Deficit-cutting panel faces big challenge

May 3, 2010


— It was the starchiest of all pep rallies, a gathering of bipartisan worthies in the Ronald Reagan office building near the White House. They assembled to cheer on President Obama’s newly launched commission, which has the seemingly doomed mission of coming up with a cure for the nation’s runaway debts and deficits.

Prodded by former Commerce Secretary Peter G. Peterson, a throwback to the 1970s type of moderate Republican, and his charitable foundation, several hundred representatives from business and academe turned out to hear former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming and former Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles describe their hopes for the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, whose first meeting they had convened the day before.

Simpson, blunt as always, had publicly acknowledged that they were on “a suicide mission,” whose recommendations might well antagonize both Democrats and Republicans. Those gathered in the Reagan building — including former President Bill Clinton, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, former Federal Reserve Chairmen Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker, former Congressional Budget Office Directors Alice Rivlin and Robert Reischauer, and current budget chief Peter Orszag — insisted that however tough the odds, the crisis demands action.

Rubin told the audience that he had never been as alarmed about the country’s fiscal future. Greenspan added, “We’ve got to get this problem solved, sooner rather than later.”

Clinton said that as foreign countries buy up almost half the national debt, controlling its growth “is a national sovereignty issue.” When the former president was asked by CBS News’ Bob Schieffer what advice he would give the commission, he said he was more hopeful than many others because of the character of the co-chairmen. Acknowledging that Republicans oppose any talk of tax increases and Democrats are adamantly against reductions in Social Security and Medicare, Clinton said Bowles and Simpson “are free enough to disregard the polls, but they are smart enough to take them into account.”

The daylong discussion strongly suggested that the commission will not waste much time looking for a “magic bullet” no one has ever thought of before, but rather will start searching at once for the trade-offs between tax hikes and entitlement cuts that might enlist support among the 18 members, and then in Congress.

The day pointed up two big barriers to that search. First, senior Republicans in Congress were conspicuous by their absence. The most prestigious GOP speakers currently serving were Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire and Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the ranking members of the Senate and House budget committees and both members of the Bowles-Simpson commission.

You could not ignore the fact that they were the most outspoken in questioning whether both tax hikes and spending cuts had to be part of the solution. And commission rules require that at least four of the eight Republicans among its 18 members agree before any recommendations are forwarded to Congress. That will be a stretch.

The other thing that became clear is that no one yet has developed the kind of down-home language that could translate the issues at the center of the Reagan building discussion into everyday language. There is no Ross Perot doing that job as the Texas billionaire did with his chart talks during his eccentric 1992 presidential campaign.

The grass-roots political force that logically should be spurring Congress and the president to tackle these ruinous deficits is the tea party movement. But it does not speak the same language as does Peterson’s billion-dollar foundation or the intellectual heavyweights assembled in the Reagan Building. Their declaration that “our current national debt is $12.9 trillion, or nearly 90 percent of GDP,” is not the battle cry that will send Sarah Palin’s ardent admirers into the streets.

Peterson’s foundation could do the country a favor by uncovering a credible populist Republican who will buck his party’s orthodoxy and take that message of fiscal responsibility to the country.

— David Broder is a columnist for Washington Post Writers Group. davidbroder@washpost.com


Paul R Getto 8 years ago

The only 'bullet,' magic or otherwise, it an honest appraisal of the situation. We can get out of this mess over a period of time, but it will require increased taxes and fees for all and a reduction in benefits for all. Are we mature enough as a political culture to accomplish this? Recent history suggests otherwise, but I remain optimistic.

tomatogrower 8 years ago

Agreed, Paul. The career politicians will never raise taxes, because they might not get reelected. People like the tea bag party will protest taxes, even though they pay one of the lowest tax rates in the world, and they will never give up all the government benefits that they don't even realize they get, like nice sports complexes where they can hold their anti-government rallies. We have become a bunch of spoiled brats. We want our cake without paying for it.

newsreader 8 years ago

Stop handing out money to other countries, even the ones that hate us but certinally don't hate us enough to take our money... oh i'm sorry "monetary aid"

Tamara Degner 8 years ago

The tea baggers are not protesting taxes; they are protesting government spending, and mismanagement of funds. And tomatogrower, how do you know how much taxes are paid by tea baggers? You don’t. So that comment is just an uninformed opinion. Also, not anti-government, it is a small government that is wanted. Thomas Jefferson said it best...A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have.

Don Whiteley 8 years ago

Let's quit blaming our politicians and political parties. The fact is, Americans simply won't vote for politicians who raise taxes or reduce government subsidies. We're the cause of this problem, not them. Until we vote responsibly with our nation and not our personal interests in mind, our country will continue to sink in an ocean of debt. Last week, there was an article between a guy who wanted to see the government cut more spending and a woman who wanted to see them raise taxes. Both were too bullheaded to realize that they were both right. If we're going to get out of this mess that Americans have goten ourselves into, we're going to have to cut government programs until their recipients howl and we're going to have to raise taxes until the middle and upper classes howl. It's time for Americans, Republicans, Democrats, and everyone else to pay the piper!

beatrice 8 years ago

Slashing military spending is the only way we can begin to get close. Too much of the other things people get all bunged up over are like tossing bricks in the Grand Canyon -- we could cut all of them and they aren't going to come close to filling the hole. We currently spend more on our military than the next 15 countries combined! That is out of control. And people are worried that someone is getting foodstamps who doesn't deserve them. Please. It is the military, folks. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

Commenting has been disabled for this item.