I have noted it again and again: you cut taxes, revenue increases, and the deficit goes down. The latest numbers on the deficit show that it has been cut more than in half in the last three years. Because of tax cuts that have spurred the economy, revenues continue to set records. At this rate we can expect a balanced budget within two or three years, assuming Congress holds the line on spending. Go here for a chart developed by the White House showing graphically what has occurred in the last four years.
This is why sustaining Pres. Bush's veto of SCHIPs legislation is so important. Let it be clear: Pres. Bush favors increasing spending on this children's health insurance program by 20%. But that apparently is not enough for congressional Democrats (and some Republicans). To maintain fiscal integrity, we have to be able to say "no" to big new spending programs. The Wall Street Journal has it right:
The Democratic position is clear: Expand a government program and all will be cured. Mr. Bush's position recognizes that a subsidy like Schip is necessary is some cases because of government mandates and overregulation. Congress and the states consistently enact health-care policies that make insurance coverage more expensive, and then they wonder why people have trouble paying for it.
In a more rational world, liberals would embrace the health-care tax reforms that Mr. Bush advocates. The employer-based insurance tax deduction is a wealth transfer to those who need it least--the most affluent, with the most gold-plated plans. It launders health dollars through a third-party bureaucracy that encourages people to spend, reducing access and raising prices for the uninsured. On equity grounds alone, Democrats should support changing these incentives.
That they don't, or won't, suggests ulterior political motives, and that's where Schip comes in. All Democratic "universal" health-care plans combine more government subsidies with more coverage mandates. Today's Schip expansion is the down payment for 2009, when they want to extend it well into the middle class. The fact that there are better, and more economic, policies to cover more people is less important than getting ever more Americans on the government health care tab.
Recent Comments