Political movements grow when they confront their own painful truths; they collapse when they indulge in self-admiration and flattery.
One painful truth that the conservative movement needs to confront is fiscal discipline, or the lack of it; I think it is fair to say that the conservative movement in general and GOP in particular, have abandoned fiscal conservatism.
By fiscal conservatism I mean a balanced budget. Does anyone remember how Reagan barnstormed through the country all during the 70’s expounding on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution? For a while it was the favorite topic of conservatives. However, once in office, he abandoned that, in favor of tax cuts and a military build-up. Maybe good things, but still, we have been living with deficit spending ever since. No Republican at any level of government has made a serious proposal to balance the budget since 1981.
Instead the movement was seduced by the snake oil of supply side economics, or the Laffer Curve, which put forward the notion that cutting taxes will raise revenue. This can be true, but only in very limited circumstances, and only in modest doses. For anyone who thinks otherwise, I would ask- where is the real world proof of this? Reagan cut taxes, and ended up with a budget deficit every single year; so did Bush I; and Bush II; the latter is especially painful, given that the GOP held all the mechanisms of government for much of the time.
This was called “Voodoo Economics” by Bush I, and rightly so; it is just the conservative version of the “free lunch”, where we can enjoy low taxes, and high spending. But, some may protest, there were mitigating factors- a recession, a war….but hasn’t this always been the case? More importantly, won’t it always be the case? The future is uncertain, but what we do know with certainty is that there will always be a recession waiting for us, and a war or disaster to consume emergency funds. Running deficits year after year, praying for another dot-com or housing bubble to inflate the treasury is madness. The Republicans made a Faustian deal with the Dems- the Dems get ever-higher spending, which is popular, and the Republicans get tax cuts, which are also popular, and they both walk away happy. Except that this is leading to economic suicide somewhere down the road.
I think if the conservative movement wants to really be taken seriously, they need to get serious and discuss what it would take to restore fiscal sanity to the government. The Republicans used to be the “green eye shade guys”, the grownups who were sober and sane, telling the Dems that there is no free lunch.
I think we need to stop the fixation on tax cuts- Federal marginal tax rates are actually lower now than they have been in a generation- and stop tolerating pork projects. Pork, by the way, includes a very large chunk of military spending.
This is a deeply unpopular position, I know- nothing screams “electoral loser” like a proposal to cut spending AND/OR raise taxes.
However, the good news is that there is a growing unease with deficit spending, and the time may be right for a case to be made that we would be better off with a combination of spending cuts and higher taxes, than the alternative which is economic collapse.
Daniel Horowitz
Neil Stevens
Steve Maley
Jake Walker
You really need to go look at the facts....
reddog53 (Diary) Friday, September 18th at 7:55PM EST (link)Your rant above about the ‘snake oil’ of the Laffer Curve, etc is so rife with error that I don’t know where to begin. For a good tutorial, see National Review Magazine’s series on The Reagan Years.
If you look at the REVENUE collected by the government in the 80s, with the exception of the first two years of the Reagan Administration, each year brought in more money with lower taxes. The deficit climbed during the Reagan years because Congress altered his ‘dead on arrival’ budgets (See Tip O’Neill) and spent more than they had the year before. I believe that the facts show revenue rose by about 27%, while spending rose by 41%…
That being said. I agree that unending deficits are bad for the economy and should be shunned, particularly when they apparently have no end in sight.
I most heartily agree with the need to restrain Pork spending, and feel that there is finally an opportunity to turn the corner on that issue since the Stimulus has been such a dud.
So we have a place to agree-
reason60 (Diary) Saturday, September 19th at 12:08PM EST (link)Which is that unending deficits are bad.
Economists can and do argue endlessly about Keynes and Laffer; but instead of debating over magazine articles, lets look at the bottom line- No Republican Administration or Congress has balanced the budget since, I believe, Eisenhower.
This is the point I am trying to make- every GOP politician will talk vaguely about fiscal conservatism, but who really is proposing the hard work to do it? Who is seriously committed to cutting spending?
If we had multiple rounds of tax cuts, and yet the budget still ran in the red, something is wrong- and it doesn’t help to simply shrug it all off on those wacky Dems.
We have to admit that the Republican politicians- (and Republican voters!) love pork- even when the GOP held all the branches of government, spending increased, year after year.
You are right.
Flagstaff (Diary) Monday, September 21st at 2:41AM EST (link)There are too many problems to even bother with it.
“The press is so powerful in its image-making role that it can make a criminal look like he’s the victim and make the victim look like he’s the criminal. If you aren’t careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”– Malcolm X, Audubon Ballroom, December 13, 1964
I am not even going to argue with you, you're kung-fu is weak...
DONTREADONME (Diary) Friday, September 18th at 9:09PM EST (link)now go back and look at your Constitution and tell me who appropriates money, then tell me what happens if the Executvie Branch does not spend that money.
Then, by all means read reddogs comment above, and then realize that supply side economics has nothing to do with the Government supplying. It means Government consumes less manufactured wealth. Wow, you need a different username
Yes, Congress appropriates money-
reason60 (Diary) Saturday, September 19th at 12:18PM EST (link)And when Congress was in the hands of the Republicans 2001-2006, did spending go down? Did the budget deficits end?
Suppose the GOP captures Congress in 2010- what would they do differently than they did in 2001-2006? If they use the same approach, won’t they get the same result?
I think it is telling that no national GOP figure is even talking about balanced budgets.
I think the party would be better suited to look to Goldwater and Eisenhower for their economic models, rather than Bush and Reagan.
Total bs. nt
Vegas_Rick (Diary) Friday, September 18th at 9:11PM EST (link)“God is great, beer is good and people are crazy.”- Billy Currington
“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan ‘press on’ has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.” Calvin Coolidge.
I'm sure bs had nothing to do with this tripe.
mbecker908 (Diary) Friday, September 18th at 11:32PM EST (link)