The President, the GOP and the Deficit

The partisan brinkmanship that has left the federal government barely able to adopt budgets doesn't bode well for the following sentiment, but here it goes: This nation desperately needs President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats and Republicans alike to work together in constructive fashion to reduce a federal deficit that is on track to create so much red ink that just paying the interest on the national debt will consume a quarter of the budget. We used to be a nation in which there were more than four working adults for every senior citizen receiving Social Security and Medicare. In coming decades, as baby boomers keep aging, that ratio will drop to 2-to-1. Plainly, huge changes need to be made.

In his speech Wednesday on deficit and debt concerns, the president cogently laid out the problems. Some congressional Republicans have done so as well.

It was Obama who said, "We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt," and that, "I guarantee that if we don't make any changes at all [to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security], we won't be able to keep our commitments to a retiring generation that will live longer and face higher health care costs than those who came before." But it could have been House Speaker John Boehner or Rep.

Unfortunately, beyond this rhetorical agreement, there is not nearly enough common ground on what to do going forward. And despite the moral posturing seen from both sides, neither comes close to holding the moral high ground.

Obama criticized specific GOP proposals while offering mostly vague promises, including some built on such highly dubious premises as the federal government's ability to sharply rein in spending on health care. He also undercut such Democrats as California Sen. Dianne Feinstein by opposing even such obvious changes in Social Security as a very gradual increase in the retirement age.

But Republicans also disappoint. They have paired their vision of a much smaller government with plans for still more big tax cuts, with some yet again trotting out the discredited canard that tax cuts always pay for themselves through increased revenue. They also defend a troubling tax status quo in which the amount big corporations pay increasingly seems to depend on the skill of their lawyers. This is the reason many analysts say General Electric could make $5 billion in U.S. profits without paying a dime in taxes.

The partisan feuding over these rival views is only likely to intensify as the 2012 presidential campaign heats up. That's tragic, because now, maybe more than ever, we need much less concern about short-term political gains — and much more concern about the future of this country.

REPRINTED FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM