Despite decades of repeated failure, President Obama and Congress continue to promote the myth that government can spend its way out of recession. Heritage Foundation economic policy expert Brian Riedl dispels the stimulus myth, lays out the evidence that government spending does not end recessions--and presents the evidence for what does end recessions. Hint: It's not another "stimulus package."
President Obama's third stimulus plan, presented as a "jobs plan," relies heavily on government infrastructure spending, one of the least effective components of the previous stimulus plan, and is far less likely to stimulate the economy than it is to stimulate government expansion and the federal deficit, leading to higher taxes on Americans who will receive little in return.
The recession and excessive spending have caused the debt held by the public to grow sharply to 56‰ of the economy, topping the historical average of 36‰. To make matters worse, entitlement programs will double in size over the next few decades and cause the national debt to reach 320‰ of the economy.
Investors and job creators around the world have gravitated to the U.S. because America was a place where taxes and regulations fostered competitiveness, transparency, and accountability. The way to create jobs is therefore not through massive new government spending, new bureaucracies, or more debt, but rather by pursuing solutions that are based on time-honored principles proven to create jobs and, ultimately, economic prosperity in America.
In an attempt to reform the financial industry, Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) and the Obama Administration have proposed new regulatory measures that would hurt consumers, increase the likelihood of future government bailouts and interventions, and do little to address the real problems in the financial industry.
The unemployment rate in America jumped from 4.9 percent in late 2007 to 10 percent in November this year. The conventional wisdom that unemployment is rising because more people are losing their jobs is only partly true. Job-loss rates have increased, but the largest force driving unemployment is the sharp drop in private-sector job creation. The massive stimulus bill championed by President Obama did nothing to "create or save" millions of jobs. Any "jobs bill" that relies on government spending without improving the investment and entrepreneurship climate will fail.
Today's jobs numbers, released the day after the White House jobs summit, show that Christmas has come early for many workers. However, as long as entrepreneurial activity remains low, unemployment will remain high.
One day after the White House jobs summit admitted that the President's policies are not working, the Department of Labor's monthly jobs report added the exclamation point.
Both the House health care reform bill (H.R. 3200) and the bill authored by Senator Baucus would increase government spending by hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, even after assuming massive "savings" from cutting waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid. If lawmakers can easily cut nearly $1 trillion in waste from Medicare and Medicaid over the next 20 years, they should do so to reduce Medicare's $36 trillion unfunded obligation, not to fund massive new health care benefits.
President Obama's budget will likely produce $13 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years--nearly $4 trillion more than forecast. The White House figures are based on unrealistic estimates of discretionary spending, interest payments, and interest rates. The White House also used budget gimmicks to hide the full cost of certain entitlements and failed to account for the full costs of cap-and-trade energy legislation and health care reform.
The OMB's new budget spending estimates are alarming and absolutely unsustainable-and are the true cause of these appalling levels of deficit and debt.
Spending and deficits are surging at a pace not seen since World War II. Washington will spend $33,932 per household in 2009--$8,000 per household more than last year. While much of this spending is a temporary result of the recession and financial crisis, President Obama's 2010 budget would replace this temporary spending with permanent new programs.
The most striking part of the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government is not the balance sheets showing total assets of $2 trillion dwarfed by total liabilities of $12 trillion. Rather, it is the Statements of Social Insurance, which show $43 trillion in excess future expenditures over future revenues for Social Security and Medicare.
The Senate health insurance premium tax would impose new costs on Americans who already have coverage while deferring for years the even larger amounts that Congress proposes to spend subsidizing those without coverage. Through either Medicare Advantage or Medigap, seniors would pay approximately 17 percent of the new premium tax: the second largest share after workers in small business, who would pay 54 percent.
Congress should stick with current policy and permanently repeal the death tax once and for all. Abolition of this harmful tax will help spur economic recovery, put unemployed Americans back to work and increase the long-term growth potential of the economy.
Congress is proposing a surtax on high-income individuals to help pay for health care reform that would burden the economy and slow its recovery from the recession.
Congress should repeal the estate tax once and for all to remove an unfair burden from the backs of American family-owned businesses and their workers.
The Pelosi health care plan relies on a large surtax that would gradually encompass all American taxpayers, much like the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax does.
The Joint Tax Committee recently shed important new light on the proposed "Cadillac excise tax" contained in the Senate Finance Committee’s health care bill.
The Senate health care bill would impose $406.2 billion in new taxes; cost $2.5 trillion over the first 10 years; stifle patient choice by transferring most decision-making authority to Washington; and produce the greatest concentration of political and economic power over a sector of the U.S. economy in our history. Americans want and need health reform, but the Senate bill is clearly not what they have in mind.
If Congress and the President choose to empower an independent commission to tackle this immense problem, they must give it the authority to do it right.
Key assumptions in CBO's cost estimate of the Senate health care bill--especially the viability of the so-called "firewall"--will never hold up over time.
An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party is literally unprecedented, not just in scope but in kind, and unconstitutional either as a matter of first principles or under any reasonable reading of judicial precedents.
An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party is literally unprecedented, not just in scope but in kind, and unconstitutional either as a matter of first principles or under any reasonable reading of judicial precedents.
The Senate health insurance premium tax would impose new costs on Americans who already have coverage while deferring for years the even larger amounts that Congress proposes to spend subsidizing those without coverage. Through either Medicare Advantage or Medigap, seniors would pay approximately 17 percent of the new premium tax: the second largest share after workers in small business, who would pay 54 percent.
The net result of the Senate health care bill would be higher unemployment for low- and moderate-income families and higher health insurance costs for their co-workers.