We all need to recognize that the Constitution gives Congress, alone, the power of the purse. We may ask presidential candidates for answers and ideas but ultimately it is Congress who has this responsibility.
We can easily stop Congress from over- spending - Make a law that Congressional officials can not be re-elected if they do not balance the budget!
Of course this is not pragmatic and is unlikely to occur. A more pragmatic approach is to make it nearly impossible for a representative be re-elected if they fail to balance the budget. This could be done through a well-funded and influential lobbying group. This has many advantages actually. It is politically independent and can maneuver the ever-changing political landscape and it is pretty easily constructed. Such an associated interest group, much like the NRA, would have lobbying abilities, campaign influence, and could could rate candidates. It would have local members -thus educating and mobilizing in a grass roots manner.
No law could do all of that .
We have been sold the idea that the federal budget does not need to be balanced like a checkbook. But as the middle class can attest, a snowballing federal deficit bleeds away our dollar’s purchasing power. We used to be able to afford a car and now we can barely afford a movie night out with our kids. Much of the reason we have lost our economic opportunities is that the debt to GDP ratio is now 123%. Just to pay the the yearly interest for the federal loans is around one trillion dollars per year. That is our tax money going towards ….nothing.
This impacts our pocket book in 3 ways.
Inflation, which shrinks our paycheck’s purchasing power.
loans from the bank are all but impossible for small businesses as we compete with the Federal Government for those loans.
Interest rates compound through the economy like gravity to make our cost of living one of the highest in the world and our quality of life one of the worst in the western world.
If that is hard to follow- then just feel it. We are not where we used to be on Mainstreet. Windows are boarded up and money does not walk through the door like it used to. Much of this is due to the crazy Federal Budget.
Concrete Ideas
There is more to balancing the budget than anyone can agree on. When it comes to balancing the federal budget economists can not agree on simple questions such as: When is the federal budget too much?
To the ranchers and farmers in rural America, the spiraling debt does not need equations and theories. Common Main Street sense says this is foolish.
In the 1980- 90s the economy simply outgrew the debt and essentially erased it after some thoughtful cuts. This time it will not likely be the full solution but consider this…
- Increasing the housing sector could create a 6% growth rate. Using deregulation and especially dropping the capital gains taxes on income from house sales will open up rentals to purchase, and create more construction. Opening federal lands in the large cities to housing could propel lower costs in these areas where economic growth will be sure to follow.
- Evaluate which areas of the budget are winners and losers. It can be surprising. Some of the child welfare subsidies actually give a return for every dollar spent by producing good workers and stable families over time.
-The federally funded medical programs account for a whopping percentage of the budget. Only by addressing the elephant in the room are we going to get anywhere. Our plan is to streamline the programs to reduce administrative costs and redundancies, yet improve efficiency and quality. It does not mean cutting programs. It is about thoughtfully taking a fragmented puzzle of programs and organizing them into a logical system designed to integrate and work together.
-The budget spiral seems to follow campaign finance deregulation. We need to get rid of the money influencing decisions. We need to get reverse the Citizens United decision.
- Finally, economists largely agree that economic growth is strongly tied to innovation. Who does the innovation in America? Is it the billionaires with their offshore hedge funds? Alexander Bell was 25 -29 when he invented most of his ideas. Thomas Edison was 25 -30. Tesla was 28 and Steve Jobs was 21. Eli Whitney was 28. Most inventors are young with their characteristic curiosity, energy and ability to think and act outside the box. Currently, the younger generations in America have few opportunities. The old corporate ladder has given way to outsourcing and contractor work. The cost of education and housing pull them down further. There is no upward mobility . They earn half of the national average and minimum wage is way below minimum. It makes total economic sense to get the flow of moneys running through this sector. A dollar in a retired billionaire’s off-shore accounts does nothing to stimulate the economy but a dollar into the younger generation’s hands would go to housing, education, mainstreet jobs, raising young families, and investment.. Innovation would again come about with youthful input. These dollars reinvested would be worth many more in 10 -20 years than if they sat idly in safe havens for the elderly rich.
It has been done before. Let’s do it-