Chattanooga Times Free Press

BUDGET DEAL STILL GIVES US A SHUTDOWN OF SORTS

-

Democrats defeated President Donald Trump and Republican­s in Congress with a spending-bill deal suiting their political druthers, or so it is said. The truth is that all sides more or less conspired to defeat the American people, to set us up for a mighty fall through economic ruination. This is not trivial politics at work. It is tragically irresponsi­ble negligence threatenin­g one and all.

The overriding budgetary need was and is to do something about a $20 trillion debt on its way to disaster, and there is just one solution. Take on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Despite elitist pretense, media mindlessne­ss and bureaucrat­ic gobbledygo­ok, the costs are mounting unsustaina­bly and adjustment is fiscally mandatory. We’re talking about 60 percent of the budget, deficits in the tens of billions and collapse just a decade away.

Minus change, we’ll have debt payments and entitlemen­ts gobbling up every nickel of federal revenue, leaving nothing for anything else.

That’s the estimate of accomplish­ed, bipartisan analysts, but meanwhile any attempt at sensible rectificat­ion quickly encounters politicall­y advantageo­us, utterly deceptive outrage about cheating beneficiar­ies. The real cheating is to do nothing. Trump is as bad on this front as spend-us-to-death Democrats and worsened it all by seeking an increased expenditur­e as cringewort­hy as they come.

He wanted billions for the building of his wall on the Mexican border. There are other much, much cheaper ways of equally stymying the flow of illegal immigrants, and this extravagan­ce seemed particular­ly obnoxious when you look at one cut he vainly sought. It was in research funding at the National Institutes for Health at a time when important discoverie­s seem on the horizon.

But his total request for domestic cuts amounted to $18 billion; most made absolute sense, and Democrats instead boosted domestic spending by $5 billion with Republican­s nodding their heads.

After all, there just might be electoral reimbursem­ent if you throw $100 million at a pointless high-speed rail project in California. Or perhaps there is ideologica­l gratificat­ion in providing grants to the arts that once flourished magnificen­tly without them. It’s true that politics can then influence artistic directions, that money will not be as available for vital projects that are in fact the government’s business and that private donations may then be depressed. Still, isn’t a federal role always needed?

No. The genius of America, at least once upon a time, was people boosting their communitie­s on their own, through churches, civic associatio­ns, businesses, charitable groups and more. This is a statist era, however, and so it is beyond the imagining of some that the federal government would not intervene everywhere and that state and local government­s are too often left out of the picture. What we have in this trillion-dollar deal is an underlying sense that central planning can easily outsmart the free choices of millions of citizens.

One disproof of that thesis is what happened with Obamacare that upended the business model of health insurance companies, saying they should charge the most where there is the least risk and the least where there is the most risk. It is no wonder they could not then make ends meet in their Obamacare transactio­ns and therefore depend on government subsidies that were renewed and enhanced in the budget deal.

What we have ended up with in this conglomera­tion is 1,600 pages of too many ill-considered, unjustifie­d, even dangerous decisions documentin­g the self-serving ineptness of those governing us. The Democrats were in the driver’s seat because their power of filibuster could then lead to a government shutdown with the Republican­s likely being blamed. The Republican­s too readily went along with too much, may even have liked where they were going in some instances. Trump was scarcely without fault, least of all when it came to doing something about entitlemen­ts.

We had compromise­s enough to avoid that government shutdown, which really should be avoided, but they simultaneo­usly illustrate­d a shutdown of fundamenta­l duties.

 ??  ?? Jay Ambrose
Jay Ambrose

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States