A Vivid Example of Fiscal Irresponsibility at the Federal Level

Posted on August 16, 2015 by jackheidel

An article in the Friday, August 14 edition of the Omaha World Herald, “Why are the BRT stations so expensive? Officials explain the $260,000 price tag,“ describes a new $30 million bus rapid transit plan for Dodge Street with 27 individual sleek, modern bus stop shelters along the route at a cost of $260,000 each. Half of the new $30 million plan will be paid for by the city of Omaha and half by the Federal Transit Authority which has an annual budget of $8.6 billion.
The issue is not whether Omaha should spend $15 million in local funds to achieve a $30 million bus system upgrade. We can expect city officials to make a responsible decision on this matter. The real issue is why the FTA should have annual budget of $8.6 billion to begin with when it is paying for, and therefore encouraging, extravagantly designed bus transit systems all over the country.
The U.S. deficit for the 2015-2016 budget year, ending on September 30, is predicted to be about $450 billion dollars. This adds to the approximately $13 trillion public debt (on which we pay interest) which, at 74% of GDP, is the highest it has been since the end of WWII (see the above chart from the Congressional Budget Office).
It is the responsibility of Congress and the President to figure out how to get the budget under better control. All aspects of federal spending can and should be tightened up, including entitlements (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) and discretionary spending (everything else).
The Federal Transit Administration is wasting money on unnecessarily extravagant bus transit systems. Such fiscal irresponsibility means that its budget should be cut significantly. Many other similar examples exist in the federal government. We need people in Congress who can identify these fiscal boondoggles and effectively agitate for needed cutbacks.

How to Avoid a New, and Much Worse, Financial Crisis

Posted on August 13, 2015 by jackheidel

Is it possible for the U.S. to effectively address its enormous debt problem in today’s contentious political environment? Two weeks ago I discussed in “America’s Fourth Revolution” why the political scientist James Piereson thinks this is impossible. He is very persuasive but I think he is too pessimistic.
Since then I have discussed several different things we should do to turn around this perilous situation:

If spending for just Medicare and Medicaid (two very expensive entitlement programs) alone fell by 25% over ten years, as a percentage of GDP, and then stayed in line with GDP after that, the U.S. would actually have a budget surplus in 2040.
Just recognizing the magnitude of our debt problem would do wonders in public awareness.
If the Tea Party were able to grow beyond a protest movement and unite the country behind a majoritarian agenda of work, mobility and opportunity, it would be much more effective in achieving its fiscally conservative goals.
Another significant way to save money, and get better results at the same time, is to turn over more and more programs to the states. A good way to do this is with block grants to the states for federal programs in such areas as welfare, education and Medicaid. This would give the states more flexibility to get the job done in an efficient and cost saving manner.

What we need to do to turn our debt situation around is to greatly shrink our annual deficits below their current level of about $450 billion per year. If the debt is growing slower than the economy, then it will shrink as a proportion of the economy. This is what happened after WWII (see above chart) and it needs to happen again now!

Perfecting Our Union: Ending the War Against the States

Posted on August 11, 2015 by jackheidel

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

As the readers of this blog know, I am very concerned about our massive (public) debt, now at 74% of GDP, the highest since the end of WWII. One way to get federal spending under better control is to give more power back to the states (which are required to balance their budgets), as described by Adam Freedman in his new book “A Less Perfect Union: the Case for States Rights.”
Here are some of the many advantages of doing this, according to Mr. Freedman:

Better schools, roads and infrastructure, as states are freed from wasteful federal mandates. The Common Core, for example, should be considered as federal guidelines and not as an attempt to require a specific curriculum.

Lower taxes, as states engage in a virtuous competition for citizens and businesses.

Improved stewardship of natural resources, as decisions reflect local priorities on land use.

Less crowded prisons, by returning criminal jurisdiction to the states, where penal reform is light-years ahead of Washington.

An end to national gridlock, as the most divisive social issues devolve to state and local decision-makers. A good example here is the current interest by states and localities to enact their own minimum wage laws. This is far superior to raising the national minimum wage law in a one-size-fits-all manner.

The way to implement a program of giving responsibility back to the states is with block grants. A plan to do this for social welfare programs was formulated by the House Budget Committee just one year ago. It is often suggested to do something similar with federal education programs and with Medicaid as well.
Moving programs back to the states will improve their quality and help get costs under much better control. It makes much sense to move in this direction!

Prominent Myths about Our National Debt

Posted on August 6, 2015 by jackheidel

As the 2016 presidential election contest begins to heat up, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and its outreach arm, Fix the Debt, have issued a new “Fiscal FactChecker: 16 Budget Myths to Watch Out For in the 2016 Campaign.” Here are four of the major myths:

We Can Continue Borrowing Without Consequences. “Low interest rates are a temporary consequence of the struggling global economy and near term Federal Reserve actions – not a permanent fixture.”
There is No Harm in Waiting to Solve Our Debt Problems. “The longer policy makers wait to control debt, the more difficult it will become. For example, reducing debt to around the historical average of about 40% of GDP by 2040 would require tax increases or spending cuts of about 2.6% of GDP per year, if enacted today, or starting at $1,450 per person per year. Waiting a decade to begin would require adjustments of over 4% of GDP.”
Deficit Reduction is Code for Austerity, Which Will Harm the Economy. “Most advocates of fiscal responsibility in the U.S. have called for gradual reductions in long-term deficits so that the debt grows slower than the economy. These changes tend to have minimal near-term effects as well as the potential to significantly grow the size of the economy over the long term.”
We Can Fix the Debt Solely by Taxing the Top 1%. “The top 1% of earners, households that make at least $450,000 annually, earn a substantial share of national income, about 13% on an after tax basis, and further tax increases on this group could help. But these increases would need to be combined with reductions in spending growth and/or broader tax increases to fully address the nation’s fiscal challenges.”

Just a few days ago, I described a persuasive argument, “America’s Fourth Revolution,” that our hyper-partisan and dysfunctional political system will be unable to rectify our debt problem until we have another and much more severe financial crisis. The above discussion of budget myths from CRFB actually suggests a way forward to solve our debt problem.
We have a choice. Which path will we take?

America’s Fourth Revolution

Posted on July 28, 2015 by jackheidel

The Manhattan Institute’s James Piereson has written a fascinating new book, ”Shattered Consensus: The Rise and Decline of America’s Postwar Political Order” in which he argues that the New Deal liberal consensus has broken down and will soon be replaced by a new model containing several specific features. The coming new model will be the result of a Fourth Revolution of comparable scope to the first three:

A Democratic-expansionist regime from 1800 until 1860 which dissolved in the midst of the slavery and secession crisis.
A Republican-capitalist regime from 1860-1930, which was brought down by the Great Depression.
A Democratic-welfare regime from 1932 until the present, although with faltering support after 1980.

America’s third regime is in the process of fading out or collapsing for three reasons:

Debt. The national debt of $18 trillion today, at about 100% of GDP, is comparable to the debt at the end of WWII. But once the war ended the government cut spending and stopped borrowing and the U.S. economy grew at 4% for the next 20 years. Nothing comparable to this major debt reduction is in sight today.
Demography. Today there are about 160 million people in the U.S. workforce of whom 120 million have full time jobs. The workforce will grow by 1 million per year for the next ten years while the number of people turning 65 will grow at nearly twice that rate. The nation will soon reach a point where 150 million working people will be paying payroll taxes to support 80 million people on Social Security and Medicare. Political leaders are doing nothing to address this looming crisis.
Slowing Economic Growth. The chart above shows how the U.S. economy has been slowing since the 1960’s. Since the end of the Great Recession in 2009, GDP has grown at only 2.2% and is likely (CBO) to continue growing indefinitely at this slow rate under current policies. The second chart shows the enormous difference between 2% growth and, for example, even 3% growth over time.
Why don’t Congress and the President deal with these problems now, before they reach the point of crisis? It’s because Congress has become increasingly polarized, with Democrats having moved leftward and Republicans moving rightward. Polarization is characteristic of regimes as they begin to tear themselves apart in conflicts which defy resolution within the existing structure of politics.
My approach on this blog is that these very severe problems can be solved by politicians working together in a cooperative way. Mr. Piereson makes a very persuasive case that this is not likely to happen and that it will take a huge new crisis, a revolution, to straighten things out.
I hate to say so but he may be right.

