deficit politics
I have to admit that I didn't notice it either when the Treasury last week showed that the fiscal 2012 deficit could be almost 30 percent lower than the deficit actually recorded in fiscal 2011.
The new estimate of $996.5 billion for the 2012 deficit that was included in table 2 of the Monthly Treasury Statement for October 2011 was an eye-popping $419.7 billion less than the $1.416.2 trillion deficit in 2011.
The 2012 estimate is just that -- an estimate. Not only is the fiscal year only 10 weeks old, but the Treasury number is based on the mid-session review of the budget that was published in September, that is, more than 3 months ago. The number almost certainly will change as the year continues.
So just to be safe, let's say that the federal deficit will fall from 2011 to 2012 by $350 billion rather than almost $420 billion (Note...it could just as easily fall by more instead of less). The question remains: Why wasn't it bigger news? After all, other than the years immediately following World War II, this would be one of the largest one-year drops in U.S. history.
My column from today's Roll Call is the first in a series I will be writing over the next year about what it's really going to take to reduce the federal deficit: It's going to hurt and anyone why says otherwise is misinformed (possible), misleading (probable), or just plain lying (very likely).
Just to be clear: No matter what anyone says or what you want to think, there are and will be no silver bullets or magic elixirs.
Spending cuts will reduce services and what the government buys from someone. Revenue increases mean that someone will pay more to the government. There will be some winners, but mostly there will be losers
Unless you still believe in the tooth fairly and Santa Claus, stop believing anyone who says this isn't the case.
Pain Has to Be Added to the Budget Debate
Dec. 13, 2011
Most CG&G readers are too young to remember that what we now know as the National Football League was actually created by the merger in 1966 of the NFL with the American Football League.
The merger announcement was big news. But while fans focused on the championship game -- the Super Bowl -- between the two leagues that began in 1967, with one exception the actual merger didn't really happen until 1970 when the NFL and AFL became one league with two divisions.
The one thing that did happen almost instantly was that the NFL and AFl ended the bidding war for players that was costing the owners so much by beginning a common draft immediately. That common draft and the end to the bidding war was always the major motivation for the merger and it very likely would not have happened otherwise.
Two things if you're at all surprised that the anything-but-super committee is going to announce today that it has been unable to agree on a deficit reduction plan and so is going out of business.
First, you weren't reading Capital Gains and Games.
On August 4 -- two days after the legislation that created the committee was signed into law -- I said here at CG&G that it was "set up to fail." A week later I posted that the now-obviously-less-than-super committee "will-accomplish-nothing." And a number of times over the subsequent three months I argued with everyone who said otherwise that there was no reason to believe that the committee would be able to agree on even a small deficit reduction plan. (Yes, I'm taking a small victory lap here. But, hey, I'm entitled.)
A quick note very early in the morning...
This story by Robert Pear in today's New York Times about the latest from the not-so-super committee tells you everything you need to know about the status of the negotiations. According to Pear, one of the main plans for reducing the deficit the committee apparently is considering is to set up a process by which tax increases would be considered by the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees at some point next year.
Does anyone else see how ridiculous this is?
The anything-but-super committee was set up because the regular committees and legislative process could not agree on what to do about the deficit. But rather than make those decisions, the super committee may decide that the best way to deal with this situation is to throw it back to the two tax-writing committees that, because they were unable to come up with a plan in the first place, gave the job to the super committee.
