THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, January 31, 1996 TAG: 9601310010
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 65 lines
Now that budget reform seems dead for the foreseeable future, political post mortems are being conducted to decide who won and who lost. The short answer: We're all the losers.
For a while it appeared as if serious steps to get control of the federal budget and reduce deficits were going to be taken. Both parties now claim to be committed to a balanced budget. But there's room for doubt. Consider a few realities.
A balanced budget is impossible without slower growth in spending on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare, federal pensions and other entitlements. In many cases, fundamental reform of programs in addition to moderated spending is needed. Republicans had the courage to propose such changes. It can be argued that they tried to go too far too fast, but President Clinton shamelessly demagogued various elements of the Republicans' plan and the public appears to have bought the Democratic line.
With annual deficits of $200 billion as far as the eye can see, the case for a tax cut is tenuous. Yet Republicans continue to cling to it to their discredit and detriment. Only the so-called blue dog Democrats' plan has got this right. Balance the budget first; hand out prizes later.
Republicans have been mocking the Clinton budget for jiggering the numbers to make the books balance in 2002, but for returning to a deficit path thereafter. They also complain that all the pain is backloaded to occur in the final two years, long after Clinton will be out of office even if he wins a second term. It's true enough. And there's no question the Republicans make more fundamental reforms and rely less on blue smoke and mirrors to cut some important programs.
Still, Republicans are not without guile. They too reserve the lion's share of the prospective savings until five years have passed. By some calculations, more than 60 percent of the pain doesn't arrive until the next century - to be voted by another Congress, signed by another president. Both sides have adopted fiscal quick fixes and avoided major repairs needed to get the fiscal house in order for the long haul.
Part of the blame belongs with a public that speaks out of both sides of its mouth. Polls regularly show that people demand a balanced budget and lower taxes but also have an insatiable appetite for middle-class entitlements, oppose a greatly downsized defense and realize that paying interest on the debt can't be avoided. There's no way to have all that cake and eat it too.
But the fact that the problem is a hard nut to crack is no excuse for giving up on it. A comprehensive deal isn't going to be made. But a start must be made. It took almost two decades to create the fiscal mess confronting us; it will undoubtedly take time to dig out from under it.
The best proposal on the table, remains that of the blue dogs because of its realism. It features no tax cuts and slower entitlement growth. It might attract a bipartisan mix of moderates. It should be passed and presented to the leaders as a fait accompli.
It won't happen, of course. But if no progress is made now, a worse day of reckoning will arrive. Sooner or later cutting cost-of-living adjustments, raising the retirement age, raising medical co-payments, further shrinking the defense budget and other untouchable programs will be inevitable. To paraphrase a familiar commercial, we can start paying now or pay a lot more later. by CNB