A Serious Alternative to the Debt Ceiling

[Kuros]

The debt ceiling is tearing our country apart. It also allows Congress to contradict itself: Congress may approve a budget that exceeds the current debt limit, and then vote against its own budget.

There has got to be a better way. There is. It is called SAVEGO.

A Better Way out of the Stalemate

Looking ahead, the key issue is not the nominal level of debt but whether the debt is sustainable. That depends on the underlying policies that produce the debt. Because the policies now in place will produce unsustainable debt, the most important attachment to the debt limit vote, absent a big deal, would be a framework for enacting more sustainable policies. This should include fiscal targets and automatic triggers to ensure that the goals are reached. The Bipartisan Policy Center’s Save-As-You-Go proposal (SAVEGO) is an excellent model.

 

[Kuros]

Balance the budget by locking in savings

To achieve long-term debt stabilization, we must enact a mechanism that would force Congress into a fiscal straitjacket and require savings each year. “Save As You Go,” or SAVEGO, is just that mechanism.

This approach to budgeting soberly acknowledges the gravity of our situation and uses automatic, annual processes to force difficult but necessary policy changes.

It is widely recognized that entitlement reform is radioactive for Democrats, while raising revenue is political kryptonite for Republicans. In essence, SAVEGO places both painful choices into a lead-lined vault that would automatically open any year Congress fails to achieve deficit reduction.

The mechanism is robust. SAVEGO would divide the budget into distinct categories, requiring savings in each.

First, predetermined caps on discretionary spending would be set for the next 10 years.

Second, savings targets would be enacted for entitlements and revenue. If Congress failed to meet its goals in any given year, a series of spending cuts and revenue increases would be triggered to make up the difference. Washington would be required to save hundreds of billions each year.

The consensus among economists and across several deficit study commissions is that at least $4 trillion in deficit reduction must be passed within a decade to achieve fiscal sustainability. SAVEGO is designed to guarantee we reach this goal.

In months of meetings, hearings and careful consideration of alternatives, I haven’t seen an enforcement mechanism that would help compel Congress to confront the problem better than this method.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Counting on Democrats to stop spending money is as insane an idea as I've ever heard in my life. Both Reagan and Bush41 both bought into it and at a certain point you just have to grow up and accept the facts

 

[Wiseacre]

I guess I'm just too simple minded. Why can't they find $200-$250 billion or so to cut out of the budget each year for the next ten years? 2 trillion, no tax hikes needed, raise the debt ceiling by 2 trill. Don't have to touch the sacred cows, at least for now. You can't tell me they can't find places to cut that much, and don't give this crap that the seniors, poor kids, and the infirm will have to suffer - bullshit.

 

[konradv]

I guess I'm just too simple minded. Why can't they find $200-$250 billion or so to cut out of the budget each year for the next ten years? 2 trillion, no tax hikes needed, raise the debt ceiling by 2 trill. Don't have to touch the sacred cows, at least for now. You can't tell me they can't find places to cut that much, and don't give this crap that the seniors, poor kids, and the infirm will have to suffer - bullshit.

As long as you don't give us the crap that closing loopholes will cost jobs. We didn't let the Bush cuts expuire and the Reps have been blocking the closing of loopholes, so where are the jobs?!?! If there's any uncertainty in the business community, it's got to be over the Reps refusal to realize that we're not going to get out of this mess on cuts alone.

 

[WillowTree]

A better way is a flat tax, of 30% no loopholes, no rebates, and no exemptions for individuals or corporations.

 

[oldsalt]

Counting on Democrats to stop spending money is as insane an idea as I've ever heard in my life. Both Reagan and Bush41 both bought into it and at a certain point you just have to grow up and accept the facts

Yeah, that's what dubya did, huh? You're an idiot.

 

[Wiseacre]

I guess I'm just too simple minded. Why can't they find $200-$250 billion or so to cut out of the budget each year for the next ten years? 2 trillion, no tax hikes needed, raise the debt ceiling by 2 trill. Don't have to touch the sacred cows, at least for now. You can't tell me they can't find places to cut that much, and don't give this crap that the seniors, poor kids, and the infirm will have to suffer - bullshit.

As long as you don't give us the crap that closing loopholes will cost jobs. We didn't let the Bush cuts expuire and the Reps have been blocking the closing of loopholes, so where are the jobs?!?! If there's any uncertainty in the business community, it's got to be over the Reps refusal to realize that we're not going to get out of this mess on cuts alone.[/QUOTE]


I highly doubt that, gov't spending at 25% of GDP is ridiculous. The dems are sucking the money out of the private sector, and they want even more. Look dude, you had control of the Congress and the WH for 2 years, why didn't you guys get your shit together and raise taxes then? Don't come crying to me about your incompetance.

 

[Wiseacre]

A better way is a flat tax, of 30% no loopholes, no rebates, and no exemptions for individuals or corporations.

I'm good with a flat tax, but 30% is kinda high, doncha think? I'm thinking you better knock it down to about 15%, or you can kiss this economy goodbye.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I oppose any program that triggers automatic tax increases if Congress doesn't meet targets. Savego is just another excuse for raising taxes without having to deal with the political fall out. We need to eliminate any automatic coverage for Congress in not doing its job.

 

[waltky]

The burden of the majority...

Debt-limit votes can be costly to political careers
17 July`11 WASHINGTON — Debt-limit votes have been called the "burden of the majority" — an unpleasant chore that needed to be done by whichever party happens to be in power.

For former congressman Michael Arcuri, D-N.Y., his vote to raise the national debt limit was more like "the albatross." Arcuri was one of 233 Democrats who voted last year to increase the debt ceiling by $1.9 trillion. "I knew I would have to pay the price on Election Day," he said. Indeed, six months later, Arcuri lost to Republican Richard Hanna, following weeks of attack ads citing his debt-limit vote. "Arcuri promised to cut wasteful spending, but voted for $14trillion in debt," said one Hanna ad.

That vote was the 78th time Congress raised the debt ceiling since 1960, usually in routine, party-line votes. The 79th vote has proved much more difficult. What changed? Divided government with Democrats controlling the Senate and White House and Republicans controlling the House of Representatives, a shift in public opinion on government spending and debt and a crop of 80 freshmen Republicans who ran against incumbents on the debt-limit issue, experts say.

"There seems to be an openness and willingness to take this to the brink in a way I've never seen before," said Linda Kowalcky, who studied the history of debt-limit votes at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. "I hate to point fingers at the Tea Party," she said. "They are just evidence of a broader cultural and ideological shift," toward limited government spending.

In past years, party leaders were powerful enough to whip votes for "must-pass" legislation like a debt-limit increase, where failure could mean the government would default on its debt, she says. When Republicans refused to vote for a debt limit increase in 1979, Democrats who controlled Congress instituted the "Gephardt rule," which avoided a separate debt-limit vote by including it in the budget resolution — ensuring that Democrats would vote for it.

MORE

 

[Antiderivative]

The debt ceiling is tearing our country apart.

No it is not. Dumbass Dems with no backbone and a vile GOP are tearing this country apart.

Don't fall for cosmetic reasons....you know better.

 

[editec]

Whatever happened to PAYGO?

It helped Clinton nearly balance the deficit and then it was modified (read weakened)in 2004 .

 

[pete]

A better way is a flat tax, of 30% no loopholes, no rebates, and no exemptions for individuals or corporations.

I'm good with a flat tax, but 30% is kinda high, doncha think? I'm thinking you better knock it down to about 15%, or you can kiss this economy goodbye.

Make everyone that received entitlements put in 20 - 30 hrs a week doing whatever is needed in there state including cleaning toilets. Hey prisoners have to work!