A spending problem and a debt problem

“We don’t have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.” That’s a Republican mantra often used to explain why the answer to Washington’s deficit spending is not a tax increase, but more spending cuts.

You’ll be hearing the “spending problem” mantra a lot — from Democrats, too — as Congress debates raising the debt ceiling from its current limit of $14.29 trillion.

I’ve used the phrase myself — and believed it. But I cannot make that assertion today. For years now, Democrats and Republicans have engaged in the most ugly of collaborations — and it’s a reason why many voters of both stripes don’t trust compromise or promises of bipartisanship. The one thing both parties could agree on was to spend more money without paying for it.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

In the past couple of years, annual federal deficits exceeded $1 trillion, on top of the heap of debt that accumulated before the current recession. Soon the $14.29 trillion ceiling won’t be able to keep a lid on what America owes.

The annual cost just to pay interest on that debt will exceed $1 trillion in 10 years, estimates the fiscal watchdog group the Concord Coalition. While Washington releases rosier numbers, the Concord Coalition uses a “plausible baseline” — Bush tax cuts are extended, slated cuts to Medicare providers don’t happen, and the Alternative Minimum Tax is adjusted for inflation — which projects annual deficits in excess of $1 trillion for the next decade.

House Republicans want to reduce most discretionary spending to 2008 levels. That’s a smart start. But it is only a start at addressing Washington’s “spending problem.”

As Concord Coalition Policy Director Joshua Gordon noted, “You can say we have a spending problem, but that’s different than saying we don’t have a revenue problem.” And that problem is: “the levels of debt.”

“Under no realistic scenario,” Gordon continued, will the federal budget be balanced without a combination of spending cuts — including cuts in Social Security and Medicare — and tax increases.

I’ve heard the GOP talking point about how you don’t go out to eat every night when you owe thousands in credit-card debt. Be it noted that each American’s share of the federal debt is about $45,000. The flip side to that analogy is that when you owe banks a big chunk of change, you don’t announce you only will make the minimum payment for the rest of your life.

Today, the recovery is too fragile to withstand tax increases. But the day will come when voters can and should be expected to pay the consequences of sending big spenders to Washington.

On talk radio, I have heard Republicans complain that they never voted for the big spenders, so they shouldn’t have to pay higher taxes. Let me quote my pal Joseph Bottum, who, writing for USA Today on Republicans who don’t want to raise the debt ceiling, observed, “You’ve heard that whine before; on the playground, or in a squabble after school. It’s the cry of a child who thinks it’s just not fair he has to clean up someone else’s mess.”

Like it or not, it is America’s debt — and the day will come when Americans have to face the consequences and pay for it.

Debra J. Saunders is a San Francisco Chronicle columnist. Her e-mail address is dsaunders@sfchronicle.com.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, June 4

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

A rendering of possible configuration for a new multi-purpose stadium in downtown Everett. (DLR Group)
Editorial: Latest ballpark figures drive hope for new stadium

A lower estimate for the project should help persuade city officials to move ahead with plans.

Burke: A parade for Army? Sure; but let a sibling march, too

The U.S. Merchant Marine has supplied the country’s fighting forces since the Revolutionary War.

Harrop: This isn’t the outcome that Musk likely imagined

After handing over $250 million to elect Trump, he got the job of taking heat for unpopular cuts.

Dowd: Musk moved fast and broke his own reputation

The head of the failed-DOGE experiment leaves Washington with a black eye and less respect.

Comment: GOP’s fiscal hawks get it; voters don’t care about debt

On a basic level they say they do, but they’re more concerned over inflation and cuts to their services.

Comment: Drilling in Alaska tough enough; Trump isn’t helping

Despite his drill-baby-drill promises, Trumps’ trade and energy policies are working against him.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Tuesday, June 3

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Renovating of Funko Field cheaper than building new stadium

The City of Everett faces three stadium options: 1. Do nothing and… Continue reading

As candidates how they’ll address crime survivors’ needs

As campaign season kicks off for city council and mayoral races, it… Continue reading

Kristof: Rubio dead wrong that end of USAID hasn’t cost lives

He told Congress it was a lie, but consider two of thousands of examples of lives lost to aid cuts.

Douthat: Trump should embrace the TACO; it actually serves him

Trump’s willingness to backtrack when a plan isn’t working may actually help him seal deals.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.