Bipartisan budget glass is (almost) half full
Contrary to a typo in an NPR transcript earlier this week, I do not work for the 鈥�Conquered Coalition.鈥� (LOL. It鈥檚 been corrected since.) We at , like many 鈥渄eficit hawks鈥� who are really more appropriately considered 鈥揑 love it!), haven鈥檛 given up on fiscal responsibility just yet.
Take the recently-reported that鈥檚 been characterized (in a Washington Post print headline) as showing Stories about this poll have tended to emphasize the majority who are opposed to each item in a 鈥減ick one鈥� menu of tough choices: 78 percent opposed to cutting Medicare, 69 percent opposed to cutting Medicaid, 56 percent opposed to cutting defense spending. The only 鈥減ick one鈥� option that a majority (72 percent) supported: 鈥渞aising taxes on incomes over $250,000.鈥� And even that is not as agreeable as it sounds, considering that households with incomes over $250,000 make up only about 2 percent of the population鈥搃.e., you鈥檇 think we could get a little closer to 98 percent support on that one.
But that majority opposition to each of the 鈥渢ough choices鈥� is because respondents were asked to take or leave each of those tough choices as the single strategy for deficit reduction. No one wants to agree to give up something if they think others in society aren鈥檛 going to give up something, too. None of those 鈥減ick one鈥� choices conveyed a notion of shared sacrifice or a 鈥渂alanced鈥� approach.
It鈥檚 the response to the poll question below鈥搘hich does start to get at the possibility of compromise for the common good鈥搕hat deserves more of our attention:
18. Say the national debt could be reduced significantly by raising taxes on all Americans by a small percentage and making small reductions in Medicare and Social Security benefits. Is this something you would support or oppose? Do you support/oppose this strongly or somewhat?
Support
Net: 45
Strongly: 19
Somewhat: 26
Oppose
Net: 53
Somewhat: 13
Strongly: 40
No Opinion: 2
Only slightly over 50 percent oppose this more balanced approach which combines (鈥漵mall鈥�) cuts in the major entitlement programs with 鈥渞aising taxes on all Americans.鈥� This is a glass that is (almost) half full. We haven鈥檛 even begun to make the full sales pitch on this 鈥渟hared sacrifice鈥� plan with more specifics about how Medicare and Social Security can be trimmed while actually strengthening the safety-net parts of those programs (reassuring the liberals), or how revenues can be raised in a progressive manner by reducing 鈥渢ax entitlements鈥� rather than merely jacking up tax rates (reassuring the conservatives).
This gives me hope.
The same poll shows that a majority of Americans (59 percent) already agree that the best way to reduce the deficit is through the only-generally-described 鈥渃辞尘产颈苍补迟颈辞苍鈥� of tax increases and spending cuts鈥搉ot just one or the other. They鈥檙e just not going to agree to a particular example of that more balanced approach without learning more about the details of the proposals and considering how those specific proposals would affect their own families and would mesh with their views of the appropriate roles of government.
This really seems quite doable. We just need to keep talking鈥揳nd listening. It鈥檚 a conversation we鈥檝e only just begun, but recently it seems to me (鈥漡lass half full鈥� person that I am) that we鈥檙e starting to grow up about it.
--------------------------
海角大神 has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.
