Competing Plans For The Federal Budget
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-03-12/competing-plans-federal-budget
Since 1921, the White House has been required to submit a budget. But this year marks the first time that Congress, not the president, will begin the budget process. Republican Congressman Paul Ryan offers his party’s budget today. His plan cuts overall spending by nearly five trillion dollars and transforms Medicare and Medicaid. The Ryan budget would also repeal the new health care law. Senator Patty Murray will offer a Senate Democratic version tomorrow, which is expected to call for higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and more spending on education and infrastructure. Diane and guests discuss competing visions for the federal budget.
Guests
E.J. Dionne Jr.
senior fellow, Brookings Institution. Author of "Our Divided Political Heart: The Battle for the American Idea in an Age of Discontent."
Vin Weber
co-chairman, Mercury/Clark & Weinstock, a consulting firm; former member of Congress representing Minnesota's 2nd district (1981-93).
Chris Frates
national correspondent, National Journal
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Eli Rabett wrote:
"Please explain to Eli why he should back PBS when Diane Rehm and others continue to book two Republicans on every show compared to one Democrat."
On the contrary. We finally have a spirited debate on the show.
Tax deductions (loopholes) should be reduced as part of the sequester legislation, as they are expenditures of tax dollars.
Government subsidies, grants, entitlements are the same as any other allocation of tax dollars.
Reduction of tax loopholes are NOT tax increases. Tax deductions are an allocation of tax dollars to certain individuals or corporations. They are no different than the tax expenditures spent on Solyndra. As some like to say, it is like picking winners and losers.
Tax deductions (loopholes) are expenditures made by our government. These are taxes revenues that are given to certain corporations and individuals; these are expenditures of our government. The exchange of funds is made thru the tax return process, which saves the government not having to cut a check for this expenditure
Reducing tax deductions is not a tax increase, it is a reduction of government spending and should be included in the sequester action.
"Patrick Kinnamon wrote:
Can someone commenting here, or one of the guests please explain the historical precedent or economic theory behind Congressman Ryan's new budget plan? Seeking a balanced budget strictly through cuts seems like a never-ending game of chasing your own tail; the lack of revenue caused by withering federal investment could make the balance difficult to attain, could it not?"
Agreed. But therein lies the problem. Where would we find a non-partisan group of economists who would be willing to state publicly whether or not any of these "budgets" would even begin to work? Are there still any people left in this country who have the wellbeing of ALL Americans in mind? I'm really beginning to doubt the existence of such persons. America strike me as a nation that is wallowing in materialism. Which is why I am skeptical about the prospects of our nation in the future.
Everyone agrees that medical costs are what is driving the long-term US deficit. In the wake of Time Magazine's "Bitter Pill" issue two weeks ago, why is it that no one is talking about reforming the way in which medical care is delivered to consumers?!?
What kind of subsidies are on the table in the competing budgets? Does the Republican budget consider cutting subsidies to fossil fuel companies (to the tune of billions of dollars a year)?
Hi Diane
Can your panelists explain why medicare payroll tax is capped at around $110K? We don't cap the amount recipients draw when they are in the system do we? Why not tax the entire income or at least at the level of the highest tax bracket ($400K for single $450K for family, though I don't understand the $50K gap either).
Sabrina
Patrick Kinnamon_ There is a strong historical connection to the corruption of the Gilded Age with bought Congresses and State Governments. There is a strong historical connection to the Harding, Coolidge and Hoover administrations that assumed the 1% was all that mattered. And there is a lesser historical connection of a 1930s right wing financial class that supported the ultimate Austerity and Final Solution of fascism in Germany and Italy. (Modern fascists will scream about my statements because accurate history is their enemy. Obama is kind of a Hoover, not like FDR at all. So Dems can scream too. Lets name a dam or a nuclear plant for him and be done.)
If you don't think that the health care bill will benefit the average American ( no, not free, but clearly beneficial) I can only think your ideological position denies reality.
Why don't you address the role of racism in the obstructionism of anything President Obama tries to do?
