Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Bank Failures Warn of Deeper Economic ProblemsDuring the Great Recession, a whopping 0.014 percent of banks were closed by the FDIC.

Remote Work Through the Eyes of Three 20-SomethingsRemote work is here to stay.

Remote Work and Labor MarketsThere are more remote workers today than there are immigrants in the U.S.

The Amish in IndianaIt is hard not to draw similarities between the Amish and newer immigrant groups.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 228
economics 176
education 146
economic development 144
state and local government 124
taxes 122
finance 108
recession 100
budget and spending 100
indiana 99
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

January 21, 2013

Leadership and the Government Shutdown

We appear to be headed for a government shutdown as our leaders in D.C. find themselves at an impasse on the largest question facing the nation—how to cut spending. So, it might be useful to understand what this is all about and what it might mean.

As a gentle reminder, it is the U.S. Congress who authorizes taxes and spending. Beginning in the Wilson Administration, Congress set a debt ceiling, ironically to permit more flexible spending using World War I. That limit is raised routinely to accommodate spending growth between budgets. The problem today is that we have not had a new federal budget since April 2009. Each year, the deficit increases by a trillion dollars or so, and Congressional Republicans rightly look to the debt ceiling as a tool for forcing a budget negotiation.

However, the president does not want to negotiate on the debt ceiling. Having dispatched the fiscal cliff with a tax increase sufficient to slow the economy, without the mollifying benefit of the much needed structural changes, he isolated future talks to budget cuts. This now begins to look like a mistake, since the transparency of a genuine budget debate will reveal just how unsustainable our spending has become. False metaphors and demagoguery obscure this reality, which is why we have lots of name calling and no real budget debate.

Despite the enormity of our annual deficit, it is not the size that is the real problem; it is how we have been spending that really endangers us. Scrutinizing the composition of this federal budget will be an uncomfortable affair. Had we spent wantonly on a few durable things, the past four years without a budget might be forgiven. But much spending growth has gone to programs that remove the incentives that encourage economic growth. The automatic spending increases have largely gone toward income support for those who are not working, toward a huge expansion of social programs, toward a dubious set of business giveaways and toward defense spending growth. Only the latter represents even a small potential investment in our future, but I'd bet against it.

What a budget debate will lay clear are two angry facts. The first is that we are not really investing in a future. Our budget is one of maintaining current consumption, not readying ourselves for a difficult future. Second, the level of taxes Americans now pay cannot support this. The January 1st deal only closed 5 percent of the deficit. If we are to have a bigger government, the middle class best prepare for a huge tax increase.

I think all of this is a sign of faltering leadership by the president. This might make me appear partisan, so don’t take my word on the matter. Senator Barack Obama himself opined on the matter on the senate floor in 2006: “Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem. The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills.”

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/659/leadership-and-the-government-shutdown

Tags: law and public policy, bailout and debt, budget and spending, obama administration, taxes, budget and spending, leadership, bailout and debt


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Hicks earned doctoral and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Tennessee and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Virginia Military Institute. He has authored two books and more than 60 scholarly works focusing on state and local public policy, including tax and expenditure policy and the impact of Wal-Mart on local economies.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close