Defusing the
Debt Bomb TOM COBURN entitlement benefits for the poor and seniors. Convinced I have spent much of the past two years in meetings of the virtue of their goal, partisan Democrats rationalize with members from both parties trying to solve the debt their decision to dismiss, demagogue, and demonize problem. My colleagues are well intended, and I love anyone who proposes entitlement reform. This position, them dearly as individuals, but there is no real leadership however, is entirely about protecting Democrats, not the in either party. Both sides do the same calculation: “If poor or seniors. If entitlement programs are not reformed, I tell the voters the truth, they won’t like me and they they will collapse and bring our won’t vote for me.” They then economy down with them. convince themselves that they Republicans, meanwhile, can’t do the right thing now say their line in the sand is “no because they won’t have the tax increases.” I’m glad so power to stay in office. many Republicans are talking If Members of Congress tough about the problem being knew their current term would overspending, not underbe their last, I have no doubt taxation. I’ve been making that we could defuse the debt bomb case since 1995. If these same within a matter of days. The Republicans, who continue to fact that we haven’t passed vote for more spending, had such a bill has much more been as resolute since 1995, the to do with careerism – the problem would be much easier philosophy of governing to to solve. Every dollar of deficit win the next election above all spending Republicans backed— else – than ideology. Bridging along with Democrats—was the gap between conservatives a deferred tax increase. Our and liberals is easy compared present challenges prove that to bridging the gap between deficits do matter. courage and cowardice. Republicans know it is Both parties today are possible to increase revenue putting their short-term political without raising tax rates on interests ahead of the country. If Members of Congress anyone. In fact, you can cut tax Both present their positions as knew their current term rates, cut spending, and see an tough and principled to their increase in tax revenue. Senator respective partisans, but what we would be their last, I have Marco Rubio (R-FL) nailed this often see is posturing and false no doubt we could defuse point when he said, “We don’t purity. the debt bomb within a need new taxes. We need new For example, politicians in taxpayers.” Ultimately, smart tax both parties try to score points matter of days. policy stimulates real growth, by promoting their refusal to which, in turn, creates jobs and compromise with the other side. revenue. In most cases, this posturing has nothing to do with In the real world, putting one dollar on the table in principle and everything to do with careerism—pandering order to get ten dollars back, or even three or four dollars to one side’s respective political base in order to gain back, would be a great deal. In Washington, however, popularity and win reelection. this kind of agreement is seen as heresy to careerists on Democrats claim their line in the sand is protecting 6
RIPON FORUM Spring 2012