The failure of the “Super Committee” last year to reach a budget deal underscored the underlying wedge in US politics. The distribution of the electorate through most of the post-1945 years has been a dominant centre, slightly to the left or right of centre. This enabled legislative compromises to be reached with relative ease.
But a political tsunami has emerged out of our past in the form of the Tea Party, with its ethos reminiscent of rugged individualism and self-reliance. It has yet to obtain sufficient traction to forge majorities for new legislation but its influence beyond its numerical strength has created an effective veto of new legislation before the current heavily Republican House of Representatives.
The emerging fight over the future of the welfare state, a paradigm without serious political challenge in eight decades, is accentuating the centre’s decline. The welfare state has run up against a brick wall of economic reality and fiscal book-keeping. Congress, having enacted increases in entitlements without visible means of funding them, is on the brink of stalemate. As studies have demonstrated, trying to solve significant budget deficits predominantly by raising taxes has tended to foster decline. Contractions have also occurred where spending was cut as well, but to a far smaller extent.
The only viable long-term solution appears to be a shift in federal entitlements programmes to defined contribution status, but the political problems of such a switch can be seen in state and local governments’ attempt to trim public defined pension plans. Public sector unions have fought mightily to avoid having their pensions shrink, as they have in the private sector.
We now face a true revolution, not so much in the streets but in the fundamental choices we will have to make to secure our fiscal future. Arithmetic demands it. Continue reading »