You could credibly say, we are doing the hard part on addressing the true nature of the long run deficit (health care costs, tax reform, and to a lesser extent Social Security and Defense) and in the interim we must help the states. On the path to a balanced budget you could say we must invest in (education, energy, infrastructure, etc) and people could hear you out, but without a credible plan to address the long range deficit people will just stick their fingers in the ears and sing loudly like you did when you were a kid and you thought the noise under your bed might be a monster.
- This is why progressives have more at stake than conservatives in developing a balanced budget; because we believe government has an important role to play in society.
- It looks like we are headed for the worst possible policy outcome regarding the deficit, cuts in the short run and inaction on the real problem.
- It is a really bad idea to wait for a crisis to address the hardest issue, there will be fewer options left and progressive priorities will be at more risk under that type of scenario.
- I have been saying only the President could lead with his budget on the hardest stuff, I hope I am wrong and the Senate picks up the ball and then the President jumps in.
- Bubbles of a secret deal, but that seem far fetched.
update: interesting take on grand bargains from Matt Yglesias. Andrew Sullivan saying you can be pissed but still support the President.