It had to happen. The disaster unfolding in Greece is just too susceptible to over-simplification not to be seized upon by Republicans looking to go after Medicare and Social Security. First up in Missouri? Why none other than that astute economic thinker, Rep. Billy Long (R-7), who had this to say on the topic:

… . With the events in Greece this week, it is hard not to think about our own debt crisis.

Currently, the U.S. national debt stands near $18.3 trillion. To put that in context, the total size of the U.S. economy is $17.7 trillion. It is frightening to think our nation’s debt outpaces our economic activity; and, even worse, China holds 30 percent of our debt and counting. As the interest we pay on our debt continues to increase, I am concerned we may be on a similar path as Greece, which has debt close to double the size of its economy. That is why my colleagues and I are committed to sound fiscal solutions to curb America’s rising debt.

[…]

Reducing our spending, creating a balanced budget and responsibly continuing deficit reduction are the steps to take to reduce our debt, and I believe we are getting off on the right foot. Our next move should be concerning reforms must focus on Medicare, Social Security and entitlement programs. [Emphasis added.]

This refrain has been sporadically played on the right since 2010 – and none of the predictions of debt-related disaster have been realized. There are a number of reasons why the U.S. is not nor never will be like Greece (for instance, see here, here, or here).

While Long is right about the fact that the ratio of debt to GDP in the U.S. is very high, he, like many other Republican fear-mongers making the same claim, are wrong about the conclusions to be drawn from that fact. Many are still citing past research purporting to show that a high debt-to-GDP ratio damages economic growth. This research has been shown to be incorrect, and, in addition, there are many examples of countries that have a high debt level while enjoying respectable economic growth. One need look no farther than our own economy which in spite of our high debt-to-GDP ratio has also been enjoying sound economic growth.

Of course, one should also bear in mind that high as our debt is, it has shown little increase relative to other developed countries over the past eight years. The debt represents the sum of each yearly deficit and the $18 trillion debt Long cites includes the deficits from the period 2000-2007, when the debt was growing at its fastest rate ever. It includes the cost of the Bush war and the Bush financial implosion in 2008. In the past few years, deficits have been shrinking which helps to constrain the growth of the debt.

But more importantly, if Long seriously wants to cut the deficit and, hence, the debt, he is taking the wrong lesson from Greece and the European Union. Cutting spending hurts; it doesn’t help. As Daniel W. Drezner notes in the Washington Post:

As 2015 unfolds, the U.S. economy continues to rebound and the Eurozone economy continues to… not do that. So you would think that the debate over the merits of austerity would have been settled. After all the United States deployed expansionary fiscal and monetary policies for a longer time than Europe, with a more modest switch back to austerity after 2010. The Eurozone abandoned fiscal stimulus pretty early, the European Central Bank prematurely raised interest rates, and the result is an an economy that is underperforming the Great Depression.

Why in the face of the evidence would any one sincerely interested in the public good want to impose more austerity on the U.S? We seen how the actual austerian experiments have played out and, in spite of European persistence, the picture is not pretty – except, perhaps, for Germany where exports have been enhanced by the currency controls imposed on the rest of Europe.

Finally, Long’s insertion of the Chinese spectre into the argument can only be intended to spike the same fear of national decline and loss of dominance as the Greek comparison, neither of which is justified by the facts. Long is dead wrong about Chinese influence and the imagined threat it poses. He can’t even get the numbers right. China does not hold 30% of our debt. It is the largest foreign investor in U.S. debt, but, overall, only 34% of U.S. debt is held by all international investors together. In fact, a similar amount, 28%, is held by the U.S. government itself.

All of which is to say, Long, like his GOP confrères, is full of it. His spiel represents just one more dishonest way to go after government programs that Republicans have always loathed. Take a complex subject, make it simple, add a few few buzzwords, spin it according to ideology, and presto-bingo, you’ve created a curtain behind which to go after government that works for all its citizens, not just the wealthy big spenders who call the shots for Republicans. Billy Long is, as usual, just regurgitating predigested talking points, but don’t doubt that we’ll be hearing lots of the same type of talk during the coming weeks as GOPers seek to make their vendetta against Social Security, Medicare, and now Obamacare, sound respectable.

