Reduce Deficit with Either Modified Simpson-Bowles or In God We Trust

After watching the testimony before the Deficit Reduction Committee I went from stuck in despair to hoping for repair. I now have faith in two plans: The “In God We Trust” plan, or “The modified Simpson-Bowles Commission Plan.” Here’s why.

The committee appeared from behind closed doors to hear testimony on November 1 from Sen. Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, co-chairs of the Simpson-Bowles Commission, and Pete Domenici and Dr. Alice Rivlin, co-chairs of the Domenici-Rivlin Task Force. Both deficit reduction plans have languished despite Deficit Committee co-chairs admitting both plans provided an impressive body of work over the last two years.

The two sets of speakers agreed the plans are similar and capable of resolving the deficit crisis with a bold goal of $3.9 trillion. All four lectured committee members they would fail the American people unless their final agreement curtailed spending and increased revenue.

That’s when the ‘In God We Trust plan’ arrived within me. Our silver dollars have “In God We Trust” inscribed on them. If no agreement is reached by Saturday November 12, the committee would agreed to trust God to choose the right plan. After assigning plans to different sides of the coin, each co-chair would flip a silver dollar until both coins matched. Full faith in our motto would compel relieved members to unanimously support the chosen one and our primarily God-loving people to accept it.

In the midst of committee members’s despair-inducing questions to support their pet perspectives, Simpson recommended Bowles be given a chance at the end of questioning to explain how the committee could succeed. After the questions mercifully ended deficit Co-Chair Jeb Hensarling gave him the opportunity. Committee members scribbled notes as Bowles talked.

Bowles articulated boldness in a plan to cut deficits by $3.9 trillion over ten years with the $1.3 trillion cuts in discretionary spending agreed to in the enabling legislation and another $2.6 trillion from a unanimous committee. His numbers begin with public proposals on the competing positions and suggest compromises. If you love numbers they’re below and trust me Bowles crafted beautiful creatures. If you avoid numbers, skip merrily to the penultimate paragraph while whistling about the spirit of compromise.

 The two sides have proposed $250-450 billion more cuts in discretionary spending, so Bowles assumed they could compromise on $300 billion. They’ve proposed $500-750 billion in cuts to health care and if they increased eligibility requirements they could reach $600 billion. They’ve proposed $250-400 billion in cuts on mandatory programs, so they could compromise on $300 billion. Interest savings would equal $400 billion. They’ve agreed to alter the CPI index calculations on benefits and pensions to save $200 billion. Those promising compromises total $1.8 trillion. Adding $1.3 trillion equals $3.1 trillion. Notice that’s $800 billion short.

Bowles said that brings everyone to the revenue side. He trusts tax-restructuring recommendations in the two plans, but political reality led him to accept a verbal commitment from House Speaker Boehner who said tax-restructuring to increase revenue by $800 billion is possible. Bowles suggested Democrats could accept it if were made slightly more progressive. Spending cuts of $3.1 trillion plus revenue increases of $800 billion equals $3.9 trillion dollars.

Bowles reminded the committee members they have the power in section 404 of the enabling legislation to instruct authorizing committees to produce entitlement and tax reform in streamlined processes. All four speakers charged them to seize their power.

Bowles said, “I think that would create a lot of excitement with people in the country and go a long ways to build people’s confidence that we can stand up to our problems.”

God gains confidence when we stand united to overcome problems. So I’ve shelved my despair and hope for repair in favor of Bowles’s modified Simpson-Bowles plan and pushed the In God We Trust plan to a fallback position. Come to think of it, the modified Simpson-Bowles plan is an In God We Trust plan.  

 
Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.