A Time for Leadership

March 11th is not just a precursor to the day of Irish pride; it is also the second month anniversary of the Republican Party taking control of the House of Representatives with a decisive majority as well as gaining a stronger minority in the Senate. And yet another commemoration is due to be mentioned here. Despite the railing on of most candidates on cutting the budget and instating tough measures to ensure everlasting fiscal discipline, the GOP has already began falling into the pattern established during the 1990s, when it swept to power following a wave of anger against President William Clinton.

(Photo credit is to Little Miss Attila Blog))

Thus far the Republican proposals for debt reduction have been weak at best. With a paltry 9 billion currently on the table, the figures go nowhere near the 61 billion promised by Majority Leader Eric Cantor, or the 500 billion considered by Senator Rand Paul. The leadership has argued that these menial deductions are the only way to prevent a government shutdown, yet some might try and consider if this truly is the case. All of the funds which have been set on the table for elimination tend to focus themselves heavily in the extended services areas of the national budget; excess spending which does not actually begin to dent the larger picture. In order to actually reach a federal cease of operations the GOP would need to cut in far deeper than their preliminary agenda states, and therefore the frozen condition of their ranks is irrational from all angles.

Currently the Democrats hold the Senate, yet this is not a time to be playing coy about the responsibilities of the lower house and its new leadership. If the left-wing refuses to cooperate, then the GOP should allow the government to shutdown temporarily in order to show the extent of Harry Reid's simple follies with the lives of the American people. Continuing this game of minor adjustments will only lead to the mounting problem of solidifying enough support in the long run to keep the reformers in office and their mission alive.

Speaker Boehner has made the rather flimsy argument that only the smaller cuts will garner Democratic backing in the upper house, yet this point is moot considering how easily they will (as they have done before) sway once the pressure valve is activated. In sampling, Barack Obama's strong personal case against the extension of tax cuts became nothing after he realized the standing unlikelihood of his success. So if the Democrats insist on blocking the larger deficit reduction bills, they should be brought out in the public over this betrayal of common sense, providing coverage with a strong probability of sinking their future electoral endeavors.

Personal sacrifice is never something that the people of America readily and happily embrace, but even the most adamant about protecting their immediate prosperity must eventually come to understand that the current levels of debt are unsustainable, making prudent fiscal reactions a definitive cornerstone to national recovery, even if this means changes to the federal retirement system. Rather than voting for reformers and then complaining about the drastic measures they provide, Americans should be willing to make a decision to give away part of their individual well-being for the benefit of future generations. The burden may be heavier than most ideal, yet the outcome is better long-term.

Republicans now have only two possible outcomes to their efforts: honest success or political failure. The latter has been tried time and again to almost uniformly inadequate results, and so only the first remains viable. History is watching their choices in this troubled era, and one can only hope they do not cave to the status quo along the way.



Jason O'Grady

National Alliance Vice President for Economic Policy