Tag: spending cuts

Clinton Exclusive, Continued: “I’m Proud” Of Obama For Resisting GOP On Debt

Praising President Obama for his willingness to confront Congressional Republicans over the debt and deficits, former President Bill Clinton warned against excessive spending cuts in a slowly recovering economy. If the Republicans and Democrats achieve a deal before the August 2 deadline for a national debt default, he told The National Memo in an exclusive interview this week, they can all be winners — even the Tea Party.

“I think there’s a real chance that austerity first, far from putting a confidence boost into the economy, will further dampen growth,” he told The National Memo in an exclusive interview this week. Drawing a contrarian lesson from the United Kingdom, where the Conservative government’s budget-slashing policies have slowed growth and depressed revenues, he added, “I think there’s a chance the British will end up with a bigger deficit because tax revenues will drop more than spending will be cut.”

The former president, who now runs the William J. Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, also offered his own perspectives on how to reduce federal spending over the next ten years – while doing the least possible damage to entitlement programs, infrastructure, education and health care. But he would prefer to postpone most spending cuts and tax increases until the economy is stronger than at present.

“In broad outline, a good deal would be one that combined spending cuts with revenue increases, and phased them in — in a way that didn’t start until we’ve got more growth than we’ve got now,” he said. Splitting deficit reduction more or less evenly between cuts and taxes would work best, he added, and pointed out that there are multiple possibililities within the current federal budget to save hundreds of billions of dollars, while doing little social or economic damage to the country. He pointed to a March 2011 report by the Government Accountability Office — the official Congressional auditing agency — that found dozens of examples of duplication and waste.

“If you just go through the GAO report — I did this weekend, the whole 400 pages — there’s just tons of opportunity to save money, a lot of money, maybe as much as $100 billion a year,” said Clinton, ranging from better maintenance practices in the military and more competitive bidding throughout government to more efficient collection of unpaid federal taxes:

If you could collect 25 percent, just 25 percent, of the $340 billion a year owed in taxes and not paid under the current tax system, just one-fourth of that; and if you ended these direct payments to farmers that have nothing to do with farm prices, where [they] get more if [they’re] bigger and richer, and which were supposed to be phased out; and you did a smidgen of what [GAO auditors] recommend on information technology and transportation and building management — you’d have a trillion dollars over a decade.

If you put a third of the $170 billion in no-bid federal contracts up for bid – and you had the same success that we had when [the Clinton administration] pushed contracts from no-bid to bid…Just those two things, alone — collecting 25 percent of taxes owed and not paid, and bidding out a third of the $170 billion in no-bid contracts out for bid in transparent process — would give you a hundred billions dollars [in annual savings].

In the military, 18 percent of the maintenance budget, according to the GAO, is caused by corrosion in planes, cars, weapons systems. Simple anti-corrosion measures have a return on investment somewhere between 11 to 1 and 60 to 1. Unbelievable!”

According to the former president, who achieved budget surpluses before leaving office in 2001, “a real conservative — as opposed to an anti-government, anti-tax conservative” could play a highly constructive role in the current debate by insisting that Congress thoroughly enforce the GAO findings as federal policy. But that would require the Republican majority to behave as if they are “serious about making government work instead of wanting it to fail.”

Clinton expects that the President and Congress will ultimately work out a budget deal before August 2, and that “everyone will win” as a result.

“The President will win because a terrible thing was averted,” he said. “Even if people agreed with him — just like they agreed with me on the [1995] government shutdown –the consequences of not paying our bills could be so great that [voters] could blame everybody. That was his risk. But he’s proved willing to take it and I think he should have and I’m proud of him for doing that.” Likewise, he said, both Republican and Democratic Congressional leaders will win because they helped to avoid a global economic crisis.

“And I think the Tea Party will win because they won’t be outed,” he said ruefully. “In other words, if this thing happened, you might have a successful third party candidacy for President — if our credit got down-rated and everybody’s interest rates went up. But I think the Tea Paty would be toast, because they’ve been going around telling everybody this is no big deal.”

More likely, he concluded: “They’ll all live to fight another day.”

Previously: Bill Clinton Says He Would Invoke Constitutional Option “Without Hesitation” to Raise Debt Ceiling and “Force the Courts to Stop Me”

Obama Can’t Celebrate Yet

WASHINGTON — The wounded are especially dangerous fighters. President Obama now occupies the high ground in the debt-ceiling debate, having called the Republicans’ bluff on the debt. He showed that deficit reduction is not now, and never has been, the GOP’s priority. He dare not get overconfident.

After thwarting the deal that House Speaker John Boehner was cooking up with Obama, Rep. Eric Cantor, the majority leader and Boehner’s rival, needs to show he knew what he was doing and recoup political ground. Cantor is likely to present Obama with spending cuts that the president once seemed to endorse as part of a large deal but will have to reject now that the big agreement is dead. There is still a lot of danger out there.

But it’s already clear that history will show that Boehner, the old war horse, was a better political calculator than Cantor, the self-styled “young gun.” Boehner saw an opportunity to make huge cuts in entitlement programs, shake off the severe damage done his party by Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget, and ignite a war between Obama and the Democratic base.

Boehner made what, in the larger scheme of things, were modest concessions on tax increases, getting three times as much in spending cuts. Only House Republicans can think that three steps forward and one step back constitutes retreat. Boehner lives in the real world. Most members of his caucus live in Foxland or Rushville, where talk shows define the truth.

Obama thought solving a big problem would outweigh any political difficulties his deal with Boehner might cause him. But Cantor saved Obama a lot of trouble. He protected him from a bitter intra-party fight and made crystal clear that preserving low taxes for the wealthy and for corporations is the GOP’s driving objective. Even the most resolutely centrist and cautious have been forced to concede this essential truth of American politics.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell — he’s astute like Boehner, but less interested in policy — signaled on Tuesday that this whole adventure of tying a debt-limit increase to the quest for big spending cuts has become a losing strategy. His convoluted but clever proposal would make Democrats take all responsibility for increasing the debt cap. This gets the GOP out of its current box and forces Democrats to cast a lot of unpleasant votes. That would help Republicans take over the Senate in 2012, which is what McConnell cares about most.

Thus has the GOP forced its way into a sentence on which Democrats once held a monopoly: Yes, Republicans are in disarray. They’re divided among those who know Boehner was right, those like McConnell who want to get out of the debt-limit mess altogether, and the troika now running Republican House strategy (Cantor, Ryan and Rep. Kevin McCarthy) who need something to show for having brought the country to the brink.

The best way out of this impasse is, unfortunately, a political nonstarter: to work with the budget crafted by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., which shows you can get a lot of deficit reduction by mixing some spending cuts with higher taxes on the very wealthy. It’s a road Obama might usefully have considered earlier.

The rational alternative is a deal with enough cuts to satisfy a majority of Republicans and enough revenue to win over a sufficient number of House Democrats to make up for tea partiers who’ll never support a debt limit increase. If Boehner reasserts himself, that’s probably where things will go.

Here’s the worrisome scenario: Cantor takes every domestic spending cut that was discussed as part of the negotiations with Vice President Joe Biden, declares that the administration has blessed them, and packages them together for a vote.

Never mind that Cantor walked out of the talks before there was serious negotiation about defense cuts and revenues, and thus no real agreement. Cantor, who needs to embarrass the Democrats and pull Obama down from the commanding heights, was shrewd to get the administration talking early about cuts in domestic spending and to put a lot of its cards on the table. He can now play those cards against Obama by forcing the president to reject reductions he had once considered when a larger agreement looked possible.

This might look like a political game. But at this stage, House Republicans can’t afford to end this whole sorry episode with a whimper. The bang they are looking for could yet cause a lot of collateral damage.

E.J. Dionne’s email address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.

(c) 2011, Washington Post Writers Group