Thursday, February 24, 2011

Budget Cutting For Dummies ...And Washington Politicians, Part 4 - Where's President Obama?

The last three days we have examined some innovative and critically researched ideas that would reduce the Federal government's outrageous deficit spending by hundreds of billions of dollars every year without significant economic or financial hardship and pain to ordinary Americans. These ideas ranged across the entire spectrum of government functions and included the elimination of wasteful, redundant, or obsolete government programs and departments. As we stated on Monday, the country is on a spending a debt trajectory that will eventually collapse both the economy and the country.

Today's post takes a slightly different tack on the whole national debt issue. But before explaining the back end of the title of today's post, "Where's President Obama?" consider the following quotes:

“Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration or the next generation.” President Barack Obama


"We were told by our President that we could fight two wars, increase our military budget by 74%, spend more on education, initiate a prescription drug plan, have tax cuts, all at the same time. We were told by Congress that they could make up for lost revenue by cutting government waste. The result is the most precarious budget situation we have seen in years. We now have an annual budget deficit of almost $300 billion, not counting more than $180 billion we borrow every year from the Social Security Trust Fund." President Barack Obama

"Obama must take the lead in cutting lethal U.S. debt." Syndicated columnist Morton Kondracke, February 15, 2011 article.

"How are we going to rein in government spending? We have heard very little from the President. Now maybe he will open up with his budget... But he really has to lead here, and so far he simply has not." Glen Hubbard, Dean, Columbia School Of Business, Business Week quote, February 14, 2011 issue.

"Obama Must Lead On Deficit Cuts." Financial Times headline, February 13, 2011

"Tomorrow never comes." David Brooks, New York Times, February 17, 2011 article quote when explaining how the Obama administration keeps delaying the task of cutting spending.

"One and Done: To Be a Great President, Obama Should Not Seek Re-election in 2012."  Douglas Schoen and Patrick Caddell, Washington Post article from November 14, 2011, explaining that if the President declared he would not seek re-election and focused only on taming the deficit, he would save the nation and go down as a great President.

Seems like the entire country is waiting for the President to step up and tackle the hard question of getting the national debt and government spending under control. A task of such a large and wide ranging reach needs strong leadership to get the hard work, debate, and actions accomplished in a manner that completes the task in the most efficient and caring way possible.

Unfortunately, that is not the approach the President has taken. He has criticized previous Bush administration deficits as being too large but which are a fraction of the deficits that have occurred during his Presidency. He has said that he will eventually get around to deficit reduction but first other issues had to be tackled. Once tackled, however, he still does not take up the lead. He appointed a bipartisan commission that took the better part of a year researching, analyzing, and proposing a comprehensive set of deficit reduction ideas, all of which were rejected without the slightest show of interest in what the commission had come up with. The 2011 deficit will skyrocket to well over  TRILLION dollars but both his state of the union message and latest budget proposal show no significant effort to reduce spending. He is nowhere to be found despite the calls from all sides to get out and lead.

Why is he is "leading from the rear" as one columnist, David Brooks once surmised? Great leaders in all walks of life, good and bad, lead from the front. FDR was always out front leading the country through the dark times of the Depression. Churchill was always out front leading the British people during the darkest times of the war. Martin Luther King, Jr. was leading the marches through the streets of the South during the civil rights era. Steve Jobs has led Apple back from the brink of extinction by being out front, on the cutting edge, taking chances. General Custer never brought up the rear in the 7th Calvary. When the historic chance of a lifetime, saving the United States from its government spending presents itself, as outlined in the Washington Post article above, the President is nowhere to be seen.