Previously: High Broderism: the debt, the debt, it’s the debt…. (November 16, 2012)

From CNN’s election exit polling in Missouri:

Most Important Issue Facing Country

Foreign policy:4%

Deficit:14%

Economy:59%

Health care:21%

Interesting. The deficit came in a distant third.

And the poll numbers nationally?:

The Real Mandate: CAF/Democracy Corps Election Poll 2012

By Democracy Corps/Campaign for America’s Future

November 8, 2012

….voters disagree strongly with the priorities of the elite consensus congealing around the president’s deficit commission co-chairs, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, and his own discussions of a grand bargain with House Speaker John Boehner. Those discussions suggest a deal that trades cuts in Medicare and Social Security for tax reform that lowers rates for individuals and corporations while gaining revenue by closing loopholes – a sort of Romney-lite tax reform.

When it comes to a deficit reduction plan, Americans have clear ideas.

They want tax rates to be raised on the wealthy. 68 percent find a plan that did not raises taxes on the rich “unacceptable.” 70 percent support a plan that raises taxes on the top 2 percent while keeping the taxes of others at the same level. 63 percent would find a plan that continued to tax investors’ income at lower rates than worker’s wages unacceptable. 75 percent would support a plan to create a higher tax bracket for millionaires. 67 percent finds a plan that lowers tax rates on corporations or the rich unacceptable.

They do not want Social Security benefits cut over time. By 62 to 31, they would find a plan that did that unacceptable.

They do not want Medicare payments cut or capped: 79 percent, nearly four out of five, find capping Medicare payments forcing seniors to pay more unacceptable.

By 50 percent to 41 percent, they favor a deficit reduction plan that starts with closing loopholes and raising tax rates at the top, and excludes cuts to Medicare and Social Security over one that closes loopholes but “gets entitlement spending under control, including reducing the growth of Medicare and Social Security.”

The public is very skeptical of the $1.5 trillion in across-the-board cuts in discretionary spending over the next 10 years that Congress has already passed Most Americans do not share the scorn of Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan for poverty programs providing a “hammock” for the lazy.

Seventy-five percent – three-fourths of the country – find a plan unacceptable if it requires deep cuts in domestic programs without protecting programs for infants, poor children, schools and college aid.

Moreover they embrace the president’s argument that we should reduce the deficit and invest in areas vital to the economy at the same time. By 70 percent-27 percent, they support a plan to cut “wasteful spending and abolish special interest tax breaks and subsidies so that we can invest in infrastructure and technology and make sure we support education, Medicare and Social Security which are key to the middle class, over a statement that we have to cut spending seriously and that will require across the board reductions in the size of government….including education, Medicare and Social Security….

Simpson-Bowles. Ah, yes, on the Internets it’s known as the “Cat Food Commission”.

All we have to fear is:

High Broderism – Also frequently seen as merely “Broderism.” A fetishistic attachment to bipartisanship for bipartisanship’s sake; reflexive adherence to false equivalencies, regardless of whether what one side says is patently insane. The result of forty years of believing that Dirty Fucking Hippies may be hiding under your bed. Whereby a center-right pundit, often Broder himself, decrees that bipartisanship is a good thing and can be achieved if only everyone would agree with the center-right pundit. For the last ten years or so, High Broderism has been the shorter version of virtually every op-ed from David Broder.

A press relase today, from State Treasurer Clint Zweifel (D):

For immediate release:

November 19, 2012

[….]

State Treasurer Clint Zweifel joins Campaign to Fix the Debt to urge leaders in Washington to reach bipartisan consensus

State Treasurer Clint Zweifel [….] has joined The Fix the Debt Campaign, a national bipartisan group dedicated to finding a long-term resolution to the current fiscal crisis facing the United States.  Treasurer Zweifel will be chairing the state’s steering committee. Treasurer Zweifel oversees state investments, invests state tax-dollars and ensures Missouri’s Aaa credit score is protected.

“The reality is that the math is simple, it is the politics that are hard,” Treasurer Zweifel said. “And it’s time for Washington to put politics aside. Fifth graders in Missouri can do the math required to fix these problems but it is going to take our politicians getting off the school yard and working together to get things done. This is not a Democrat or Republican problem and there isn’t going to be a Democrat or Republican solution. It’s America’s challenge and our opportunity to show the world why we still continue to lead.”

