Monday, January 08, 2007

The PAYGO farce

Lest you think that “pay as you go” – the exotic concept that Congress should only spend what it takes in – will change anything in Washington, read Brian Doherty’s take on the “fecklessness of the new majority party” from Reason Online:

“Pay as you go” spending rules that try to link spending increases with either cuts or tax raising—and, alternately, tax cuts with spending cuts or tax raises elsewhere? This is potentially a positive step toward fiscal discipline, though given the nature of D.C. priorities more a guarantee of no more tax cuts than no more spending hikes. While the language in H. Res. 6 on rules for the 110th Congress on “paygo” sound great, it also sounds too good to end up being true. Congress has managed to pass,and flout, similar rules many a time in the past. As a Heritage Foundation analysis explained, “not a single sequestration took place during PAYGO's 12 years as law. Instead, lawmakers repeatedly passed legislation that forbade OMB fromenforcing PAYGO at all….The PAYGO law that existed from 1990 through 2002 exempted from sequestration Social Security, net interest on the debt, nearly all Medicare spending, and several other entitlement programs. Overall, 97 percent of all mandatory spending--all but $31 billion--had been statutorily exempted from any PAYGO sequestration, according to 2002 OMB figures.” When the newresolution on "paygo" becomes practice, it needs to stay solid in ending “emergency” appropriations and be accompanied by a severe rethinking of the autopilot entitlement programs of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.
Hat tip: Real Clear Politics. All of this talk about raising the minimum wage and cutting the interest rate for college loans is pure smoke and mirrors, designed to obscure the real debate America should be having about runaway entitlements.

No comments: