WASHINGTON — Before beginning
the West Coast leg on its Fiscal Wake-Up Tour, The Concord Coalition
today released "Key
Questions Voters Should Ask Candidates About the Budget, Social Security and
Medicare." (Requires
WASHINGTON — Before beginning
the West Coast leg on its Fiscal Wake-Up Tour, The Concord Coalition
today released "Key
Questions Voters Should Ask Candidates About the Budget, Social Security and
Medicare." (Requires
Adobe Acrobat Reader) "Key Questions" is a
brochure proposing questions that citizens and
the media should ask candidates for federal office. Each question features
background information to provide context on these critical issues.
"The candidates we elect in 2008 will face crucial
decisions about the path of our nation‘s fiscal
policy. They should not take comfort, nor should we,
in the fact that the deficit has declined in the past few years. The debt
continues to go up and the long–term outlook is as bad
as ever. During the next presidential term, the baby
boomers will begin to qualify for Social Security and Medicare. Both programs
must be reformed to achieve long–term sustainability.
Important tax policy questions also await as the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are set
to expire by 2011 and the Alternative Minimum Tax digs deeper into the middle
class. Campaigns are the best
time for voters to find out how candidates plan to deal with the looming fiscal
challenge, or whether they have even thought about it at all,"
said Concord Coalition Executive Director Robert L. Bixby.
"Some candidates
will be tempted to tell the voters what they think they want to hear, rather
than what they need to hear. It’s up to the voters to make each campaign a
‘pander-free’ zone. For our part, we hope these questions will help in that
effort. We also encourage candidates to show initiative by bringing up these
issues themselves, without waiting for the voters to demand answers. That is
what real leadership is about," said Concord
Coalition Field Director Harry Zeeve.
Do you believe that budget deficits matter?
The
accumulation of large deficits, year after year, burdens taxpayers and
undermines future living standards. It does so by soaking up national savings
and crowding out productive investment. Today’s budget policy threatens to place
ever-tighter constraints on the ability of future citizens to determine their
own fiscal priorities. It also increases our reliance on borrowing from other
countries, in effect, mortgaging our future national income. The United States
would be in a stronger position to weather difficult times, address emerging
national needs and invest in future economic growth if it had greater
flexibility and strength in its fiscal position.
Do you believe that either Congress or the President has a
realistic plan to balance the budget? If not, what would you do differently?
President Bush and
the Democratic leaders of Congress share the goal of balancing the budget by
2012, but there is reason to be skeptical that they are prepared to make the
necessary trade–offs required to achieve that goal.
Both rely on assumptions that overstate likely revenues and understate likely
expenses. A serious effort to address the deficit will require policymakers to
tackle the underlying structural problems resulting from existing entitlement
and tax laws.
Do you support budget enforcement laws such as caps on annual
appropriations and a pay-as-you-go requirement for tax cuts and entitlement
expansions?
Pay-as-you-go (PAYGO)
rules for all tax and entitlement legislation and spending caps for
appropriations are proven tools for fiscal discipline. These enforcement laws
were an important part of bringing the budget back into balance from 1998
through 2001. This year, Congress took a positive step to bring back PAYGO
budgeting by enacting parliamentary rules, but stopped short of writing these
rules into law. Doing so would put additional teeth into the PAYGO rule by
establishing a mechanism that could not be waived without new legislation.
What specific spending cuts would you propose to help balance the
budget?
Politicians often
talk tough on spending without mentioning what programs they would cut. This is
a convenient way to avoid making hard choices. Vague calls to crack down on
"pork" or "waste, fraud and abuse" are not enough to get the job done.
The tax cuts passed since 2001 are set to expire by 2011. Do you
support extension of the expiring tax cuts and, if so, how would you address the
budgetary implications?
Since 2001,
Congress has enacted four tax cut packages with "sunsets" that cause them to
expire by 2011. In light of the deteriorated fiscal outlook and the fact that we
have not taken action to prepare for the costs of the baby boomers’ retirement,
it makes sense to reassess whether any or all of the tax cuts enacted during the
surplus era should be extended. Economists generally acknowledge that tax cuts
do not fully pay for themselves through greater economic growth. Thus, extending
the tax cuts will require Congress to make substantial spending cuts, raise
other taxes or significantly increase the national debt.
How do you propose to keep Medicare from overwhelming the federal
budget?
Medicare costs are
projected to grow faster than the economy, and faster than can be reasonably
supported by the federal budget. Putting Medicare on a financially sustainable
path will require some combination of reductions in services, increased
cost-sharing by beneficiaries, increasing the eligibility age, bringing more
revenues into the system and improving the cost effectiveness of Medicare and
the health care system overall.
What steps would you take to close
Social Security’s long-term funding gap?
Social Security
promises far more in future benefits than it can deliver under current law.
Candidates must confront some tough issues. Finding a cure for the challenges
facing Social Security will require reduced benefits, increased revenues, or
both. Candidates who promise to preserve benefits at the levels promised under
current law should explain where the money will come from to fund these
promises. Likewise, candidates who promise to oppose any tax increases should
explain what changes they would make to restrain the growth of Social Security
costs to stay within current tax levels.
Key Questions Booklet:
http://www.concordcoalition.org/doc/keyquestions/2008-internet.pdf
###
The Concord Coalition is a nonpartisan, grassroots
organization dedicated to balanced federal budgets and generationally
responsible fiscal policy. Former U.S. Senators Warren Rudman (R-NH) and Bob
Kerrey (D-NE) serve as Concord‘s co-chairs and former Secretary of Commerce
Peter Peterson serves as president.
CONTACT:
Jonathan DeWald
(703) 894-6222
jdewald@concordcoalition.org
