Some truly bizarre logic from the man President Obama picked to manage the Federal Budget:
During an economic downturn, one wants to allow the deficit to increase, so deficit reduction should be focused on the out-years – after the economy has recovered. That said, the out-year deficits hover in the range of 4 percent of GDP, which is higher than desirable. Getting the out-year deficit under control is a top priority of the Administration.
We are in the midst of the policy process surrounding the FY 2011 budget, and that process will include proposals to put the nation back on a fiscally sustainable path. In the meantime, we have to stop making these longer-term deficits worse – which is why the Administration supports statutory pay-as-you-go legislation, so that any new tax or entitlement initiatives are fully paid for. (If pay-go rules had been followed over the past eight years, the projected deficit would be $5 trillion lower over the next decade.)
In addition to avoiding making the problem any worse, we need to address the key driver of our long-term deficits: health care costs. The federal government simply cannot be put on a fiscally sustainable path without slowing the rate of health care cost growth in the long run. That is why the Administration is insistent that health care reform not only be deficit neutral over the next ten years, but also incorporate changes that will help reduce the deficit thereafter.
The only problem is that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has determined that there would be no cost savings from the health care reform package that Congress is considering, and that it would add at least a quarter trillion dollars to the deficit over the next ten years. So, essentially, Orszag is arguing that we need to fight the deficit by spending more money.
Yea, that’s gonna work.
