creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Mark Shields
Mark Shields
19 May 2012
A Price Tag on Patriotism

Will Rogers was wrong. The legendary humorist, speaking of the responsibilities each of us has as a citizen … Read More.

12 May 2012
Shortcuts for 2012 Campaign

Please accept the following as a small token of appreciation from your semi-faithful correspondent, who knows … Read More.

5 May 2012
Slinging Mud

Indiana Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels was characteristically candid when speaking to the Indianapolis Star's … Read More.

The Eat Your Spinach and Your Brussels Sprouts Plan

Share Comment

Whatever else you want to say about the co-chairmen of the White House commission on deficit reduction, former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, Republican, and former White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles, a Democrat, you cannot accuse them of sugar-coating their proposed solutions. Simpson and Bowles have offered a politically painful fusion of both eliminating tax breaks and cutting defense and domestic spending.

This is not an "Eat your Spinach" proposal. Simpson and Bowles have managed to come up with an eat-your-spinach-and-your-broccoli-and-finish-your-Brussels-sprouts plan. No vague generalities here, they call for almost $3.8 trillion in deficit reductions between 2012 and 2020, with $1 in new federal revenues for every $3 in federal spending cuts.

Already their proposals — including means-testing Social Security, raising the retirement age and cutting benefits for the affluent, as well as provoking investors by taxing their income from capital gains and dividends at the same rate as ordinary income — have put them in rhetorical crossfire between anti-tax conservatives and entitlement-defending liberals. If the test of political courage is the ability to simultaneously alienate both the right and the left, then Simpson and Bowles have passed with flying colors.

What they have offered is not some flawless blueprint for inevitable national prosperity. Some of the criticism of their individual proposals, even if self-serving, is valid. But give Simpson and Bowles great credit for challenging us Americans, all of us, to do what our national leaders have not asked us to do throughout nine years and two wars — "to sacrifice to make our nation stronger."

Calls for shared sacrifice, you may have noticed, have not been issued, this century, from the Oval Office.

In an earlier — and better era — war, for Americans, indeed did demand equality of sacrifice.

But now for the first time in 170 years, the United States continues to wage wars without a military draft and with unprecedented tax cuts. Simpson and Bowles write that "throughout our history, Americans have been willing to sacrifice," but apparently nobody told them that was before the ascension of the Me Generation, when the one point of consensus between our two polarized parties is their apparent agreement not to increase the tax burden on Rupert Murdoch and Donald Trump.

Do Simpson and Bowles have any idea whom they are talking to? Don't they know we are the same people so bereft of patriotism that we have not even taxed ourselves to pay for these two wars and have selfishly shifted that burden to our children and grandchildren?

Ever since Ronald Reagan's impossible 1980 campaign promise to a) cut our taxes by one-third while b) doubling the defense budget and c) balancing the federal budget, we have been fed politically (and have fed ourselves) an unnourishing diet of ouchless, painless ersatz patriotism.

Somebody needs to tell Simpson and Bowles that our political tastes do not include unsweet, if nutritious, items like spinach, Brussels sprouts or broccoli. We prefer the political equivalent of the hot fudge sundae diet found in the tabloids you see while waiting in the supermarket checkout line. The front-page features an exclusive reporting that "Mussolini Is Alive and Running a Bed-and-Breakfast in Chillicothe, Ohio." But the big science story tells us that we can lose 15 pounds a week just by forcing ourselves to eat four hot-fudge sundaes a day ... something about the chemical reaction magically consuming thousands of calories, etc., etc.

That is what Simpson and Bowles are fighting. And they deserve our admiration and gratitude for trying.

To find out more about Mark Shields and read his past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

COPYRIGHT 2010 MARK SHIELDS


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
Mark - agreed that the plan proposed is far reaching. However, our government is rife with agencies that didn't exist during our previous wars. Elimination of said agenicies outright would go far to relieve the current budget strain.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Charles
Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:34 AM
i am disappointed shields
your spinach metaphor gives simpson and bowles more credit than they deserve
their proposals are just another in the continuing transfer of wealth to the top
deficit cutting proposals with tax cuts?
people have to work until they are 69 to get their paid-in retirement benefits?
the close military bases canard?
simpson-bowles cannot get a majority of their panel to agree with them so they went around them and issued their own report!
boo!
what causes you to give these bozos anything other than well-deserved criticism for failure
tom keane and lee hamilton demonstrated how to do a commission
these yahoos should be held to that standard of commission work
Comment: #2
Posted by: james
Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:10 PM
I am disappointed in the comments Friday night, November 12. If the tax deduction for home interest is eliminated that will decrease the desire for many Americans to own a home. We already have a housing crisis and that will not help. One way that the government will get the American people to buy into raising taxes is for the men and women of congress to have the same medical benefits and retirement benefits that the American people have. Pay into the social security system, establish their own retirement accounts with the government contributing 3%, cut down on the freebees that go along with being part of the government structure. They are suppose to be serving the people that elected them, not getting rich. It is time that the people creating the budgets and passing the laws accept responsibility for what it is that they do. If a people like myself is not responsible - I have to pay the price. Everyone needs to do the same.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Candi
Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:09 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Mark Shields
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

3 Apr 2010 "Still the Economy, Stupid"

5 Jun 2010 What Baseball Can Teach American Business

8 Aug 2009 August Musings