Took a peek at memeo…

Took a peek at memeorandum yesterday evening, and saw that others had come to a similar conclusion about the win-win situation where the GOP is trying to decide between tax cuts and deficit reduction. Jonah Goldberg came to the same conclusion I did, only much earlier in the day.

Kevin Drum, however, seems to thing that allowing you to keep more of your money is, well, inconsequential to most of us. He has this to say:

In the past there has always been a natural feedback loop that kept conservatives and liberals in check. Conservatives, by supporting tax cuts and prudent fiscal policies, earned the support of millionaires and big business. Liberals, by supporting broad growth of popular federal programs, earned the support of the poor and middle class. Neither side had a permanent advantage.

So you see, if you got a bunch of your own money back from the government in the Bush tax cuts, then you are, by his definition, a millionaire or a business magnate. Well Kev, I hate to burst your bubble (well, OK, I don’t really), but I got some badly needed tax relief and I’m nowhere near a millionaire, and most people who got tax breaks were in the middle class. What really goes on is that liberals, by supporting broad growth of popular federal programs, buy the support of the myriad special interests that is the Democratic Party. Note that I’m not saying conservatives buy support, because they’re just trying to let me keep my money; that’s not “buying”. However, liberals are buying support because the hallmark of their programs is taking money from one person and giving it to another. The two are categorically different.

Further, Kevin sideswipes the idea (but doesn’t quite make the connection) that new government programs are guaranteed to be money pits.

Jonah may like the idea of heaving a few cabinet agencies over the side, but people like Karl Rove and Tom DeLay know perfectly well that this would be electoral suicide. Even aside from the fact that most of Jonah’s target agencies are quite popular with some key constituencies, everyone who looks seriously at federal spending for more than a few minutes knows perfectly well that the vast majority of spending goes to four things: Social Security, Medicare, national defense, and interest payments. Unless you propose large cuts in those programs, you just aren’t serious about “small government.”

And of course no one will ever propose serious cuts in those programs. Interest payments are untouchable for obvious reasons, and the other three are all highly successful and highly popular programs. Not only won’t they be cut, but demographic and other pressures ensure that all of them will grow considerably over the next couple of decades and everyone knows it.

“Everybody knows” that these government programs will “grow considerably”. Thank you for noticing that, and please keep that in mind the next time a Democrat proposes a new spending program. It’s not just those you mention, but just about every government program does the same thing. This is not good news…for anybody.

I will admit that I’ve not been thrilled with how the Republicans have busted the budget further, and while I think part of that is playing politics, I also think a good portion of that is the fact that Bush does not have a veto-proof majority in Congress. If the Republicans had some of the same freedom to do what they want that the Democrats have had in the past, I think you’d see more seriousness about smaller government.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!