|
As the majority
party on Capitol
Hill shifts from
Republican to
Democrat in the
110th Congress,
the deficit and
the long-term
fiscal
challenges
facing the
government will
continue to be
hot-button
issues for
Congress.
Federal spending
poses a serious
problem to our
children’s
economic future.
On the
discretionary
side of the
ledger, the use
of emergency
spending during
the annual
appropriations
process has
risen
dramatically. In
recent years,
Congress has
passed
appropriations
bills containing
“emergency”
spending above
budget
allocations and
controls for
items and events
that are
predictable and
recurring.
Emergency
spending is
considered “free
money,” because
it is not
controlled or
offset in
relation to
other federal
spending.
Instead of
offsetting the
spending by
reducing other
spending or
increasing
revenue,
emergency
spending is
charged straight
to the
government’s
credit card,
with future
generations
paying the
interest.
However, these
short-term
deficits pale in
comparison to
the much more
serious problem
of entitlement
spending –
programs such as
Social Security,
Medicare and
Medicaid that
grow
automatically
each year and
require no
annual review by
Congress. The
retirement of
the massive Baby
Boom generation,
which begins in
2008, combined
with
skyrocketing
health care
costs, creates a
fiscal and
demographic
tsunami. With
fewer workers
contributing for
each retiree,
the burden on
our children
becomes
astronomical.
Over the next 10
years, the
growth in
mandatory
spending
programs will
accelerate and
by 2016, the
cost of Social
Security,
Medicare and
Medicaid alone
will absorb 56
percent of total
federal
spending. By
2030, these
three programs
will exceed the
total cost of
government
today.
The average
American family
lives on a
budget, and
avoids making
big purchases or
long-term
financial
commitments it
cannot pay for.
There is no
reason Congress
cannot do the
same. With more
than $66
trillion in
unfunded
government
obligations over
the next 75
years, serious
spending
restraints are
long overdue.
Something must
be done, and
soon.
Within the last
year, Congress
took a first
swing at this by
passing the
Deficit
Reduction Act (DRA),
a bill that
works to slow
the growth of
entitlement
programs by
nearly $40
billion over the
next five years.
However, that
action was
merely Congress
dipping its toe
in the water of
what looms as a
pending
financial
disaster for
future
generations.
Building on the
success of the
DRA, I
introduced a
comprehensive
package of
reforms that
provides common
sense ways to
slow the runaway
train of
government
spending. The
Stop
Over-Spending
Act of 2006, or
“S.O.S.,” would
put in place
procedures that
would force
Congress to make
policy decisions
on how to limit
spending. The
bill,
co-sponsored by
nearly 30
Senators and
endorsed by a
number of
blue-ribbon
economic
organizations in
the private
sector, would
re-establish an
honest and
straightforward
approach to how
the government
spends the
people’s money.
To address
annual
discretionary
spending, the
S.O.S. Act
reinstates
discretionary
spending caps in
law. If Congress
exceeds these
limits, the
overage must be
offset by an
across-the-board
reduction. By
establishing
reasonable
limitations on
emergency
spending within
the caps, the
bill eliminates
the excessive
misuse of
emergency
spending, which
has created
“shadow budgets”
in recent
years.
The bill
includes a line
item
veto/expedited
rescission
process to allow
the President to
identify
wasteful
discretionary
spending and to
get an
up-or-down vote
without
amendment. It
also creates a
commission to
identify and
eliminate agency
duplication and
programs that
have outlived
their
usefulness.
To address the
deficit, the
S.O.S. Act
requires the
deficit to be
measured and
considered as
its share of
economy, or the
Gross Domestic
Product (GDP),
and requires the
deficit to
decline from
2.75 percent of
GDP next year to
.05 percent of
GDP by 2012. If
these deficit
targets are not
achieved,
congressional
committees are
required to
“reconcile” and
write laws to
achieve savings.
If these
committees do
not make the
necessary
decisions, then
an
across-the-board
sequester of
entitlement
programs kicks
in.
To address
long-term
entitlement
spending, the
bill creates a
commission to
ensure the
solvency of
entitlement
programs, such
as Social
Security,
Medicare and
Medicaid. The
commission has
attracted
outrageous
attacks from the
other side of
the aisle, who
falsely claim it
is designed to
harm Social
Security. Such
statements are
simply an
election-year
scare tactic.
Instead, the
commission is a
15-member,
bipartisan
group.
Two-thirds of
the commission,
a bipartisan
majority, must
agree to any
solvency
recommendations
before they can
be reported to
Congress. The
Committee’s
report is
subject to
amendments, is
ensured 50 hours
of debate, and
requires a
60-vote
bipartisan
majority to
proceed to final
passage of a
bicameral
conference
report.
While Democrats
seem to think
that Pay-Go is
the solution to
reducing
spending, it is
simply a
mechanism that
encourages the
growth of
government and
allows a
“tax-and-spend”
method of
governing to
thrive. It
requires the tax
relief currently
driving economic
growth to be
offset, but not
the nearly $400
billion in
expiring
mandatory
programs that
are expected to
be extended in
the new
Congress. And
worse, Pay-Go
doesn’t address
the deficit or
long-term
entitlement
spending.
I am hopeful
that we can work
in a bipartisan
manner to
address the
entitlement
issue, to better
position our
economy to
handle the
tsunami of
fiscal
obligations we
are facing in
the very near
future. I plan
to continue to
push for the
S.O.S. plan in
the 110th
Congress and
call on my
Democratic
colleagues to
join me in this
effort.
Regardless of
which party is
in power, it is
time for the
elected
officials of
this government
to stop looking
at the next
election and
instead look at
the next
generation. We
must stop
playing politics
and have an open
and honest
debate about how
to tackle our
fiscal problems.
Our children
deserve a
government they
can afford, and
we cannot
continue to
pretend these
issues will
resolve
themselves.
RF
Judd Gregg is
the senior
United States
Senator from New
Hampshire. |