Congress can limit spending if it wants, but there is no longer an automatic mechanism to make it do so
Dan Calabrese , Bio and Archives--February 8, 2018
American Politics, News | Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
The way it usually gets presented to you, it's wonderful if Congress can agree to a spending bill, and it's a catastrophe if it can't. No spending authority to fund the operation of the government? Oh no! We'll all die!
Actually no we won't, and most of the time a "shutdown" doesn't shut down much of anything at all. But most people have been trained to think that agreement on a spending bill is what all Americans need if we're to continue living, breathing and eating.The Budget Control Act of 2011 effectively had two sets of spending limits—an initial set of caps, and then a deeper set of cuts that kicked in only under the so-called sequester, which was triggered in 2013 after lawmakers failed to agree on a deficit reduction package. Earlier budget deals have reversed the cuts from the sequester but until now they held spending within the initial set of caps. “This is the first deal that not only reverses the sequester, but busts the original spending caps,” said Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a fiscal watchdog group.
This is important because once lawmakers raise spending above the cap for just one or two years, it is very hard to return below them. “Deficit spending is kind of like an addiction. They say they just need one more fix, but it makes the next one easier,” said Mr. Goldwein. Also, unlike the tax cuts, which Republicans said wouldn’t add to deficits because they would boost growth, the spending increases in this bill “explicitly reverse past deficit reduction,” said Mr. Goldwein. The latest deal underscores how difficult it has been for Washington to permanently rein in red ink by relying on cuts to discretionary spending programs, which account for just one third of all government outlays and aren’t the primary driver of future deficits. Republicans have for years itched for increases to military funding, but Democrats have insisted any boost for the Pentagon should allow for increased spending on domestic programs. The burst in spending doesn’t so much reflect a desire to stimulate the economy as it signals a pent-up frustration with years of outright spending cuts or increases that failed to keep up with inflation.
View Comments
Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain
Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.