To learn more about Fix the Debt, you can visit their website http://www.fixthedebt.org.

Uh, oh.

Via Twitter:

Jeff Mazur ‏@jmaz

You a Dem signing onto http://www.fixthedebt.org  agenda? Get ready to explain to key constituencies why you want to “reform” Medicare/Medicaid. 11:14 AM – 19 Nov 12

sethdmichaels @sethdmichaels

“Fix the Debt” is like a doctor you go to when you think you’re having a heart attack but when you come to they’ve given you a facelift. 3:21 PM – 19 Nov 12

State Treasurer Clint Zweifel (D):

Clint Zweifel ‏@ClintZweifel

It’s time to put politics aside, work together for fiscal responsibility & show the world why we still continue to lead. #MOTreas 2:25 PM – 19 Nov 12

The republican version of bipartisanship is that Democrats get to hand them the keys to the store, Democrats get to back the republicans’ truck to the loading dock, Democrats get to load the truck for the republicans, and then the Democrats get to smile and wave while the republicans drive away with the inventory. Almost everyone else then suffers.

Michael Bersin ‏@MBersin

@ClintZweifel That’s easy. Let dubya’s windfall tax cuts for those making $250,000+ a year expire. Invest in public infrastructure not war. 5:13 PM – 19 Nov 12

Michael Bersin ‏@MBersin

@ClintZweifel If we had wanted a cheerleader for the “Cat Food Commission” and High Broderism we would have voted for Cole McNary (r). 5:17 PM – 19 Nov 12

Sean Nicholson ‏@ssnich

All I want for Christmas is some High Broderism 8:24 PM – 19 Nov 12

Michael Bersin @MBersin

@ssnich Or “clean coal” in your stocking. Same difference. 9:48 PM – 19 Nov 12

Tony Messenger should be really, really happy.

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) is having difficulty remembering her republican talking points. Via Twitter:

@RepHartzler Rep. Vicky Hartzler

Looks increasingly likely the Super Committee will fail in its charge to find $1.2 trillion in savings/reforms. Where’s Pres. Obama? AWOL! 1 hour ago

@RepHartzler Rep. Vicky Hartzler

Pres. Obama has been AWOL–preferring to travel the world rather than give leadership to help forge an agreement to save our country! 1 hour ago

All that’s missing is all caps.

Oh, really?:

Lawmakers Trade Blame as Deficit Talks Crumble

By ERIC LIPTON

Published: November 20, 2011

….Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said on “Meet the Press” that President Obama and White House budget officials “were asked to be hands off.”

“The Republicans said, ‘Don’t let Obama come into this, because if he does, it will make it political,’ ” Mr. Kerry said, adding, “They’ve been intimately involved, but carefully so that they didn’t politicize it. I think they did the right thing….”

[emphasis added]

Well, isn’t that interesting?

November 21, 2011 8:35 AM

The right blames Obama for GOP’s debt failure

….Republicans can’t urge Obama to keep his distance, and then blame him when he keeps his distance.

Members of this committee were given a task: strike a deal. Democrats were willing to meet Republicans more than half way; Republicans weren’t willing to compromise. It’s only natural to wonder who’s to blame when there’s a breakdown like this, but holding the White House responsible is deeply foolish.

[emphasis added]

“…deeply foolish…”

We knew that already.  

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) was on Hardball with Chris Matthews last night, talking about the republican party establishment’s threat to force the United States to default on its debt.

Via our good friends at Fired Up!:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Chris Matthews: Welcome back to Hardball. On July twenty-second, just seventeen days from today, lawmakers need to start the machinery to raise the debt ceiling or we could be in an economic disaster. Are Republicans willing to default on United States debt because of intransigence on taxes? Senator Claire McCaskill [D] joins us from Capitol Hill.

