Skip to main content

Why Republicans Can’t Propose Spending Cuts

December 13 2012
Written by Jonathan Chait.
 
STANDOFF ANALYSIS - “Where are the president’s spending cuts?” asks John Boehner. With Republicans coming to grips with their inability to stop taxes on the rich from rising, the center of the debate has turned to the expenditure side. 
 
In the short run, the two parties have run into an absurd standoff, where Republicans demand that President Obama produce an offer of higher spending cuts, and Obama replies that Republicans should say what spending cuts they want, and Republicans insist that Obama should try to guess what kind of spending cuts they would like.
Reporters are presenting this as a kind of negotiating problem, based on each side’s desire for the other to stick its neck out first. But it actually reflects a much more fundamental problem than that. 
 
Republicans think government spending is huge, but they can’t really identify ways they want to solve that problem, because government spending is not really huge. That is to say, on top of an ideological gulf between the two parties, we have an epistemological gulf. The Republican understanding of government spending is based on hazy, abstract notions that don’t match reality and can’t be translated into a workable program.
 
Let’s unpack this a bit. We all know Republicans want to spend less money. So the  construction of the debate appears, on the surface, to be a pretty simple continuum based on policy preferences. 
 
Republicans like Mitch McConnell say government spending is “out of control” and would, at least ideally, like to bring it into line with revenue entirely through spending cuts. Democrats like Obama endorse a “balanced” solution with revenue and taxes. Right-thinking centrists, like the CEO community and their publicists like Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei, think we should cut deeply into entitlement spending while also raising tax revenue. (VandeHei, in a video accompanying his execrable story, asserts, “There’s money to be cut everywhere.”)
 
There really isn’t money to be cut everywhere. The United States spends way less money on social services than do other advanced countries, and even that low figure is inflated by our sky-high health-care prices. The retirement benefits to programs like Social Security are quite meager. Public infrastructure is grossly underfunded.
 
-cw
 
 
 
 
 
 
CityWatch
Vol 10 Issue 100
Pub: Dec 14, 2012
 

Get The News In Your Email Inbox Mondays & Thursdays


Featured CityWatch Stories

INVESTIGATIVE ANALYSIS - Sacramento has streamlined housing approvals so aggressively that residents rarely get a heari…
GELFAND’S WORLD - We’re at a moment when all sorts of political questions are coming to a head. And if that old phrase…
MY THOUGHTS - Gov. Gavin Newsom is about to decide whether California should take another extraordinary gamble with fed…
TECHNOLOGY - California lawmakers wrestled with a difficult question earlier this summer: Could the state safely share…
THE BOTTOM LINE - Street vendors deserve a realistic path to legalization. But when City Hall weakens enforcement while…