, the American people are tired of politicians who talk the talk but don’t walk the walk when it comes to fiscal responsibility. It’s easy to get up in front of the cameras and rant against exploding deficits. What’s hard is actually getting deficits under control. But that’s what we must do.”

At least he got the first part right. Polls show that Americans, especially Millennials, are tired of the federal government’s big spending ways. A February poll by Rasmussen finds that among voters 18-29,

  • 74% are either very or somewhat concerned by the federal deficit
  • 68% believe that cutting the deficit would be better for the economy than the Keynesian approach of increasing deficit spending
  • 64% believe that increasing the deficit will hurt the economy
  • 85% thinkthat the government fails to spend taxpayer money wisely and carefully
  • 87% blame politicians unwillingness to reduce government spending as the cause of the federal deficit

Our fiscally frugal generation has been let down again. Far from being responsible, Congressional Democrats have found creative ways to work around the spirit of the Paygo law. For instance, the law exempts more than 50 federal programs from its reach – including the biggest ticket items like Social Security, the Medicare doc fix, and the alternative minimum tax patch. These tidy little exceptions are worth some $2.5 trillion; money that the government is not required to offset under Paygo.

The biggest farce comes in the form of an “emergency” exception. Patricia Murphy of Politics Daily explains,

“[A]lready, the Senate has issued itself a waiver from the provisions on three of the four spending bills it has considered by declaring several bills to be emergency spending, including a $15-billion jobs bill, a $10-billion measure for unemployment benefits and $100 billion package of tax extenders.”

If everything is the exception is there really a rule? We won’t (though we could) argue that there isn’t a unemployment emergency that requires government action. But, it does not follow that the government can’t make up for that spending elsewhere. As Olsson Frank Weeda of the Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform makes clear,

“You can find there are so many places in discretionary spending that have been increased tremendously over the last two, three, four years that can be cut.”

On Tuesday Tom Coburn attempted to rein in the clear abuse of the Paygo law by introducing an amendment requiring the Senate to post the full cost of Paygo violation online for the public.  Of course the Senate passed it unanimously. To vote no would have been to uncover the swiss-cheese fiscal responsibility of Paygo. Nevertheless, Coburn is less than optimistic about his amendment’s chances to create lasting change to Democrats’ free spending ways. In an emailed statement he says,

“Today, minutes after the Senate accepted my amendment to post its violations of PAYGO online, Senators signaled their intent to remove this amendment from the bill before it goes to the President.  Taxpayers are tired of this cat and mouse game on spending and will hold Senators accountable if they want to be for transparency in words but not action.”

Unfortunately, Obama and the Democrats in Congress have perfected this game of cat and mouse. They say all the right things in public yet continue to drown our generation in red ink. Paygo is a good idea to get us back on track. There should be no exceptions.

by Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee

Read more: www.collegerepublicans.org

 

Can Republicans and Obama work together?

At Culture11, I've written a piece on how Republicans and Democrats can and should work together.  A little.  While they still can.

Rather than giving advice to President Obama on the policies he should offer, I would advise Congressional Republicans to take Obama up on some of his offers … and quickly, lest the opportunity slip away. ...

For a very brief period after President Obama takes office, there will be an alignment of political interests.

  • Republicans philosophically support federal transparency and responsible budgeting — at least, they are supposed to; theory and practice have diverged in recent years.

  • Democrats have marketed themselves as supporters of transparency and responsible budgeting — at least, they claim to; theory and practice will diverge in coming years.

But remember, Democrats aren't cleaning up the problems.  They're just putting new pigs in the mud. The time for idealism and cooperation is short.

However, there will only be a very brief window to do that. Whatever Senator Obama has claimed, President Obama will have very different interests. The new Democratic administration and Congress will act according to their own incentives, just as Republicans did in the past.

The election of Obama did not empower people. It empowered politicians. [...]

Hope and Change got people on board the Democratic bus. Political convenience will throw them under it.

There's a lot more to it.  Read the rest at Culture11.

PAYGO Football

in

Soren is right that Obama is already walking away from moderation when he, as Matt Stoller put it, "renounce[d] the stupid PAYGO rules".  Like everybody who decides PAYGO is inconvenient, Stoller rationalizes it by excluding from the calculation spending that he finds appealing.  The problem with this, of course, is that you can't simply attribute debt to "the good kind of spending"; money is fungible.

Obama had previously said it was a "Number 1" priority that "we shouldn't be running up budget deficits", written in his book that we should "restore ... PAYGO", and his website says he "strongly supports ... commonsense “Pay As You Go,” or “PayGo” rules".  But now....

Change!

In any event, Obama had already announced this last year during the 2007 Yearly Kos convention.  At the time, Ezra Klein reported....

Obama says he's not going to sacrifice his domestic priorities for deficit reduction. Universal health care, renewable energy, and all the rest won't be sacrificed on the altar of PAYGO.

I'm not sure why the media never calls out politicians when they talk about fiscal responsibility.  Lucy always pulls the football away.  You would think they would have enough pride to stop playing the part of Charlie Brown. 

Obama walks away from another centrist position: PAYGO and fiscal balance

H/T to Matt Stoller for noting that Barack Obama abandoned another centrist position that he has been running on. No more PAYGO:

Tucked into tonight's debate was a little noticed statement from Obama about fiscal responsibility and what he'll have to cut.  He talked about how the country needs to live within its means and so he supports PAYGO, but importantly, also said we'll have to get back to that after we get through these rough economic times.  I don't have the exact quote but it's very good news that he supports a Keynesian stimulus, and hopefully he'll be able to bring the Blue Dogs along.  They want to renounce the stupid PAYGO rules, because making all policy revenue neutral prevents obviously good investment choices like bonding out government revenues to build mass transit, new energy systems, etc.

What other respnsible, centrist positions will Obama abandon? And are Republicans willing to fight to peel off Democratic Blue Dog votes to win a rules fight on PAYGO in a time of a trillion dollar deficit?

While it would seem disinegenuous, given previous objections to PAYGO that it prevented tax cuts. But tax cuts aren't exactly on the horizon. Matt gives us the schedule::

The first discussion of any import within the new Democratic caucus will take place on November 17, when the caucus decides the rules they will vote on in January.  Those rules may include PAYGO or they may not; hopefully if they do include PAGYO there will be exceptions for investment activities that will eventually produce revenue.

Republicans and responsible people (only partial overlap) have between November 17th and some time in early January.

Syndicate content