Second, why don't you address the role of the baby boomers in this process. It is much more of a one generation pulling one over on next than a Republic/Democratic issue. When viewed in this way it is clear both are catering to the baby boomers at the expense of the next generation.
Let's increase the SS and Medicare payroll deduction cap, increase the minimum wage to about $16/hr and structure the income tax to cap individual incomes below $500 K. Let's put this proposition on the level.
No one is talking about the biggest money maker of all, and that is making the minimum wage a living wage. The MW should at least have the buying power of the the 1968 MW which had the buying power of about $27 today.
RussellAlbert: I think babyboomers would continue to work rather than retire if some jobs were available. It is silly that right wingers can't see that President Obama is the prototype for the Black Republicans they're trying to attract.
I agree with your concern about materialism. Yesterday's show was about whether the economy is actually improving, and all the talk about getting things going involved getting consumption moving again. This path seems entirely unsustainable and paradoxical-- how can we encourage people to save for retirement and ask them to pay ever-rising health-care costs while also asking them to keep buying material items? A more sustainable economy in the long run needs research, education, infrastructure improvement, renewable energy-- services rather stuff. And to get there, we need to put money into those things on a national level and redefine our priorities. The American Dream should not be about owning things, but living a secure and enriched life.
freedom or welfare wrote:
"President Obama may talk a big game about economic fairness, but his record on the issue doesn't quite match up."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/income-inequality-obama-bush_n_...
Yes...? This is news?
As long as the budget is made by people (Members of Congress and the President) whose incomes are at levels that absolve them from the issues the majority of Americans face, it will always be at best a engagement of comical proportions.
Congress itself is immune from most laws they pass, they have a health plan and a retirement plan that most all people would love to have, and we as taxpayers fund these programs.
Fixing social Security is easy - remove the income caps. If you make millions you get to pay in a lot more.
Fixing taxes, everything you make no matter the source is income.
Healthcare - until such time we have a health are system rather than a procedure providing system, we will continue to have major issues.
The phony 'left/right' paradigm is playing out very well for the politicians who work against the interest of those they are supposed to represent....
Bank Stocks are up!
To Hell with the middle class....
Sincerely,
Congress
Its apparent Diane can’t control her guests this morning to stay with relevant points; the DR Show is increasingly irrelevant to the nation and only speaks to DC insiders.
Average Jane here:
I want to work, not 30 hrs to lose my benefits just over 40 hours.
I do not want the federal governments help.
I do not want the federal governments socialized medicine.
(Working Great for Europe, he he.)
Just work me at one job, decent wage, decent medical and I do not want to pay for the people that are lazy or here illegally.
Enough taxes already..... You already get half of my paycheck up front. More taxes? Really? How is that working for California? They are leaving in the masses, you can only support social programs in a healthy economy.... Social programs are a bonus not an entitlement.
Way too many people are not working because the entitlements are too easy to obtain.
I am working while 9-10 people lay around and wait for their checks.
Lazy
Lazy
Lazy America.
If you had to write a book on how to destroy a country from within..... The administration is following it to the "t."
Dumb down the population through a lack of education
Take away personal defenses by making legal gun bearers evil
Make the general population dependent on larger government (socialized programs)
Because they are so fat, dumb and happy they will believe.... anything
Diane's three card monte game always comes out the same, book two republicans, one dem and then give everyone equal time. Next time WAMU has a fund raiser everyone should call in and tell them not one red cent until the panels get evened out.
C'mon, Vin Webber as the "middle". Dionne should be the middle position.
freedom or welfare ....... GOP fear mongering and lie machine was extraordinary at shaming Dems into voting for those wars of choice. "You are with us or against us"..."what you want to talk to the terrorists!?"..."you are UnAmerican if you do not support us". GOP despicable party... Democrats no gonads party
BethN- You are correct that Keynesianism does not apply in an economy where half the workers get exactly or near the minimum wage (and fewer than 40 hours) which is less than half the living wage. Nor does Classical econ apply because it produces elements of fascism and feudalism. Another commenter observed how consumer materialism is not sustainable either. There has been no time in history when collective public imagination was more needed, nor a time when it was more suppressed. The formulas don't work anymore. Leadership is discredited and illegitimate. Occupy.
