Failure of Courage in Budget Impasse? : Both sides hint at long delays in making tough decisions

Deja vu--another budget impasse between President Clinton and congressional Republicans. Ah, but this time both sides are dangling the prospect of ducking the tough budget decisions altogether and making the November elections a referendum on their differing philosophies of government. The country would operate on a make-do basis while our elected officials use the budget stalemate as political fodder.

This cynical approach to governance is not likely to endear voters come November. They sent their representatives to Washington with the expectation that they could and would make difficult decisions. Failure to craft a compromise budget is no distinction to be worn proudly on the campaign trail. A cop-out is a cop-out, whatever the philosophical disagreements on how to balance the budget in seven years.

The president and the GOP have been unable to come together on the scope of cuts, particularly in areas like Medicare and Medicaid and government spending on educational and environmental programs. The Republicans prefer more drastic cutbacks in all these programs than the president, who, while championing the middle-class issue of Medicare, is aware of the need to slow the growth of this entitlement program for seniors.

Their quarrel is better focused now that they both are using data from the Congressional Budget Office. The differences are a matter of priorities. The seven-year plan for a balanced budget is meant to be just a framework. In practice, budgets are reworked by Congress and the president on an annual basis, and it is unrealistic to expect economic assumptions and projections made now to be valid in a year or two. The focus should be on gradual but sure change in how Washington spends money. That means creating minimal disruptions to important programs of the social safety net while setting them on a clear course for reform. Policy discussions and decisions should not be held hostage to budget ledgers.

The consensus on deficit reduction should logically lead to the question of whether tax cuts are prudent now. Delaying them would mean fewer program reductions to offset the lost revenue. Meanwhile, the government could save billions by correcting the consumer price index, which is widely considered to be overstated as much as a full percentage point. The CPI is the basis for cost-of-living increases for the tens of millions who get Social Security payments and other government pension checks each month. Tax cut delay and CPI adjustment--both worth billions--would go a long way toward closing the gap between the budget proposals.

As it is now, with no budget at hand, there could be another partial government shutdown on Jan. 26. Also looking Washington in the eye is the need to raise the $4.9-trillion federal debt ceiling, which will allow the Treasury to borrow to finance necessary spending. Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin said he can manage until mid-February, but no later, without new borrowing.

If Washington must resort to the practice of continuing resolutions instead of a regular budget to keep the government running, deep cuts can be expected in many programs. Others would simply fall into limbo. Is this any way to run a country? No. And it is hurting all of us every day. Speaker Newt Gingrich with copy of budget.