-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
I understand what the GOP leaders are doing in putting off the debt ceiling fight until after they bank the gains from the sequester. I understand them trying to put the onus on the Senate to pass a budget. I understand these things, and I don’t think they are awful idea — but I would do something just a bit different. I would not pass a clean debt ceiling hike for the equivalent of three months; I would tie it to a very nominal package of savings, even if only, say, $15 billion over ten years, if just to establish the principle that cuts belong with debt ceiling hikes.
But I wouldn’t just put a number on it. The number of the dollars saved isn’t important. What’s important is the substance of the savings. The savings should be highly specified. They should be the sorts of things that will make the Dems look bad if they disagree.
For instance: Right now, the federal government pays $14 toward each federal worker’s pension for every $1 the worker contributes. The private sector norm is $1 to $1 — an even match. Sen. Ron Johnson reports that an even match would save $133 billion over a ten-year span. Okay, then, how about being ultra-reasonable and moving from 14-1 down to 12 1/2-2 1/2? The savings from that tiny change, asking federal workers to contribute a TINY bit more to their own retirements, would save about $14 billion over ten years (by VERY rough extrapolations). Who could object to that?
Likewise, another $10 billion over ten years could be saved on federal worker health insurance (again, by some rough math of my own). How? Private sector usually fork over about 60% of the premiums for each worker’s health insurance, with the workers providing 40%. (This number is an approximation, from memory, having checked several slightly conflicting sources about a month ago.) The federal government, however, provides about 72% of the premiums for family coverage. How about just cutting that 72% to 66.7%? The difference is less than $40 a month per worker. The savings, though, would be about $1 billion per year.
Who could object to that?
Or…. whatever. The point is to find REALLY low-hanging fruit, in terms of savings, and tie it to the debt ceiling. Make sure it is something that tests well and proves overwhelmingly popular — just as it proved popular to advocate cutting the “bridge to nowhere.” Tie such a popular cut — not cutting a popular program, but popularly cutting a ridiculous specific bit or few bits of federal largesse — to the debt ceiling hike; get it donw weeks in advance, and then go about the House’s other business. It’s then up to Obama to explain why he is putting the government into “default” rather than agreeing to cut a bridge to nowhere, or whatever.
IF we bank small savings, and then bank more small savings — not savings from the rate of increase, but real savings, even if small, from real programs — and then bank some more, each time there’s a fight, then we serve the taxpayers, built credibility, and keep Obama on the defensive.
That’s why the debt ceiling hike should not be completely clean. Mostly clean, maybe…. but not entirely. We do need to establish the principle of saving taxpayer dollars.
Oh, well….
View all comments (10) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2013/01/18/debt-ceiling-punt
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Mike G| 1.18.13 @ 6:47PM
This is exactly the kind of stuff we need to start with. How about reducing the number of pens the President uses to sign legislation? Why does he need a pen for every letter in his name. Sign the damn legislation, and give away one pen. It will make that pen much more valuable own, too. It's not much, but do it to every piece of legislation and it can add up. Much more tedious than trying to cut one big program, but a great way to start cutting waste.
I will be totally amazed if they actually follow your advice, Mr. H.
RJ| 1.18.13 @ 7:10PM
I agree, Quin. The GOP should never miss a chance to point out wasteful spending or reasonable ways to reduce government expenses.
Recently I read an article that said the federal government spend $1.5M to restore graffiti on Alcatraz Island. A few years ago we heard Harry Reid on the floor of the Senate saying it was heartless for the federal government not to fund cowboy poetry festivals. The government has gone crazy and wasteful with much of its spending. It needs to be challenged and overcome.
Sean| 1.18.13 @ 8:03PM
How about not passing a debt ceiling hike and force deep spending cuts? No that would take balls.
jeff152| 1.19.13 @ 8:18AM
I agree. Too many times the republicans have demanded something (no tax increases, dollar for dollar cuts, etc) only to give in at the last moment. They have firmly established a well deserved reputation of a paper tiger. If I were Obama, I would not compromise either, the republicans can always be counted on to cave.
Ok, lets punt. Then in three months when the democrats still havent passed a buget. Their rich supporters give there guys zero interest loans to hold them over and the president is still talking about paying the bills. What will the GOP do then. I guarantee another cave under cover of another "strategy" move. Does anyone think this is not going to happen? GOP is a joke and I'm tired of trying to argue points they put forward with the dems I come in contact with only to be proven a joke along with them. If they don't stick with their demand for real cuts with the debt ceiling, I am done with the GOP.
Teflon93 | 1.19.13 @ 1:30PM
Oh, you're just imagining things. Surely they will give us a spending reduction Tuesday for a tax hike today THIS TIME.
Dai Alanye | 1.18.13 @ 8:05PM
These are definitely worthwhile ideas, and might get some traction. I would certainly like to see them put into effect. I'd also like to suggest a more dramatic one, simply to learn what people think.
Let's cut all (that is, ALL) Federal salaries. By say 25% for those at the top, gradually lowering the cut to 5% for those at the bottom of the heap. Perhaps Obama, with his demand that the rich pay a fair share, would sign on. It might not do much for the yearly deficit but would set a fine example for the rest of us.
Oldefarte| 1.18.13 @ 9:00PM
Governmental welfare recipients should be required to perform menial unskilled labor for their city/municipality for their benefits. Social Security funding could be repaired by eliminating the wage ceilings of high income earners [or waivering them out legally if so desired of becoming SS beneficiaries at retirement and then freeing them from forced contributions]; or by legislatively foricing the government to repay the $trillions it has borrowed from the SS trust fund. Governmental workers lavish wages/benefits could be solved by legislating curbs/elimination of governmental unions entirely. The POTUS's lavish vacations to exotic destinations at taxpayers' expense could be de-funded, as could all exorbatant governmental agency expendatures for unnecessary conferences in expensive locations. Governmental budgeting could be legislated to require zero-based methods thereby justifying every year a ground up buildup on a needs basis for each/every dollar added to same. Lobbying of legislators could be outlawed and any violations could require immediate termination of congressmen judged guilty of same!!!
Teflon93 | 1.19.13 @ 8:22AM
Don't be a sucker, Quin. Tammy Faye Boehner won't fight. How many empty promises to fight on the continuing resolution, on the sequester, on the debt ceiling have we seen already?
You're not that stupid.
C Bowen | 1.19.13 @ 9:08PM
The Republicans will cave; they nominated a TARP supporter for President for goodness sake who ran on a budget plan that included multiples hikes to the debt ceiling.
Republicans will make sure Wall Street debt holders get paid.
Ron Paul had the most politically realist plan in regards to the debt ceiling--just have Congress declare the bonds the Federal Reserve Holds null in void--~$2 trillion saved.
R Martin| 1.20.13 @ 7:40AM
You focus properly, Mr. Hillyer, on the need to start somewhere in reducing government employee bloat. But I'm not sure about your generalization regarding private sector pensions. I think the private sector is moving away from company funded pensions in favor of employee funded 401k plans. Which makes the discrepancy with government workers even worse