"And there is a lesser historical connection of a 1930s right wing financial class that supported the ultimate Austerity and Final Solution of fascism in Germany and Italy. (Modern fascists will scream about my statements because accurate history is their enemy ...."
Who? Prescott Bush? That meme of the left that has been debunked over and over and over and over again?!
I agree with you that there are similarities today to the pre-depression era in this country. But Obama is closer to Wilson than Hoover.
A few simple truths.
Americans have equal opportunity, but no guarantee of equal outcome.
Raising taxes will never solve our spending problem.
When you tax something, you get less of it. That's true whether you're taxing cigarettes to reduce smoking, or taxing economic activity which destroys income and jobs.
Without changes to entitlements, the light at the end of the tunnel will always be an oncoming train.
ecgberht2 wrote:
"Eli Rabett wrote:
'Please explain to Eli why he should back PBS when Diane Rehm and others continue to book two Republicans on every show compared to one Democrat.'
On the contrary. We finally have a spirited debate on the show."
The standard format for political discussions on "Diane Rehm and others" is one Democrat, one Republican, and one centrist to simply lay out the facts. Variations include two Democrats and two Republicans, one Democrat and one Republican, one Green Partier and one Libertarian, or lopsided variations such as one Republican and two centrists, two Democrats and one Republican, etc. Today we had one Democrat, one Republican, and one centrist. Eli Rabett's comment makes no sense at all unless he only listened to yesterday's show and assumed that was the standard.
To ecgberht2's comment "We finally have a spirited debate on the show": Diane made a very witty observation at the end of the hour - something like "People have always described this show as very relaxed, very calm, very civil. They may have a different opinion now."
Will the moderator let me comment that I thought it was almost on the level of an On Point conversation? :) Keep up the good work!
The Last Moderate wrote: "Yes...? This is news?"
I know you're trying to go anal and you do it well.
What is wrong with my link praytell? it has a lot of provable facts a figures, further the Huffington post is a favorite of most of the commentators here and is not my first choice in any case.
politicalbear wrote:
No one is talking about the biggest money maker of all, and that is making the minimum wage a living wage. The MW should at least have the buying power of the the 1968 MW which had the buying power of about $27 today.
Source for that, please?
Tom Deacon wrote:
"If you don't think that the health care bill will benefit the average American ...."
Fantasy. Taxes will kick in Jan 1, 2014. Mid-term elections November 5, 2014.
RussellAlbert wrote:
"Why don't you address the role of racism in the obstructionism of anything President Obama tries to do?"
Because that too is a fantasy.
Eli Rabett- The informed American electorate is even more Left than you suggest. This is a society of imposed violence and intimidation where atheists and socialists fear for their lives, and where polls are structured to reinforce corporate capitalism.
When you consider Justice, even E.J. Dionne is right wing. You're adjusting very well to the boiling water. Jump out!
Contribute to Pacifica rather than NPR. Pacific accepts no corporate funding and is run by mostly volunteers. Right now WBAI in New York is begging for antenna rent if you want to help something good.
freedom or welfare wrote:
"The Last Moderate wrote: 'Yes...? This is news?'
I know you're trying to go anal and you do it well.
What is wrong with my link praytell? it has a lot of provable facts a figures."
Okay, first of all I've decided not to flag that last as offensive. Let it stand to everyone can see your folly.
My point is simply that I thought everyone already knew that nobody was doing anything about economic inequity. Everybody knows that the President keeps talking and talking about it. Everybody knows that he has done zero to follow through.
In related news ... scientists suspect that the sky is blue.
freedom or welfare wrote:
"The Last Moderate wrote: 'Yes...? This is news?'
I know you're trying to go anal and you do it well.
What is wrong with my link praytell? it has a lot of provable facts a figures."
Okay, first of all I've decided not to flag that last as offensive. Let it stand so everyone can see your folly.
My point is simply that I thought everyone already knew that nobody was doing anything about economic inequity. Everybody knows that the President keeps talking and talking about it. Everybody knows that he has done zero to follow through.
In related news ... scientists suspect that the sky is blue.