Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review March 6, 2001 / 11 Adar 5761

Morton Kondracke

JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
James Glassman
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Bush and Congress should prepare for lean years -- WASHINGTON needs somebody to play the Torah's Joseph, as Pharaoh's budget director, made Egypt save during its seven fat years so it could survive the lean years that followed.

To secure the retirement of the baby-boom generation, lawmakers should help workers set up private savings accounts before voting on tax cuts or spending increases.

Both President Bush and Congressional Democrats claim they want to make prudent use of the nation's anticipated $5.6 trillion surplus -- while accusing each other of wasting it. But both sides are thinking only about the next 10 fat years, not the 30-odd lean years to follow.

In the Bible, Joseph foresaw Egypt's future by interpreting Pharaoh's dream, but the United States' future can be foretold, at least partly, by looking at demographics: It will take in the neighborhood of $5 trillion a year to pay retirement benefits in 2040.

The total so-called "unfunded liability" facing the country for retirement programs from 2015 to 2040 -- even assuming no improvement in Medicare benefits -- is about $10 trillion.

Joseph got Egypt to lay aside a fifth of its harvest during the fat years as a reserve for the lean ones, but the United States has only the vaguest notion of how to prepare for the boomers' retirement, much less those of the coming generations.

Both Bush and the Democrats say they will lay aside (in a "lockbox") $2.5 trillion of the surplus derived from Social Security to pay down the national debt.

Bush claims that it's entirely possible to carve a $1.6 trillion tax cut out of the remaining $3.1 trillion non-Social Security surplus while increasing spending for defense, education and medical research and providing a prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients.

Democrats say it isn't possible and that Bush is plunging the country back toward budget deficits. Because both parties want to lockbox the Medicare surplus of $400 billion, they say the available surplus is really $2.7 trillion.

They contend that Bush's tax cut will cost $2 trillion, counting resultant interest payments the government will have to make.

On top of that, Democrats assert, both parties will want to extend various tax credits that are due to expire and will want to prevent middle-income taxpayers from being forced to pay the alternative minimum tax designed for the rich -- all of which will cut the surplus down to $200 billion or $300 billion.

That, they argue, leaves nowhere near enough for a prescription drug benefit, education and defense increases, farm relief and various emergencies that might arise.

The Democrats and centrist groups such as the Concord Coalition make a good case that Bush's tax cut is too large -- especially when it's not clear that the projected surpluses will materialize. On paper, the Democrats have a more prudent alternative.

They would devote $900 billion each to tax cuts, new spending and funding to pay down some of the $3.2 trillion national debt faster than can be done using Social Security and Medicare surpluses alone.

The problem is, the $900 billion Democrats want to devote to paying down the debt almost certainly would get spent on some program or other unless it is specifically set aside for "the lean years."

Bush suggested again Tuesday night that he would try to meet the long-term retirement burden by reforming Social Security, allowing each younger worker to invest part of his or her taxes in private savings accounts. This strategy would allow workers to earn higher interest on their money than Social Security would reap, thereby lightening the burden their children will bear in supporting their retirements.

The problem is, it will cost an estimated $1 trillion to set up private accounts -- money also needed to support current retirees.

In a new departure, Bush said some of this money would be available because it's not possible to fully pay down the national debt; therefore, some Social Security surplus money could be used for that purpose.

However, the estimated $500 billion he's targeting won't be sufficient to cover the cost. Before spending or tax-cutting away the "fat years'" surplus, there ought to be an adequate set-aside for the lean ones.

If there is a Joseph around Washington now, the closest to it is Bob Bixby, head of the Concord Coalition, who recommends using $1 trillion of the $2.5 trillion Social Security surplus to finance private accounts and up to $2 trillion of the non-Social Security surplus to pay down the debt.

"You can't do a big tax cut, Social Security savings accounts and big-time debt reduction simultaneously," he said. "One has to be scaled back, and Bush has chosen to scale back private savings accounts for now."

But those accounts could help increase the country's plummeting personal savings rate -- another protection against the lean years to come.

"Bush is missing the opportunity to use the bully pulpit to be the baby-boom savior and use today's prosperity to fund tomorrow's obligations," Bixby told me.

Bush is a regular Bible reader. For budget advice, he should turn to Genesis, Chapter 41.

JWR contributor Morton Kondracke is executive editor of Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill. Send your comments by clicking here.