Senator McCaskill, what I like about you is you’re normal, you’re a moderate, you’re somewhere near the center, you’re where I would be if I were lucky enough to have the power you do. And I look around me with fanatics. I see fanatics on, mostly on the right, some on the left. It seems to me that they’re quite willing, when I hear them talking, here’s your own colleague, Senator Roy Blunt [R] dismissing the debt ceiling deadline, saying, quote, the deadline is never really a deadline, I don’t think world markets are going to get roiled, and I don’t think our creditors are not going to get paid.

And here’s someone from the far right, [Representative] Michele Bachmann, dismissing the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling. Let’s listen to here now.

Representative Michele Bachmann: Well, first of all, it isn’t true that the government would default on its debt. Because, very simply, the Treasury Secretary can pay the interest on the debt first and then from there we just have to prioritize our spending.

Chris Matthews: This to me is scarey. What’s your view? That these people are willing to go right into Armageddon, not face the warning signs, go right off the cliff, and take this country into Greece in the way the world watches us go down the hill.

Senator Claire McCaskill: Yeah, it’s a real problem. Compromise has become a dirty word. And frankly our country has been the greatest country on the planet because our democracy has learned the art of compromise. And now compromise is something that the two ends of the spectrums don’t want to see happen and we’re gonna suffer for it.

You know, the other thing that’s frustrating about this, Chris, is that I think they are trying to tell the American people that when we raise the debt limit we’re asking for permission to spend more money. That’s not true. All [crosstalk]…

…Chris Matthews: Right.        

Senator Claire McCaskill: …we’re doing is making good on the spending that’s already occurred. This would be like going out and buying a new car, these guys all voted for this spending, they all voted for the things that put us in this deficit position, and now they’re saying the don’t want to pay the bill. It, it’s like they bought a new car and they don’t want to make payments. It is defaulting. And we will default, um, on obligations or government has, whether it’s to people who are getting a Social Security check, or whether it’s to our military pay, or whether it’s to our debt that we have to pay. And all of those things will have serious and significant consequences. People need to quit trying to win elections and start solving the problem.      

Chris Matthews: What seems to me is paper boys were told, you know, buy savings bonds because they’re as good as you can get. And now we’re saying renege, default on savings bonds, the very thing, it’s like a religion to us as kids, now they have this new crazy religion, you can’t raise revenues even when you have higher expenses.

Senator Claire McCaskill: Well, and I think one of the things we’re gonna do this week, which I think I hope will be helpful to people is we’re gonna debate a sense of the Senate that, you know, the median income has, has gone down for most American families over the last several years while last year the CEOs of the top Fortune five hundred companies got a twenty percent pay raise. Last year. [crosstalk]  

Chris Matthews: Well.

Senator Claire McCaskill: A twenty percent pay raise. And all we’re saying is, shouldn’t the millionaires, the multi-millionaires do a little bit to help out here? Can’t we compromise on both ends of the spectrum, do a little bit on revenue, look at some of the means testing we can do in our entitlement programs, come up with a comprehensive package that repre, that represents a good compromise? And, and do what we should do for our kids and our grandkids. And that is, keep America the economic super power that it’s always been in the world.

Chris Matthews: Well, you know, Senator, I heard this weekend at the Aspen ideas festival all these big idea people get together. And the point was made, I’ve never heard it put so bluntly, and Ed Schultz, wait ’til he hears this, and maybe already knows this, my colleague, that the reason we’re not suffering from inflation in this country with all the oil prices going up is the workers are getting squeezed. They’re paying higher prices and they’re not getting wages to catch up with them. They’re the ones the, the middle class working person, the men and women, are the ones paying for inflation by making less real income.

Senator Claire McCaskill: I mean, if you [crosstalk]…      

Chris Matthews: That’s what’s going on.

Senator Claire McCaskill: …that’s exactly what’s going on. And, I mean, I was, I was fascinated by all these Republicans who wouldn’t vote to take away paychecks from the oil companies from taxpayers. Taxpayer subsidies to the most wealthy and successful corporations in the history of the planet. And then they turn around the next week and say, well, subsidies to people who grow corn are terrible. Like, really? Really? This makes no sense. [crosstalk]

Chris Matthews: Um, my problem. Well, here’s my. Senator, there’s one thing we’re gonna hear from our, our friends on the left and that is, fight harder. My question is, the President have any choice between default and defeat? If he stands against the crazies and says, we’re, we’re gonna have to have revenues and they say, no, and then we face default that’s, everybody pays for that in this country. In history we pay. Is there any alternative to default or political defeat by handing the Republicans and the right exactly what they want, just spending cuts, no taxes? [crosstalk] Is there any alternative?        

