The "Fiscal Cliff" Failings Headed For Obama's Signature

The "fiscal cliff" deal is better than the legislatively manufactured automatic alternative.  Rep. Paul Ryan explained his vote in favor of the resolution to the "fiscal cliff" saying that "there are clearly provisions that I oppose. But the question remains: Will the American people be better off if this law passes relative to the alternative? In the final analysis, the answer is undoubtedly yes. I came to Congress to make tough decisions—not to run away from them. Now, we must return our attention to the real problem: out-of-control spending. Washington’s reckless spending drives the debt. And this debt is hurting the economy today. Unless we get at the heart of the problem, Americans will face a debt crisis—one that will threaten our most vulnerable in particular. It is our responsibility to prevent such a crisis.” 

What the deal demonstrates, however, is the wide gap between the two parties, in that the insurmountable differences between them lead to an agreement that actually solved no major issue other than averting a crisis of Washington's own creation. The agreement, which the Senate approved only three minutes after all Senators received it, failed to address the debt ceiling and a possible national default. The package did nothing to address rigid high levels of unemployment (12 million Americans still out of work). The deal in no way fundamentally tames the government’s soaring debt. As even the liberal Washington Post reported (not an op-ed) regarding the law, "The nation’s long-term finances remain in peril, with federal spending projected to rise dramatically as a wave of retiring baby boomers turns to the government for help in paying for ever-more-costly health care" (and in fact the bill increases federal spending by $332 billion over the next ten years). Sequester spending cuts were a can kicked a mere two months down the road to coincide with the debt ceiling debate. Even in reaching a deal, the level of dysfunction of your federal government (no matter your side of the aisle) should be apparent.

What needs to be realized now is that taxes are off the table. The Congress and President went through machinations ending with a down to the wire deal that essentially finally resulted in a bipartisan resolution on taxes. This "fiscal cliff" deal represents the tax compromise, and it must be viewed as such. When the debt ceiling is to be hit in a couple months, the issue can therefore legitimately only be government spending. And on this the Republicans must demand seriousness in confronting the nation's debt crisis.

This is not a matter for debate. It is a reflection of reality. As Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson of the "Simpson-Bowles Commission" reacted to the compromise headed for Obama's signature, “Washington missed this magic moment to do something big to reduce the deficit, reform our tax code, and fix our entitlement programs. We have all known for over a year that this fiscal cliff was coming. In fact Washington politicians set it up to force themselves to seriously deal with our Nation’s long term fiscal problems. Yet even after taking the country to the brink of economic disaster, Washington still could not forge a common sense bipartisan consensus on a plan that stabilizes the debt.” 

------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Rand Paul was one of only 8 to vote against the package in the Senate, and here are a couple excerpts of his Senate floor speech: Tweet