Robert A. Levine 3-13-12
Politicians running for office have promised constituents the moon from time immemorial,
believing it’s necessary to get elected. If they’re victorious, they can decide later whether or not to follow through on the promises they’ve made.
At times, the pledges are so outlandish that neither the candidates nor the electorate have any expectations they will be fulfilled. In other instances, candidates deceive the voters into believing promises will be realized while having no intention of trying to get them accomplished. There are also promises to special interest groups to get their support, in spite of the fact they may be injurious to society in general.
The campaign promises currently being made by the Republican presidential candidates, regarding cutting the deficit and taxes, strain credibility. A recent report by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which is considered non-partisan, noted that all the budget plans put forth by the Republican candidates would raise federal government debt by 2021 compared to what would occur if the programs now in place remained unchanged. The tax cuts, that are an essential part of the Republican candidates’ policies, would substantially increase the debt despite any spending cuts that might be enacted.
Though Obama’s program would also raise government debt, the increase would be less than with any of the Republican proposals and less than on the present trajectory. Under Obama’s plan, federal dept would rise from 68% of GDP in 2011 to 74% in 2021. Romney’s program would increase the debt to 86% of GDP in 2021, Santorum’s to 104% of GDP and Gingrich’s to 114% of GDP. Ron Paul’s plan would produce the smallest increase in debt of any of the Republicans at 76% of GDP and would be closest to Obama’s proposal.
Are the “fiscal conservatives” no longer fiscally conservative? http://bit.ly/A0pDIi Republican candidates constantly attack Obama for increasing the deficit and national debt, even though their promised programs would be much less effective than what the president is currently proposing. Disregarding any adverse effects that might result, the candidates promise tax cuts because they know it will mobilize the Republican base and get them votes in the primaries and in the general election. But how often do you find candidates willing to take principled stands and “tell it like it is” to the electorate? Of course, if a candidate is honest and forthright, it does not mean voters will flock to his or her banner. Most citizens would rather fantasize and not hear bad news, even if it’s the truth.
An example of fantasy accepted as reality by the voters was Ronald Reagan’s advocacy of supply-side economics when running in the Republican primaries in 1980. His call for massive tax cuts and reduced government spending to stimulate the economy was derided as “voodoo economics” by his Republican rival George Bush, but Reagan was able to convince the public of his program’s validity, winning the nomination and the general election. Now, in attempt to reprise Reagan’s victory, Republican candidates are promising a similar strategy. Will the electorate swallow the same pablum again, or realize that sometimes the bitter medicine of tax increases (at least on the affluent) may be necessary? How do we get citizens to do a reality check on all campaign promises?
Resurrecting Democracy
www.robertlevinebooks.com
Politicians running for office have promised constituents the moon from time immemorial,
At times, the pledges are so outlandish that neither the candidates nor the electorate have any expectations they will be fulfilled. In other instances, candidates deceive the voters into believing promises will be realized while having no intention of trying to get them accomplished. There are also promises to special interest groups to get their support, in spite of the fact they may be injurious to society in general.
The campaign promises currently being made by the Republican presidential candidates, regarding cutting the deficit and taxes, strain credibility. A recent report by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which is considered non-partisan, noted that all the budget plans put forth by the Republican candidates would raise federal government debt by 2021 compared to what would occur if the programs now in place remained unchanged. The tax cuts, that are an essential part of the Republican candidates’ policies, would substantially increase the debt despite any spending cuts that might be enacted.
Though Obama’s program would also raise government debt, the increase would be less than with any of the Republican proposals and less than on the present trajectory. Under Obama’s plan, federal dept would rise from 68% of GDP in 2011 to 74% in 2021. Romney’s program would increase the debt to 86% of GDP in 2021, Santorum’s to 104% of GDP and Gingrich’s to 114% of GDP. Ron Paul’s plan would produce the smallest increase in debt of any of the Republicans at 76% of GDP and would be closest to Obama’s proposal.
Are the “fiscal conservatives” no longer fiscally conservative? http://bit.ly/A0pDIi Republican candidates constantly attack Obama for increasing the deficit and national debt, even though their promised programs would be much less effective than what the president is currently proposing. Disregarding any adverse effects that might result, the candidates promise tax cuts because they know it will mobilize the Republican base and get them votes in the primaries and in the general election. But how often do you find candidates willing to take principled stands and “tell it like it is” to the electorate? Of course, if a candidate is honest and forthright, it does not mean voters will flock to his or her banner. Most citizens would rather fantasize and not hear bad news, even if it’s the truth.
An example of fantasy accepted as reality by the voters was Ronald Reagan’s advocacy of supply-side economics when running in the Republican primaries in 1980. His call for massive tax cuts and reduced government spending to stimulate the economy was derided as “voodoo economics” by his Republican rival George Bush, but Reagan was able to convince the public of his program’s validity, winning the nomination and the general election. Now, in attempt to reprise Reagan’s victory, Republican candidates are promising a similar strategy. Will the electorate swallow the same pablum again, or realize that sometimes the bitter medicine of tax increases (at least on the affluent) may be necessary? How do we get citizens to do a reality check on all campaign promises?
Resurrecting Democracy
www.robertlevinebooks.com
No comments:
Post a Comment