Senator Claire McCaskill: I think that. I, I think it’s a big mistake if we, um, don’t do what’s right and that is to do a little bit on the tax expenditure side, cleaning up the tax code, taking away some of the goodies from folks who are doing really well and, and at the same time look at some of the means testing that we should have put in place in the first place in Medicare part D. We shouldn’t be buying Warren Buffet’s prescription drugs for gosh sakes, we’re broke. [crosstalk] We can’t afford to buy rich people’s pre
scription drugs.

Chris Matthews: Well, let’s do it.

Senator Claire McCaskill: So I’m gonna, I believe we should hold out for the compromise. I hope the American people agree. There’s nothing wrong with being in the moderate middle if it means you find some common sense solutions.

Chris Matthews: I’m with you Senator. Thank you so much Senator Claire McCaskill, the State of Missouri….

“…And now compromise is something that the two ends of the spectrums don’t want to see happen and we’re gonna suffer for it…”

Uh, it’s not compromise when the right wingnuts won’t even try and the “sensible middle” gives them everything they want.

“…It, it’s like they bought a new car and they don’t want to make payments…”

That’s a start for a decent meme. Did you mention that they’re also batshit crazy?

“…Is there any alternative to default or political defeat by handing the Republicans and the right exactly what they want, just spending cuts, no taxes?…”

Interesting question. You’ve heard of the 2010 election? If you capitulate to the crazies the Democratic Party base will not bother coming out to vote. Why bother?

“…They’re the ones the, the middle class working person, the men and women, are the ones paying for inflation by making less real income…”

It sounds so, well, abstract when multi-millionaires talk about it on cable television.

While digging around on the Web, I came across a couple of blog posts concerning Claire McCaskill. In response to a letter concerning the miscues of Democrats in Congress, McCaskill sent the blogger this response boasting about her wise stewardship of tax dollars – and addressing none of the concerns about which the blogger had contacted McCaskill. This inappropriate, one-note response struck me as a perfect representation of McCaskill’s one-note public persona – the fiscally responsible legislator who, like a thrifty aunt, understands the value of a dollar just as well as any of the good folks back home.

The problem comes when McCaskill confuses the discipline of economics with the ledger book – or, in McCaskill’s case, perhaps, assumes that her constituents lack the vision to see beyond the ledger book. For example, McCaskill has been in the forefront of those so-called moderate Democrats who ballyhoo a simplistic approach to debt and deficit reduction that is designed to play well at home, but is not likely to address any of our real economic problems.

Most recently McCaskill has once again joined Republican Jeff Sessions (Alabama)  in introducing an amendment that would freeze spending for three years. As Pat Garofalo of The Wonk Room notes:

…the notion that a blanket freeze is a good way to reduce deficits is severely misguided. For one thing, it locks in funding without any debate as to whether current levels are appropriate, and it will limit the ability of the Congress to respond to changing demands … . As former Labor Secretary Robert Reich has pointed out, this makes it hard “to do much of anything for the middle class that’s important” going forward.

A freeze removes any sense of prioritization from the budget (building effective programs while eliminating ineffective or duplicative ones), and simply whacks away a chunk of funding across the board. As CAP Senior Fellow Scott Lilly has pointed out, programs that are under the radar, but vital to the nation’s functioning, will likely end up on the short end of a freeze.

It seems as if McCaskill’s ersatz fiscally responsible bad angel is once more leading her astray. Certainly her auditor persona has its good moments – her work on government contracting, which President Obama referenced last Wedensday, comes to mind, as well as her principled stand on earmarks – but she should certainly give the deficit bashing a rest. There are, after all, plenty of Republicans with nothing more constructive to do than to bang on that particular empty drum.

Update:  If you are interested in what a nuanced, as opposed to simplistic take on deficits, spending and role of government, actually looks like, take a look at this set of graphs and accompanying commentary.

Image created by Viktor Voight from the Wikimedia Commons.