Fix It Now: the Political Philosophy of Chip Maxwell

Posted on July 21, 2015 by jackheidel

I have just recently come across the book, “Fix It Now: Rediscover the Constitution and Get America Out of Its Fiscal Death Spiral” by Chip Maxwell, a candidate for Congress in Nebraska’s Second District May 2016 Republican Primary.
Chip lays out his political philosophy very clearly. It is to:

Adopt a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, phased-in over ten years.
Phase out Social Security and Medicare for those under age 55.
Dismantle over the next decade the rest of the federal welfare/entitlement system.
Provide social services at the state or local level.
Launch a national effort to build a majority in Congress of crusaders for limited government.
There are some attractive features to Chip’s program but overall I think it is too radical to have much chance at implementation.
I am very much in favor of a balanced budget amendment and a ten year phase-in period is quite reasonable. Furthermore, providing social services at the state and local level would be much more efficient than what we are currently doing and, even with federal support, would be a big help in balancing the budget.
Social Security and Medicare are lifelines for tens of millions of people. We can and should strengthen these programs in order to make them more financially viable for future retirees. They are now part of our national fabric and are here to stay.
Chip’s last principle, promoting limited government, has much appeal but I think is not practical in this day and age. From my perspective, simply passing a Balanced Budget Amendment is sufficient to do what is needed. A BBA will force Congress to set spending priorities and eliminate inferior programs.
Chip Maxwell is to be commended in running for Congress. If elected, he would move the needle in the right direction, even though some of his ideas wont work.

The Moral Case for Free Enterprise

Posted on July 12, 2015 by jackheidel

Capitalism is under attack around the world as Greek socialists complain about their hard- hearted EU creditors, American liberals such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren push the Democratic Party to the left, and Pope Francis compares the excesses of global capitalism to the “dung of the devil.”
One of my favorite economic commentators is Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute. One of his books is “The Road to Freedom: How to Win the Fight for Free Enterprise,” which examines the most important economic issues facing the United States from a moral point of view. For example:

Getting the U.S. Economy Growing Again. Weak economic growth means the end of opportunity in America. Furthermore, weak growth disproportionately hurts those who most need new economic opportunities: the poor. One strategy says that the key to restarting economic growth is the state: more stimulus, more taxes, more borrowing. A second strategy says the source of economic growth is free enterprise: tax reform, less government regulation, policies that make it easier for entrepreneurs to succeed, and a smarter immigration policy.
Putting America Back to Work. Jobs are not just a source of money for Americans; they are a ticket to earned success. High unemployment is unfair because it robs people of their potential fulfillment. It is especially harmful to the poor and the young. The key to job creation is to get the economy growing faster.
Getting the United States Out of Debt. Unless the U.S. reduces deficits, it will have just three choices: steal from future generations, inflate the currency to lower the value of the debt or refuse to pay those to whom it owes the money. All of these options are immoral because they are unfair: they harm others who have done no harm to America. Three points here: 1) we have out-of-control entitlement spending, 2) debt crises are more successfully dealt with through spending reductions than with tax increases and 3) there are no quick fixes.

Considering basic economic and fiscal issues from a moral perspective adds an important new dimension to the discussion. We might disagree on the details of how to proceed but it is imperative to take effective action of some kind!

The Root of Greece’s Problem (and Ours)

