|
During
the past few weeks, Congress has been locked in a battle to pass a continuing
resolution to fund government operations through September. Both supporters
and opponents of the bill, HR 1, claim it is a serious attempt to reduce
federal spending. However, an examination of the details of the bill call
that claim into question. For one thing, the oft-cited assertion that HR 1
reduces spending by $99 billion is misleading. The $99 billion figure merely
represents the amount that HR 1 reduces spending from the President's
proposed Fiscal Year 2011 budget - not reductions in actual spending. Trying
to claim credit for a reduction in spending based on cuts in proposed
spending is like claiming someone is following a diet because he had only
five slices of pizza when he intended to have 10 slices!
In
fact, HR 1 only reduces real federal spending by $66 billion compared to last
year's budget. This may seem like a lot to the average American but in the
context of an overwhelming trillion-dollar budget and a national debt that
could exceed 100 percent of GNP in September, it is barely a drop in the
bucket.
One
reason that HR 1 does not cut spending enough is that too many fiscal
conservatives continue to embrace the fallacy that we can balance the budget
without reducing spending on militarism. Until Congress realizes the folly of
spending trillions pretending to impose democracy on the world we will never
be able to seriously reduce spending.
Congress
must not only reject the warfare state, it must also reject the welfare
state. HR 1 is more aggressive in ending domestic spending than foreign
spending, and does zero out some objectionable federal programs such as
AmeriCorps. However, HR 1 leaves most of the current functions of the federal
government undisturbed. This bill thus continues the delusion that we can
have a fiscally responsible and efficient welfare state.
The
failure to even attempt to address the serious threat the welfare-warfare
state poses to American liberty and prosperity is the main reason why supporters
of limited government and individual liberty ultimately should find HR 1
unsatisfactory. Only a rejection of the view that Congress can run the
economy, run our lives, and run the world will allow us to make the spending
reductions necessary to avert a serious financial crisis. This does not mean
we should not prioritize and discuss how to gradually transition away from
the welfare state in a manner that does not harm those currently relying on
these programs. However, we must go beyond balancing the budget to
transitioning back to a free society, and that means eventually placing
responsibility for social welfare back in the hands of individuals and
private institutions.
Despite
the overheated rhetoric heard during the debate, HR 1 is a diversion from the
difficult task of restoring constitutional government and a free economy and
society. It is time for Congress to get serious about cutting spending, not
merely tinkering around the edges of the proposed budget and kicking the can
down the road for future generations. If we fail to act decisively now, there
will soon come a time when both our money and our capacity to borrow will run
out. When that happens, our ability to negotiate and play political games
with spending priorities will be over. To avoid real chaos, the time to start
dealing with our bloated government budget is right now.
Ron Paul
www.house.gov/paul
Copyright Dr. Ron
Paul
|