It’s About Spending
Here’s the thing with respect to spending, balancing budgets, debt, and deficits in Washington, D.C. People who supported Bill Clinton, and who lauded him for something which he deserves little to no credit for having accomplished, presiding over an economy and government which George W. bush inherited, along with what we were told was a surplus. Likely, the proponents of Bill Clinton must unavoidably have a difficult time squaring the fact that Barack Obama rightly places spending issues squarely on the shoulders of Congress. Most democrats would have us believe that Bill Clinton gets all the credit for somehow taking control of fiduciary responsibilities clearly mandated by the Constitution, which viewpoint is completely false. These same democrats must now, by default, accept Obama’s accurate characterization when he discourses about the fact that it is the responsibility of the Congress to “pay the bills.”
Constitutionally speaking, Presidents have practically nothing to do with how money is spent in Washington, D.C., other than signing off on irresponsible bills that do nothing to control the seeming unquenchable desire to spend. So what is it going to be? Either the President has some sort of control over spending; balancing budgets, debt and deficits, or he does not. To the extent that any President has the bully pulpit and tremendous sway regarding the shape and direction of many arguments, most informed people, however, recognize that Congress has the responsibility to allocate funds according to the Constitution. So why didn’t George W. Bush do more to crack down on reckless spending? Why doesn’t Barack Obama do more to speak out about reckless and out-of-control spending? Why has essentially no President in the lifetime of any American living today, done little or nothing to shape the argument for smarter, responsible spending of the peoples’ money?
Recently, European leaders met in Davos, Switzerland to discuss the economic woes of many European nations. Writing for the Washington Times, Nita Ghei had this to say:
“Wealthy people and entrepreneurs are fleeing Francois Hollande’s France, where marginal tax rates now exceed 75 percent. According to French media sources, even former President Nicolas Sarkozy is packing his bags for London, thereby avoiding the big hit to his paycheck. He’ll be joined by several fellow millionaires whose retreat will further diminish France’s tax revenue. Demographic reality, in the form of low birthrates, makes overly generous social-welfare programs unsustainable. Still, not one European country has the courage to embrace change. Instead, all cling to the bogus concept of “stability” while expecting the European Central Bank to bail them out of every short-term difficulty. With interest rates near zero, there might be very little that a central bank can accomplish, since monetary policy cannot fix a fiscal imbalance that comes from overspending.”
Currently, the top marginal tax rate in the United States is at 35%. That may not seem like a big deal, however, with increasingly lower birthrates in this country, either imminent or already in place, it is clear to see that the spending habits of our government will need to change dramatically in order for governmental social programs to be sustainable for those on fixed incomes, and others dependent on them to continue to get by. So my humble suggestion for those elected to Congress, as well as the President, is to actually ban together and do that which is right for the people because we do not currently have anyone, or any group of people in government, regardless of party, who seems to want to change the culture of big government spending.
“We the people” are not even close to being adequately represented in Washington. The culture of Washington is replete with corruption, and if nothing is done to correct it, then the very people that many representatives in Washington claim to actually go to Washington to help, will be left out in the cold. The unfortunate evolution regarding big government spending is the cronyism that has taken place for far too long in government. Some people elected to public office often forget their once held belief of doing the right thing for the right reason. Others seem to have never had good intentions in the first place, and it is people like that who must be under the most magnified scrutiny and sent packing.