Why is that? I suppose you could surmise a few possibilities:
  1. Reason 1: The President does not understand the depth of the problem. I would find this reason difficult to believe. The man is a Harvard graduate. He proposed the Deficit Reduction Commission. I am sure his press people are keeping him abreast of articles like the ones listed above. It is not a secret what is going on. From the quotes above, he is saying all the right words. Is it possible that the President simply does not get it?
  2. Reason 2: The President does not want to understand the depth of the problem. This might be a little more believable. I would bet that he did not come into office to become a budget cutter and an accountant. I am sure he had lofty goals that included instituting massive social and government programs that would be a lasting monument to his government work. And now this pesky $14 TRILLION national debt issue is getting in the way of his high speed rail lines, electric cars, his cap and trade or equivalent programs, etc. In other words, he is in denial. And these pet projects are more important, in his mind, than saving the country from its own spending habits.
  3. Reason 3: The President views his re-election as the only priority and does not want to alienate a single voter by cutting government spending. As with almost every current American politician, getting elected is both the means and the ends, regardless of what damage it does to the American people, our economy, and our freedom. It used to be you got elected (the means) to do great government work for the good of the country (the ends.) Today in America, the winning of the election is all that matters. I think this is the driving force for leading from the rear, do not shake the boat, it might endanger my re-election. This is also very dangerous because if this is indeed the President's reason for not leading form the front, the chances of getting sane, logical, effective, and significant spending reductions are less likely. This would put the country at least two more years further down the deficit rathole, making recovery all the more difficult. And who knows, even Obama got re-elected, he could continue to believe that "tomorrow never comes."
  4. Reason 4: The last possible reason, and the scariest, is that he wants the economy to collapse, allowing him to sweep in and socialize and nationalize every facet of our lives once he has wiped out the existing institutions of government, a functioning free market economy, and freedom. Let's us hope that this is not his end game and the reason he appears apathetic to the whole economy crashing scenario.
If I was a betting person, I would bet that the trifecta/win-place-show order is: Reason 3 (to win) followed by Reason 2 (to place), Reason 1 (to show) and Reason 4 bringing up the rear. I believe that the President is just another contemporary politician who considers running for office the only endeavor worth doing and doing well (i.e. winning). Everything else is secondary, especially when it interferes with his own grand plans, as listed in Reason 2.

Unfortunately, with the exception of the long shot reason 4, while betting the trifecta might be amusing, regardless of the winning reason, the results are the same, he is not addressing the problem. And the reins of leadership may not be his much longer if you consider some of the information from the Morton Kondracke article:
  • Republican Senator Tom Coburn and Democratic Senator Kent Conrad, both current members of the Senate and former members of the President's Deficit Reduction Commission, are jointly working on plans to implement some of the proposals the commission came up with.
  • Republican Senator Bob Corker and Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill are working on a proposal and legislation that would force the Federal government to reduce its spending over ten years so that  spending as a percentage of the nation's GDP would drop from the historical high levels today of about 24.6% to the long term historical average of 20.6%.
  • Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss and Democratic Senator Mark Warner are also jointly working together to find a way to cut spending.
  • Republican Congressman Paul Ryan has the only comprehensive, detailed plan out in public that would reform spending in all facets of government spending over a long term span.
Additionally, organizations such as the Concord Coalition, which is headed up by a former Republican Senator and Democratic Senator,  are providing necessary ideas by forging their own sensible plans for curtailing the deficit.

When a leader leaves a void in the front, as Obama has done here, that void will be filled by others with more courage than that leader in the rear. (Note: the fact that Senator Conrad will not be running for re-election in 2012 might be a source of courage for him). I cannot imagine FDR, Churchill, King, Jobs, etc. deciding that they would lay back and see what happens in order to not endanger their personal goals. Would not happen.

That is why Mr. Schoen and Mr. Caddell of the Washington Post were implying in their article:

"This is a critical moment for the country. From the faltering economy to the burdensome deficit to our foreign policy struggles, America is suffering a widespread sense of crisis and anxiety about the future. Under these circumstances, Obama has the opportunity to seize the high ground and the imagination of the nation once again, and to galvanize the public for the hard decisions that must be made. The only way he can do so, though, is by putting national interests ahead of personal or political ones."

Leading from the rear is never a good thing, especially considering the view. General Custer can tell testify to that. In fact, any dummy can see that.



Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at http://www.loathemygovernment.com/. It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.
Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment
 
 

No comments: