Thank the Tea Party!

Ozombies be Damned


Deficit Is Down, So Thank The Tea Party

By STEPHEN MOORE
Posted 05:46 PM ET


American history has been profoundly shaped by citizen-driven grass-roots movements that spontaneously combust into seismic political change.

This is the story of the Founding Fathers, the abolitionists, the progressives, the civil-rights movement, the 1970s tax revolt and ... it's time to add to that list the oft-maligned tea party movement.

We don't fully recognize the earthquake change brought about by these millions of military veterans, housewives, nurses, schoolteachers, construction workers, senior citizens, investment bankers and clergy who saw the recklessness and immorality of debt, redistribution, Washington waste, federal bailouts and ObamaCare.

Nancy Pelosi couldn't have gotten it more wrong when she snorted that this was an artificial "astroturf" movement controlled by the Koch brothers and the Republican National Committee.

In reality, this was a local and organic movement of mostly political neophytes.

Their tactics and goals were sometimes politically naive and a few times counterproductive. But I was on the Washington Mall on 9/12 when at least a half-million gathered to express their rage against a government that had come unhinged. Their common bond was a healthy contempt for the centralized power, arrogance,ignorance and greed of the privileged class in Washington.

The tea partiers didn't like the policies of George W. Bush much more than those of Barack Obama. This was never partisan, though the anger was directed at the party in power — the Obama Democrats.

What did they accomplish? That question was answered in part by the latest government report on the budget and the debt.

The Congressional Budget Office reports that the budget deficit this year is likely to be at or below $400 billion. That's still way too high but near a $1 trillion gigantic improvement from when the tea party lifted off. As a share of GDP, federal deficits have tumbled from nearly 10% to just under 3%.

It's not a stretch to say that what brought about this abrupt change of fiscal course was the tea party movement that swept fiscal conservatives into power in the House of Representatives — and hundreds more at the state and local level.

And what a difference those newcomers made. Before the 2010 elections the federal budget was expected to hit $4 trillion by 2016. Instead — thanks to budget caps and the sequester — annual outlays, which peaked at $3.598 trillion in fiscal 2011, fell to $3.5 trillion in 2012 and $3.45 trillion in 2013.

This was the first time since the end of the Korean War that federal spending dropped for two consecutive years. This year, spending will rise, but only by 2%, not the double-digit-percentage hikes President Obama has sought.

By my calculations, the tea party has helped reduce the debt level from what it would have been by more than $1 trillion in three years.

OK, yes, the bad news is that due to a rotten budget deal last year — which suspended the caps for a year and then raised them in the future — federal spending will start climbing again next year at pre-tea party rates. It's time to start holding both parties' feet to the fire again.

Another underappreciated triumph was the sequester — the across-the-board cuts, which saved about $80 billion in 2013. The cuts in defense programs were tough, but the domestic cuts were easily absorbed, notwithstanding the moans from government officials and attempts by the White House to scare the public.

(Remember the shutdown of the air-traffic-control towers and the threats to food safety inspections?)

Ironically, the tea party may have saved Obama in 2012. Had it not been for the more fiscal conservative turn in 2011, the economy may have slid into another financial meltdown and Obama would have lost his re-election bid. The spending discipline he fought against — and even closed the government to stop — then became part of his ongoing campaign pitch.

We are not out of the woods yet fiscally, and the deficits may start to turn up again thanks to runaway entitlements that Obama won't touch.

Another worry is that Republicans may flinch again and suspend the hard-fought caps next year so they can continue spending. Already some Republican appropriators are joining with Democrats to call for suspending the budget reforms that ended earmarks for Bridge to Nowhere-type projects.

But for now, the budget is in much better shape than it was three years ago. We aren't staring into the financial abyss. Obama says he deserves the credit. It actually goes to the millions of Americans who rose up and shouted:

"We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore."

And then they voted the bums out. Thank God that they arrived just in time. Rather than ridiculing these 21st-century patriots, maybe Washington and the media should say "Thank you and keep it up."

• Moore is chief economist at the Heritage Foundation.



Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...#ixzz31vvVlY2C
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

Amazing! The Heritage Foundation nuts despite fact take credit--but oddly don't even comment on who has or has not been hurt in the process. How noble of them.

Amazing! The Heritage Foundation nuts despite fact take credit--but oddly don't even comment on who has or has not been hurt in the process. How noble of them. Originally Posted by Old-T

Oh Jesus. Who's been hurt? The mean ol' government isn't increasing spending enough.

Ask yourself this, OldLib. Who is hurt when the economy collapses under a mountain of debt?

Good Lord.

COG, You miss my point. I agree the debt and spending need to come down. But I also don't look at the "solution" as a mathematical equation or a game. I see real people who are being asked to contribute a disproportionate about to the cure.

Who has been hurt? Lots of people. Just situations where I personally know people:
--VA treatment cut because of budget cuts
--Military career enlisted folks shoved out with little to no notice for budget cuts
--PEL grants stopped for kids
--Clinics closed so now the nearest one is almost a 2 hour drive away
--Housing subsidies stopped or drastically cut mid-lease
--Teachers who haven't had a raise in 4 years and who now qualify for food stamps
--Young enlisted men and women who are now "being volunteered" for two twelve hour guard gate duty shifts a week on top of their normal 45-55 hour week because funds were cut for the hired guard gate security positions
--Families who have not been able to drive to within 3/4 of a mile of their home because the DOT funds were cut and the bridge that washed out in 2012 hasn't been fixed
--A single mom & 2 kids who lost their home because their rent subsidy was stopped

I am sure there are many more.

I am NOT saying some of these programs shouldn't go away--some should. Or be revamped. Better yet, some should never have been started. But once they were started I am definitely opposed to the abrupt cut-off as has happened in many cases. It hurts precisely the people who have been trying to do the right things, plan ahead, play by the rules they didn't make, etc. If we collectively told them "this is how the world will work", and they believed "us", then I feel we own them a graceful withdrawal. It is the same reason I am for the end to home mortgage tax deduction, but I believe it is very unjust to stop it cold turkey for people who used the deduction as part of the calculation that they could afford a house.

The US economy WOULD probably be better in the long run if we cut these off cold, but that is the "right" answer only in a computer game. We caused this problem collectively, we need to solve it collectively. I do not see the "well off" or other sub-groups sharing anywhere near equally in the burden of extricating the country from a lot of bad liberal policies. Everyone--liberal and conservative--want the pain to be leveled on "those not like me".

COG, You miss my point. Originally Posted by Old-T

You act as though your are surprised that Hanoi COG misses your point.

Truth be known, the only point in Hanoi COG's world is the point on the tippy top of his pointy little hat.

COG, You miss my point. I agree the debt and spending need to come down. But I also don't look at the "solution" as a mathematical equation or a game. I see real people who are being asked to contribute a disproportionate about to the cure.

Who has been hurt? Lots of people. Just situations where I personally know people:
--VA treatment cut because of budget cuts
--Military career enlisted folks shoved out with little to no notice for budget cuts
--PEL grants stopped for kids
--Clinics closed so now the nearest one is almost a 2 hour drive away
--Housing subsidies stopped or drastically cut mid-lease
--Teachers who haven't had a raise in 4 years and who now qualify for food stamps
--Young enlisted men and women who are now "being volunteered" for two twelve hour guard gate duty shifts a week on top of their normal 45-55 hour week because funds were cut for the hired guard gate security positions
--Families who have not been able to drive to within 3/4 of a mile of their home because the DOT funds were cut and the bridge that washed out in 2012 hasn't been fixed
--A single mom & 2 kids who lost their home because their rent subsidy was stopped

I am sure there are many more.

I am NOT saying some of these programs shouldn't go away--some should. Or be revamped. Better yet, some should never have been started. But once they were started I am definitely opposed to the abrupt cut-off as has happened in many cases. It hurts precisely the people who have been trying to do the right things, plan ahead, play by the rules they didn't make, etc. If we collectively told them "this is how the world will work", and they believed "us", then I feel we own them a graceful withdrawal. It is the same reason I am for the end to home mortgage tax deduction, but I believe it is very unjust to stop it cold turkey for people who used the deduction as part of the calculation that they could afford a house.

The US economy WOULD probably be better in the long run if we cut these off cold, but that is the "right" answer only in a computer game. We caused this problem collectively, we need to solve it collectively. I do not see the "well off" or other sub-groups sharing anywhere near equally in the burden of extricating the country from a lot of bad liberal policies. Everyone--liberal and conservative--want the pain to be leveled on "those not like me". Originally Posted by Old-T

You are going to see a "abrupt cut-off"... not easy like the last one but BAD... Now thank your "BOY" that you support.

Notice I did not say voted for, since you claim not to vote.

IIFFy, you are just plain strange.

I have never claimed not to vote. I take voting very seriously. I have no idea why you think I don't.

As to abrupt cutoffs, they may happen or may not. After all, there are lots of fundamentally unchristian folks like you who care very little about others. Too bad most of them thump their bibles as they act exactly opposite of the Jesus they claim to follow.

IIFFy, you are just plain strange.

I have never claimed not to vote. I take voting very seriously. I have no idea why you think I don't.

As to abrupt cutoffs, they may happen or may not. After all, there are lots of fundamentally unchristian folks like you who care very little about others. Too bad most of them thump their bibles as they act exactly opposite of the Jesus they claim to follow.

IIFFy, you are just plain strange.

I have never claimed not to vote. I take voting very seriously. I have no idea why you think I don't.

As to abrupt cutoffs, they may happen or may not. After all, there are lots of fundamentally unchristian folks like you who care very little about others. Too bad most of them thump their bibles as they act exactly opposite of the Jesus they claim to follow. Originally Posted by Old-T

And a drooling dim bumb.

IIFFy, you are just plain strange.

I have never claimed not to vote. I take voting very seriously. I have no idea why you think I don't.

As to abrupt cutoffs, they may happen or may not. After all, there are lots of fundamentally unchristian folks like you who care very little about others. Too bad most of them thump their bibles as they act exactly opposite of the Jesus they claim to follow. Originally Posted by Old-T

Well what the FUCK did you mean in post #9? http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...ighlight=voted

IIFFy, you are just plain strange.

I have never claimed not to vote. I take voting very seriously. I have no idea why you think I don't.

As to abrupt cutoffs, they may happen or may not. After all, there are lots of fundamentally unchristian folks like you who care very little about others. Too bad most of them thump their bibles as they act exactly opposite of the Jesus they claim to follow. Originally Posted by Old-T

I'm waiting for a answer... the we will move on to fundamentally unchristian folks and the bible thumping...

Well what the FUCK did you mean in post #9? http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...ighlight=voted Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Very simple: since Bush-1 I have voted AGAINST one of the candidates rather than FOR the other. There hadn't been anyone running who I actually liked so I went with the lesser evil.

Clear enough for you? Now bring on you dumb thumpers comment.

Very simple: since Bush-1 I have voted AGAINST one of the candidates rather than FOR the other. There hadn't been anyone running who I actually liked so I went with the lesser evil.

Clear enough for you? Now bring on you dumb thumpers comment. Originally Posted by Old-T

That's some real SERIOUS voting, Old-Tyrant... You are clear as mud.

That's some real SERIOUS voting, Old-Tyrant... You are clear as mud. Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

What an asinine stupid comment on you part. Just as I would expect from you--and you didn't disappoint, did you. Voting is more complex for those of us who actually look at issue. You? You just vote for whomever Rush and the mind control Nazis tell you to vote for.

What an asinine stupid comment on you part. Just as I would expect from you--and you didn't disappoint, did you. Voting is more complex for those of us who actually look at issue. You? You just vote for whomever Rush and the mind control Nazis tell you to vote for. Originally Posted by Old-T

Since 1992 you have not voted for one presidential candidate. You have only voted against candidates....

Alexander Hamilton was right... Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.