War savings and debt reduction: Take two
By Lori Montgomery,
WashPost
Published: November 14
The congressional “supercommittee” is looking to count as budget savings as much as $700 billion that the nation no longer plans to spend on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next decade, an accounting gimmick that has drawn fire from both Democrats and Republicans.
In deference to that criticism, aides from both parties said the panel would not count war savings toward its primary debt-reduction goal of at least $1.2 trillion. Instead, they are considering using the savings to “pay for” other priorities, such as extending emergency unemployment benefits and a temporary payroll tax cut currently enjoyed by every American worker.
Both measures are scheduled to expire at the end of this year, potentially damaging the fragile recovery — an outcome that President Obama and other Democrats are eager to avoid. Unless their cost is offset by other savings, however, extending them through 2012 would add billions to next year’s budget deficit — an outcome Republicans oppose.
Budget analysts were appalled by the idea. Robert Bixby of the bipartisan Concord Coalition called war savings “the mother of all budget gimmicks.” But aides in both parties said an agreement to use war savings to offset the cost of urgent expenses could help build support for a broader accord on the debt, which is likely to require lawmakers to support politically painful spending cuts and tax increases.
(More here.)
WashPost
Published: November 14
The congressional “supercommittee” is looking to count as budget savings as much as $700 billion that the nation no longer plans to spend on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next decade, an accounting gimmick that has drawn fire from both Democrats and Republicans.
In deference to that criticism, aides from both parties said the panel would not count war savings toward its primary debt-reduction goal of at least $1.2 trillion. Instead, they are considering using the savings to “pay for” other priorities, such as extending emergency unemployment benefits and a temporary payroll tax cut currently enjoyed by every American worker.
Both measures are scheduled to expire at the end of this year, potentially damaging the fragile recovery — an outcome that President Obama and other Democrats are eager to avoid. Unless their cost is offset by other savings, however, extending them through 2012 would add billions to next year’s budget deficit — an outcome Republicans oppose.
Budget analysts were appalled by the idea. Robert Bixby of the bipartisan Concord Coalition called war savings “the mother of all budget gimmicks.” But aides in both parties said an agreement to use war savings to offset the cost of urgent expenses could help build support for a broader accord on the debt, which is likely to require lawmakers to support politically painful spending cuts and tax increases.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
War Savings. What a joke. There can be no question that there are simply no member of Congress who are any way, shape, or form serious about reducing our debt fueled orgy at the hands of the federal government. Serioulsy, why stop with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? And why stop at 2021?
Using the supercommittee logic, if we save $1T by 2021 by virtue of no longer fighting these wars, won't the savings be $2T by 2031? $3T by 2041? That's one helluva stimulus package and it's all just 'savings'! It's like free money!!
We stopped fighting WWII 66 years ago. Imagine the savings we have piled up by not fighting this war. Enough to fund master's degrees in Conflict Resolution Studies for everyone!!
Come to think of it, we stopped fighting the War of 1812 nearly 200 years ago. The savings from not fighting this war must be in the tens of trillions of dollars. Imagine the stimulus package we could fund from these 'savings'! It's Christmas year round for the government!!
Speaking of Christmas, did you see that President Obama suggested a 15-cent 'Christmas Tree' tax to be used to promote the sale of... Christmas Trees (yeah, I don't get that one either) because it seems after about Dec 26 every year, Christmas Tree sales drop dramatically. Can you say 'stimulus'?!! However, Obama dropped the proposal. Apparently, the new federal agency known as "Christmas Tree Bureau For The Purpose Of Sales, Marketing, And Promotion Of Year-Round Christmas Tree Investment" tasked with levying the tax was going to be sued by Christmas Tree Growers Association and the cost of the settlement would have wiped out all the savings by ending the Revolutionary War.
Post a Comment
<< Home