Posted on July 9, 2015 by jackheidel

Will it be the Euro or Drachma for Greece? It’s down to the wire as Greece and the European Union negotiate the necessary conditions for Greece to remain in the Eurozone. I have devoted several recent posts to the Greek fiscal crisis, pointing out the parallels between the Greek situation and our own.
Greece needs a bailout because its public debt is nearly 180% of GDP. Our own public debt is “only” 74% of GDP at the present time but is predicted by the CBO to reach 175% of GDP by 2040, just 25 years from now. Furthermore, Greece is currently receiving very favorable lending conditions from the European Central Bank, much better than are likely to apply in the U.S. in the long term. This means we’re likely to have another deep crisis on our hands much sooner than 25 years from now.
Consider the data in the above charts from today’s Wall Street Journal. It shows that Greece is spending 14.4% of GDP on pensions, more than any other major European country. Furthermore, the efficiency of its VAT revenue collection is the poorest in the EU. In other words, Greece has a very high rate of entitlement spending and has a poor tax collection system to support it.
In a general sense the U.S. is in a similar situation. Today we spend about 13% of GDP on mandatory, i.e. entitlement, programs, compared to a total tax revenue level of 18% of GDP. Just entitlement spending alone is projected to rise to 18% of GDP by 2050, unless changes are made.
Just as Greece needs to tighten up on pension spending, improve revenue collection and get its economy growing faster, the U.S. needs to tighten up on entitlement spending and speed up its stagnant economic growth as well.
We’re not yet as bad off as Greece is today. But we’re headed in that direction with no one to bail us out when we get there!

The High Cost of Less Austerity

Posted on July 7, 2015 by jackheidel

All eyes are focused on the drama playing out in Greece. The Greeks have just voted not to accept Europe’s latest offer to keep the credit flowing, amounting to a 5% of Greek GDP income transfer from their European neighbors, in return for additional economic reforms to put the country on a path to self-sufficiency.
The New York Times declares, “For Europe’s Sake, Keep Greece in the Eurozone,” that the European Union should “offer some path forward for the Greek economy, starting by writing down its huge and unpayable debts.” More than likely EU leaders will work out a new agreement with Greece to enable it to remain in the EU and the Eurozone. Greece is lucky to be in such a position.
In a recent post, “Could the U.S. End up Like Greece? II. How Long Will It Take?”, I pointed out that the U.S. is likely to have a public debt of 175% of GDP by 2040, the same level as the Greek debt today. Furthermore interest rates are likely to be higher than their unusually low level today which means that we will be making proportionally higher interest payments at that time. In other words, we are likely relatively soon, within 25 years, to have a painfully high level of debt.
Who is going to bail us out when our own debt becomes “unpayable”? Obviously, no one! Right now the austerity and pain caused by the Greek debt is confined to the 11 million people in Greece.
Which is better? For us to bite the bullet now and get our fiscal house in order by, for example, moving towards annual balanced budgets Or to wait until our debt becomes unbearable and there is no one to bail us out?
We are so big that if this ever happens and drastic measures have to be taken, much of the world will be drawn into the suffering along with us. It won’t be a pretty sight!

Could the U.S. End Up Like Greece? II. How Long Will It Take?

Posted on July 2, 2015 by jackheidel

My last blog post, “Could the U.S. End Up Like Greece?” compares Greece’s present fiscal situation (public debt at 180% of GDP) with our own current fiscal situation (public debt at 74% of GDP and rising fast). The Congressional Budget Office predicts that, under current policy, the U.S. debt will not reach 180% until about 2055, forty years from now. One could (wrongly!) conclude from this that we are okay for the time being.
However, this is not true! The Peter G. Peterson Foundation has taken a closer look at the most recent CBO report. Under a less optimistic, but more realistic, Alternative Fiscal Scenario, the U.S. debt will reach 175% in 2040. The Alternative Fiscal Scenario assumes, for example, that:

About 50 expiring tax breaks will continue to be extended year by year, as they were in 2014 and have been repeatedly in the past. These “tax extenders” increase the deficit by over $40 billion per year.
Discretionary spending will soon rise back up to its historical share of GDP. In other words, the sequester, which is currently holding down the growth of discretionary spending, may be overridden or at least relaxed.

Greece, with its debt at 180% of GDP, is only being required by the European Central Bank to pay 1.7% interest on this debt indefinitely into the future. Thanks to the low interest rate policy of the Federal Reserve, 1.7% is also the current rate of interest being paid on the U.S. debt. But this historically low interest rate is unlikely to continue much longer without setting off a much higher rate of inflation.
In other words, we’ll likely be in the same situation as Greece is currently, in much less than 25 years. Furthermore, Germany and the other EU countries have been keeping Greece afloat for years and may continue to do so.
Who is going to bail us out when we get to where Greece is now? China? Unlikely. We’ll be on our own and it won’t be pretty!

It Does Not Add Up

Jack Heidel's blog on fiscal responsibility

Category Archives: debt