03/01/01: Bush needs group to promote ideas in Black America
02/26/01: Bush should talk about long-term budget challenges
02/22/01: AARP's agenda at odds with Bush priorities
02/20/01: When will Dems finally say Clinton is unfit leader?
02/14/01: McCain won't run against Bush again, just differ on issues
02/12/01: Is Joe Lieberman tilting left toward 2004?
02/07/01: The controversy starts: Bush orders HHS study of fetal, stem cell issues
02/05/01: Dems move toward bush on taxes, but ...
02/01/01: Bush should be open with press
01/30/01: Bush Should go for broke early on education
01/23/01: Clinton ain't going away, folks
01/19/01: Bush should try for legacy as 'Great Reconciler'
01/16/01: Left-Center Rift Re-emerges For Democratic Leaders
01/12/01: Clinton doing Bush no favors in Mideast
01/09/01: Bush and Democrats can deal
12/14/00: Will Daschle make it his business to get along with President Bush?
12/08/00: GOP is in danger of ruining record on medical research
11/27/00: Some fascinating stories about how and why people voted
11/22/00: GOP Survived health bullets, but one is left
11/20/00: Can next president and Hill deal?
11/15/00: With nation split, leaders must reach across party divide
11/07/00: The Envelope, Please:Bush Beats Gore, GOP Holds Hill
11/03/00: Parties appeal to two 'gospels'
11/01/00: Lurking in the shadows
10/26/00: What's Gore's Social Security plan?
10/18/00: While Bush, Gore debate surplus, Congress spends it
10/16/00: Two debates leave lots of questions
10/03/00: What questions should be debated?
09/28/00: Gore and Bush should prepare to lead
09/19/00: Bush let values issue slip away
08/25/00: Gore hands center to Bush
08/22/00: AlGore, look to future, not to Bubba
08/08/00: 2000 race could leave high road for low
08/03/00: Convention must point Bush to center
08/01/00: GOP Readies 'Debt Lockbox' As 2000 Strategy
07/27/00: Cheney adds heft to GOP ticket
07/25/00: Foreign, Defense Policy Deserves Full 2000 Debate
07/20/00: Truman Show: Gore Replays 1948, But Bush Isn't Dewey
07/18/00: Bush Must Fight Gore's Drug Plan As 'Bad Medicine'
07/13/00: Mexico's Election Supports U.S. Action On NAFTA, Bailout
07/10/00: Abortion is good for something --- just ask AlGore
07/06/00: Meet Steve Ricchetti, Bubba's secret weapon
06/30/00: AlGore is down, but is he out?
06/27/00: Social programs caught in election-year game of one-up
06/22/00: Congress Is Near Flunking a Test On School Reform
06/16/00: Doting on the grandparents
06/13/00: On Stem Cells, Bush Has Wrong Pro-Life Stance
06/08/00: Has Gore Caught Bush?
05/26/00: PNTR Vote Could Tell Which Party Fits 'New Economy'
05/23/00: The secret to winning the election: Economic programs
05/18/00: Gore should regroup
05/16/00: McCain's Support Is Tepid, But Lets Bush Focus on Gore
05/11/00: Voters need wonk training
05/09/00: Bush Could Score With Charge That Gore's Too Partisan
04/28/00: Reno's force aids Clinton, not Elian
04/25/00: Should Clinton be indicted?
04/24/00: Can Gore win on Bush tax cuts?
04/18/00: Levin's 'bridge' key to China trade?
04/11/00: Congress, U.S. Voters Still Aren't Ready For Campaign Reform
04/06/00: Bush, Gore Silent As Popular Culture Gets Ever Coarser
03/30/00: Is 2000 Like 1948, 1976 or 1960? Or Is This Unparalleled?
03/28/00: Will Bush, Gore Go for a Better Way To Pick Nominees?
03/23/00: Medicare cutbacks bleed hospitals
03/20/00: Chances Improve That China Trade Will Pass Congress
03/16/00: Lieberman as veep would help Gore
03/14/00: Can Bush, McCain Unite to Beat Gore?
03/09/00: Can GOP Forge Unity After Nasty McCain-Bush Race?
03/07/00: What accounts for McCain's excesses?
03/02/00: 'Debate' Proved Gore Is This Year's Best Gut-Fighter
02/29/00: Surprises! The 2000 GOP race is full of it
02/25/00: Voters want centrist in White House
02/23/00: Gore would hit McCain's record
02/15/00: Will negativity hurt McCain in S.C.?
02/10/00: How hard should Bush hit McCain?
02/08/00: Bush must retool his entire campaign
01/27/00: Could Gore beat Bush as Truman beat Dewey?
01/20/00: Big New Surplus Estimates Could Alter 2000 Politics
12/21/99: Bush improves, everyone panders
12/16/99: Prospects improve for campaign reform
12/14/99: Riots raise free trade as 2000 issue
12/10/99: Gore won GOP 'debate' in N.H.
12/07/99: Election pits Bush cuts vs. Medicare boost
12/03/99: Can race be a constructive issue in 2000?
11/19/99: White House race may be best in decades
11/16/99: Where is Bush on health care fight?
11/11/99: Will TV stop profiteering from politics?
11/09/99: Is GOP isolationist, or just partisan?
11/04/99: Gore, Bradley Run Opposite Races On Style, Substance
11/01/99: GOP, Clinton could reach deal swiftly
10/27/99: Bush to fight 'culture wars' -- positively
10/21/99: Porter, Mack: heroes on medical research
10/19/99: Gore scores among party big shots, but polls go South
10/14/99: Bush critiques could help GOP Congress
10/12/99: Congress can save health care from ruin
10/07/99: Will gun-control cause the GOP to shoot itself in the foot?
10/05/99: Gore moves: Desperate but necessary
10/01/99: Fox, Armstrong make case for NIH
09/28/99: Dems' race brightens Bush's chances
09/23/99: East Timor deflates `Clinton Doctrine'
09/21/99: Buchanan v. Bush? Yeah right
09/17/99: Candidates turn attention to poverty
09/15/99: Bush's education problem
09/09/99: Budget makes 2000 an `issues' election
09/07/99:Airport rage increases, with good reason
09/02/99: U.S. future up for grabs in 2000
08/31/99: U.S. Capitol needs visitor's center -- soon
08/24/99: Will 2000 be the year of the foreign crisis?
08/19/99: Neither party has upper hand for '99
08/17/99: Ford gets freedom medal one month early
08/12/99: There's time to catch Bush, say Gore aides
08/10/99: Rudy, Hillary try much-needed makeovers
08/09/99: GOP must launch new probe of Chinagate
08/02/99: Pols blow fiscal smoke on budget surplus
08/02/99: One campaign reform should pass: disclosure
07/27/99: Gore leads Bush in policy proposals

©1999, NEA