• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama proposes making 'pay-as-you-go' the law

I would say that if Obama didn't "kick start" the economy, GM may have gone bankrupt. Oh it did?

Aaah, but that's not a very realistic viewpoint, now is it? We still won't really know for a while if what he did actually did help any or no and even assuming that it did, that still does not exclude that individual businesses would go under while others would survive. Your view seems to be that if any single business goes down, then the plan has failed. What should be observed, IMHO, would be the general state and trend of the economy to judge if the plan failed.
 
I think it's a great idea. The problem with this proposal is that it has massive loopholes.

"The pay-as-you-go rule is very simple. Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere," Obama said at a White House ceremony, backed by more than a dozen lawmakers, including House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), who said he would introduce the plan as legislation next week. "It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s -- and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt."

One big difference between Obama's proposal and the Clinton-era rules, however, is that Obama would exempt an array of expensive policies currently in effect. For example, lawmakers could extend the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration past their 2010 expiration date, restrain the growth of the alternative-minimum tax and continue to forestall scheduled payment cuts for Medicare physicians without consequence. All told, those policies would increase annual budget deficits by more than $3.5 trillion over the next decade.

Some independent analysts who support PAYGO rules objected to the loophole. "This is like quitting drinking, but making an exception for beer and hard liquor," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

And while the proposal found favor in the House, it faced serious obstacles in the Senate, where several key senators said they would oppose it.

"I'm not for waiving PAYGO for $3.5 trillion of items, much of which I think ought to be paid for," said Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.). "I don't think at this point we can afford not to pay for those very large expenditures."

washingtonpost.com

So long as those loopholes remain, this is just a joke. Obama has actually had a decent track record so far of putting things on-budget, so let's hope he follows through in the same way here.
 
The reason he's doing this is because Ben Bernanke's been talking about how the US needs to get its fiscal house in order. Of course, Bernanke's an even bigger hypocrite than Barack Obama. They're doing their political wrangling right now.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom