ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

American Opinion: Democrats need spending priorities, not fiscal evasions

American Opinion: It all bears witness to a deeper problem. Progressive Democrats proudly see their spending ambitions as radical and transformative. But far-reaching plans to reduce poverty, strengthen the safety net, broaden economic opportunity, and expand public services require comparably far-reaching plans to tax and spend prudently — especially if the goal is to create permanent new benefits with recurring outlays. It’s wrong to seek credit for transforming the country if you’re unwilling to be honest about what that demands.

101321.op.wct.AmericanOpinion.DemTruth.02.jpg
U.S. President Joe Biden delivers remarks during an East Room event at the White House on Thursday, August 12, 2021 in Washington, D.C. President Biden spoke on "how his Build Back Better agenda will lower prescription drug prices." (Alex Wong/Getty Images/TNS)
We are part of The Trust Project.

As they prepare to spend $1.2 trillion on a bipartisan infrastructure deal, along with a vastly larger sum on a party-line social-policy bill, Democrats might be expected to defend their ambitions on the merits. Instead, progressive leaders seem to be focused on fiscal gimmickry.

Their goal is to advance a $3.5 trillion initiative known as Build Back Better . With moderates balking at the bill’s scope and cost, efforts are underway to deliver a slimmer version that might command broader support. Unfortunately, these seem to be concentrating not on setting priorities, getting value for money, and presenting intelligible choices to the country, but on creative accounting.

Some of the devices under discussion are familiar. One idea would be to set revenue gathered over the full 10-year budget-planning period against spending programs that stop partway through, even though they’re intended to be permanent. More fancifully, President Joe Biden has claimed that the $3.5 trillion plan is “paid for” and hence “costs zero dollars.” Even if it were true that higher taxes would entirely cover the outlays, the cost does not evaporate. (Does this really need to be said?)

As it happens, though, the plan’s tax increases don’t cover the proposed new spending. The true 10-year cost of the proposals would most likely be $5 trillion or more, and the tax increases under consideration would raise slightly over $2 trillion. In other words, apart from costing $5 trillion more than nothing, the plan as it stands would add substantially to public borrowing and future public debt.

Remember that these enormous new commitments were proposed on top of an unprecedented expansion of spending and borrowing due to the pandemic. Government outlays in 2020 were $6.6 trillion, of which just $3.4 trillion was covered by taxes. This year’s budget deficit is again projected to be roughly $3 trillion (13.4% of gross domestic product), pushing public debt to $23 trillion (103% of GDP). With inflation running at a multi-decade high by some measures, these gigantic numbers surely warrant more caution than Biden and progressive Democrats have allowed.

ADVERTISEMENT

No doubt, elements of the Build Back Better proposal are worthwhile. The plan is nothing if not comprehensive, and some of its ideas, especially if narrowly tailored, deserve support. It calls for an expanded child tax credit (costing more than $1 trillion by itself), universal preschool, two years of tuition-free community college, paid family and medical leave, expansions of Medicare and Medicaid, an array of subsidies for investments in clean energy, and additional support for everything from affordable housing to R&D.

All of which would be good, if money were no object. In the real world, unfortunately, governments must make judgment calls and trade-offs based on value per dollar spent. That, in turn, requires the kind of attention to detail that has been mostly absent in this debate.

It all bears witness to a deeper problem. Progressive Democrats proudly see their spending ambitions as radical and transformative. But far-reaching plans to reduce poverty, strengthen the safety net, broaden economic opportunity, and expand public services require comparably far-reaching plans to tax and spend prudently — especially if the goal is to create permanent new benefits with recurring outlays. It’s wrong to seek credit for transforming the country if you’re unwilling to be honest about what that demands.

This American Opinion editorial is the opinion of the editorial board of Bloomberg Opinion.

©2021 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com/opinion. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.


American Opinion
American Opinion

Related Topics: JOE BIDENBUILD BACK BETTER
What to read next
From the American Opinioin editorial: Late in 2021, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland formally created a process to replace derogatory names of geographic features across the nation. She declared the word “squaw” to be derogatory and ordered a federal panel — called the Board on Geographic Names — to move forward with procedures to remove that word from federal usage.
From the editorial: The problems at the southern border are complex but not unsolvable. They should never have reached this point of near-crisis. What’s most needed now is leadership.
From the editorial: The approaching midterm elections provide a perfect opportunity for the president to stress his need for visionaries in Congress who can help him.
From the editorial: While Republican opposition has blocked the bills enshrining federal rights to abortion and contraception from advancing in the Senate, the GOP appears open to codifying same-sex marriage. It was encouraging to see that the Respect for Marriage Act passed the House with solid bipartisan support. Some 47 Republicans joined all 220 Democrats in voting for it.