In the real world, cuts on the scale envisioned by Mr. Romney will prove politically untenable, which would force a President Romney to rethink his agenda.But as a statement of intent, it’s Mr. Romney — not Mr. Ryan — who has produced the budget that would more dramatically reduce the services offered by government, and in ways that would shock and outrage most Americans. We can only hope that Mr. Obama will draw those contrasts clearly in the debate. ...NYT
Steven Rattner, a former Treasury Department counselor at Treasury, has some harsh words for Mitt Romney's budget -- a budget which is at considerable distance from that of Paul Ryan. And it's up to President Obama to make an issue of what Romney is really planning to do. As Rattner puts it, Romney is the real radical. And his vagueness about the actual budget he's proposing is keeping the truth from the American public.
Here's what we have to face:
Mr. Romney is calling for a huge increase in defense spending — roughly $2 trillion more over the next decade than Mr. Ryan wants to spend, which is only $400 billion above Mr. Obama’s budget — even though the military is not asking for such an increase. Such an increase would force giant reductions, about 40 percent, in everything that’s left....NYT
Okay. A defense increase even the Pentagon doesn't want. How will we pay for that unwanted increase? With huge cuts in essential areas.
“Everything else” isn’t some catchall of small items, like feeding Big Bird. We’re talking about a vast array of programs including civilian and military pensions, food stamps, unemployment and disability compensation, the earned income and child tax credits, family support and nutrition, K-12 education, transportation, public safety and disaster relief. And on and on.
All told, Mr. Romney would allocate $6.9 trillion for these items, compared with the $9.3 trillion proposed by his own running mate (and Mr. Obama’s $12 trillion, which itself represents a 9 percent reduction from current levels, after adjusting for inflation).
No doubt some of what is buried within “other mandatory and nondefense discretionary spending” can be eliminated. Perhaps Americans won’t miss a few national parks or the space program.
But also nestled within this category are critical outlays for investments in infrastructure and research. ...NYT
Eating, as they say, the seed corn. Actually, it reminds me of Romney's relationship with Monsanto, the company that mucked with our seed corn. In so many policies coming from the radical right, value is taken from the public sector and turned over to the private sector.
