Politics 101: Don't talk about offsets on the campaign trail
Expect the candidates to get looser and looser about the 鈥渇iscally responsible鈥� pieces of their policy proposals. Expect them to spell out only the goodies, not how they would pay for the goodies.
Expect the candidates to get looser and looser about the 鈥渇iscally responsible鈥� pieces of their policy proposals. Expect them to spell out only the goodies, not how they would pay for the goodies.
The聽Daily Show segment聽and聽Ruth Marcus鈥� column in today鈥檚 Washington聽Post聽emphasize that, gee, the Romney-Ryan Medicare reform approach鈥搉o matter that the GOP team is still trying to define/refine it鈥搃s not that different from 鈥淥bamacare.鈥澛� As Ruth explains:
So what are the candidates blaming each other about?聽 In essence, it鈥檚 the exact same part of their largely-the-same overall proposals:聽the part that saves money.聽The Democrats demonstrate this by showing Grandma being pushed off a cliff by the Republicans.聽 The Republicans characterize this as the Democrats throwing the $700 billion off the cliff鈥撯�漴obbing鈥� it from the Medicare program (and the very same Grandma!) and 鈥渨asting鈥� that money.
It鈥檚 part 2 of 鈥渄on鈥檛 talk about saving money鈥� lesson on the campaign trail鈥損art 1 being the lesson I鈥檓 afraid Romney got on his tax reform approach once the implied details of a base-broadening offset were spelled out by the Tax Policy Center.聽 My point on that lesson (summarized best in聽my Concord version of the blog post) was that the lesson for Romney聽should聽have been for him to pare back his tax-cutting plans and make any offsets more progressive鈥搑ather than for him to rethink paying for the policy at all.
But any policy talk that honors the inevitable budget constraints鈥搕hat there鈥檚 no such thing as a free tax cut or spending program鈥損aints an easy target for a candidate.聽 The offset or 鈥減ay for鈥� always involves a spending cut or a revenue (tax) increase, at least relative to a not-paid-for baseline, and instead of leading to a healthy debate about the different ways to reform our tax and spending programs in fiscally responsible ways, it leads to attacks on the other side for even suggesting their version of the 鈥渇iscally responsible鈥� part鈥搉o matter how similar it actually is to one鈥檚 own fiscally responsible part!
This is how it鈥檚 going to go through the November election.聽 Expect the candidates to get looser and looser about the 鈥渇iscally responsible鈥� pieces of their policy proposals. Expect them to spell out only the goodies, not how they would pay for the goodies.聽 For voters to be able to see past the rhetoric and understand the real substance of the differences between the two presidential candidates鈥� policy positions, we鈥檙e going to need constant translations from people like Ruth and Jon Stewart, I guess.