President Clinton's new economic plan has come under fierce attack by conservatives and Republicans lately (although now, there is really no distinction between the two).
Their main problem with it is, they say, that it cuts spending too little and increases taxes too much. The first charge is a curious one, especially now that they have come up in opposition of base closings, itself a cost-saving measure. They believe that it would weaken this country's economy. So, should we continue to fund bases we don't need so that our country doesn't allegedly suffer?
I do feel sympathy for those who would lose their jobs, but surely, as highly trained individuals, they would be able to find work in the private sector. Besides, I thought that conservatives would be happy for less government involvement in the economy, and the military is a part of the government. Why in the world would we want to keep a huge military that we don't need?
Also, Clinton's plan does cut spending a great deal. In fact, recently at the urging of Democratic congressmen, Clinton called for cutting billions more in spending. This plan that the Republicans were so quick to judge in their partisan way represents the first serious attempt at controlling government spending. That is a claim which cannot be made about the previous administrations.
As for the increased taxes part of it, the heaviest burden of the new taxes will be on the wealthiest Americans. Republicans seem to have developed amnesia about the huge tax cut that the rich received under Reagan in 1981. The top rate fell from 70% to around 30%, depriving the government of $750 billion dollars over five years (source: 1993 World Almanac). I believe it's safe to say that went too far. So is it unreasonable to raise the rate back up to about 36%? I think not.
Of course, I have not forgotten that some of the tax burden will fall on us. And yes, it is true, that, early in his campaign, Clinton said that he wouldn't raise taxes on those making under $100,000. I seem to remember him also saying during the debates that he wouldn't unequivocally state that he would never raise taxes on the middle class. Besides, need I remind the Republicans that their president is the one who said "Read! My! LIPS! No! New! Taxes!" Then he went and raised our taxes. Pretty slick, wouldn't you say?
Finally, some Republicans, after much delay, have come up with their economic plan. It supposedly will drastically cut spending without raising taxes. Fine. Now get the American people to support it.
Despite what you may think about President Clinton, his budget, so far, has become the only realistic approach to reigning in this monster deficit. The consequences of further delay in partisan attacks will merely worsen the situation, making our economic future less certain. [Author's note: The economic plan I supported at the time was the one Clinton originally proposed, not the one that mutated once Congress got their hands on it. Even so, the one that passed was at least a step in the right direction.]