Republican “worry” over the Federal deficit has been the project of decade upon decade upon decade, with little to show for it except Republicans exacerbating the deficit while “tax and spend liberals” clean up the Republicans’ toxic scat, whether it be bad laws or bigger deficits.
This all came to mind while reading Professor’s latest missive. This was the trigger:
As soon as Mike Johnson (R-LA) became House speaker, he called for a “debt commission” to address the growing budget deficit. This struck fear into the hearts of those eager to protect Social Security and Medicare, because when Johnson chaired the far-right Republican Study Committee in 2020, it called for cutting those popular programs by raising the age of eligibility, lowering cost-of-living adjustments, and reducing benefits for retirees whose annual income is higher than $85,000. Lawmakers don’t want to take on such unpopular proposals, so setting up a commission might be a [Republican] workaround.
And what strikes me is that while these proposals are worthy of discussion – personally, my opinion is that age of eligibility has to be on the table, as life expectancy has been advancing, COLA changes, at least downwards, should be out of the question, and setting an upper income limit will foster restiveness in retirees who “invested” in Social Security and are not getting anticipated benefits – there are easier, equally viable approaches to the problem. And, of course, this commission may be a Trojan horse for drastic changes to, or even expungement of, such social net programs.
So, as the post’s title says, what would responsible politicians be doing in Johnson’s position, if they were honestly convinced the deficit and debt should be reduced, would simply note that reducing taxes did nothing for the economy, and do the following:
- Raise taxes.
- Close tax loopholes.
- Don’t go nuts with spending without concomitant raising of taxes.
Businesses do like taxes, in moderation. The Kansas taxation debacle proved that. And neither deficit nor debt need be immediately eliminated, so taxes need not be too high.
And then there’s the alternative. Stipulating to the abolition of these social net programs, then what might happen? Drawing a parallel, there is currently a homeless encampment in Minneapolis that went up in flames a couple of days ago.
So how about this: an encampment of elderly people? Homeless because of the loss of all income, even Social Security? They won’t even need it going up in flames in order to horrify independents.
And it’ll be just like the times before Social Security.
If you find yourself talking to a Republican, ask them why they cling to their anti-tax tenets in the face of the Federal debt and deficit. Point out that the Laffer Curve is a bust.
Have fun.
