|
|
|
| Current Issue |
|
|
| Resources |
|
|
|
Good Intentions, Bad Results
| Article
# : |
10551 |
|
|
Section : |
CURRENT ISSUES
|
| Issue
Date : |
2 / 1986 |
674 Words |
| Author
: |
J.A. Parker is president of the Lincoln Institute for Research
and Education in Washington D.C., and editor of the Lincoln
Review. He was director of President Reagan's transition team
of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission |
It is safe to assume most politicians do not understand economics. The policies they propose and enact speak very eloquently to this point. Even if they did grasp economic principles, it probably still would not matter since the majority of politicians are interested in short term political advantages - even if it means economic trouble in the future.
Political history is replete with examples of government programs that dampen the performance of the economy. Farm price supports, regulatory agencies, and counter-productive welfare programs are just a few examples where the state has sacrificed economic sanity to appease special interests. To make matters worse, it is not unusual to find politicians, having caused economic distortions to begin with, using their own mistakes to justify calls for more government spending and intervention.
No example illustrates the economic folly Congress is capable of better than the debate over next year's bridge. As much as they hated it, Congress passed the Gramm-Rudman deficit reduction bill. While the bill is far from perfect, it does do one thing; it forces Congress to address the issue and make the tough choices they have been running away from.
Unfortunately, with the exception of President Reagan, Representative Jack Kemp (R-New York) and his house Republican allies, and a smattering of other lonely souls, politicians have en masse opted for tax increases to close the budget gap. It is nearly impossible to predict the final outcome, but preliminary indications leave little doubt that controlling spending is not a popular option. The result will depend on whether the President stands firm and enough House Republicans stick to their promise to uphold a Republican veto of any tax increase.
Regardless of the final outcomes, this entire episode demonstrates the following. The Democrats are almost entirely incapable of cutting their ties to the special interest groups. Without so much as a second thought, they will try for more spending and higher taxes. The Republicans, who, if their rhetoric means anything, should know better, are afraid to break with the past and are basically acquiescing to the democratic position. Unaffected by the landslide victories of a president who opposes excessive taxes and wasteful spending, most Republicans, led by Senate Robert Dole (R-Kansas), are locked into a minority party mentality and refuse to offer the alternatives the American people want.
The loser is
...
Read Full Article
Look for this article in Ask.com
|
|
