ShareThis Page

Budget cut plans push D.C. to edge

| Thursday, Feb. 28, 2013, 12:01 a.m.

What a thrilling week it has been with a phony doomsday in the air. If you aren't in business.

If you are in business, it's just another week of wondering what the government will do next. The suspense never stops. New mischiefs in health care regulation, new penalties for coal, a $9 minimum wage — pour it on, politicians.

Government's zigs and zags have become the big uncertainty for business. Not the fickle marketplace as a whole, nor the weather, the fashions or the flu. But government.

The doom of choice this week has been the budget “sequester,” an across-the-board cut in federal spending. Will it happen, or won't it?

Just a 2.3 percent cut, $85 billion in total.

And this in total spending of $3.5 trillion-odd. But cut that little bit, says the president, and you'll see vast damage. Little children will miss their Head Start. First responders perhaps won't get to fires, floods and crime scenes in time. Up to 750,000 jobs may be lost.

All this from a $23 trim in $1,000 of spending.

Which just proves that no amount of budget-cutting can be tolerated in Washington, the unrivaled capital of government jobs, without the drapery of doomsday being hung.

Famed economist Milton Friedman long ago recommended that government spending be whacked 10 percent. He said Cabinet officers would find the ways to trim the least important programs, priorities and people. Today this would mean $350-odd billion out of a year's outlays. And in a very few years, we'd see budget balance and at least a start in paying down the $17 trillion national debt.

Nothing so ambitious has a chance of happening. But wouldn't it give a boost to business confidence, plant expansions, construction, and hiring, and bolster consumers' and investors' confidence in the dollar? A new age of prosperity might dawn if we'd get a leash on the spending tiger that threatens to chew up American prosperity as we've known it.

True, there is some economic downside to any cut in spending, even by government. The upsides just weigh more.

Yet the White House this past Monday staged a conference call of administration officials to brief media all around the country on “the devastating impact the sequester will have on jobs and middle class families ... if Republicans in Congress fail to compromise to avert the sequester by March 1.”

That's tomorrow. By now, with doom drummed into constituents' ears all week, Republicans already may have caved on the “compromise” — another tax on upper income folks, including many in business.

If so, the GOP will have missed an opportunity — maybe its last — to move the heavy train of government spending back a few inches at least. It's a shame that half the cuts are targeted to national defense, but there is undoubtedly some fat even there.

Other rollbacks are positively tempting. Such as pay and pension levels for federal employees far in excess of private sectors norms. And subsidies for corn-based ethanol that raise the price of food while doing zilch for the environment. A Head Start for needy children wouldn't help nearly as much as a Better Beginning — in two-parent families, which this government perversely discourages. What business person would figure that?

Jack Markowitz is a Thurseday columnist for Trib Total Media. Email

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.