Post on 19-Oct-2020
Search All NYTimes.com
Enlarge This Image
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times
President Obama said thatRepublicans' "vision is less aboutreducing the deficit than it is aboutchanging the basic social compact inAmerica.”
Multimedia
House Vote: Ryan Budget Proposal
Related
House Approves RepublicanBudget Plan to Cut Trillions (April16, 2011)
The Budget Debate, RevealedBy RICHARD W. STEVENSONPublished: April 16, 2011
WASHINGTON — The air in the capital these days is thick with
references to trillion-dollar deficits, debt-to-G.D.P. ratios and
mandatory spending. But the budget debate that became fully
engaged last week is about far more than accounting and arcane
policy disputes. What is under way now is the most fundamental
reassessment of the size and role of government — of the balance
between personal responsibility and private markets on the one hand
and public responsibility and social welfare on the other — at least
since Ronald Reagan and perhaps since F.D.R.
The battle ahead “is the big one, and
goes to the very major questions about
the role of government,” said G. William Hoagland, a
former Republican staff director of the Senate Budget
Committee. “This is going to be a very fundamental clash of
ideologies.”
The Democratic and Republican Parties have their own
internal tensions to address as the debate goes forward in
Congress and on the presidential campaign trail. But in its
early stages at least, it is liberals who are on the defensive.
The aging of the baby boom generation and the costs of
maintaining Medicare and Social Security have put the two
pillars of the social welfare system on the table for
re-examination. The growing weight of the national debt
has given urgency to the question of whether the
government has become too big and expensive.
The tepid nature of the current economic recovery,
following big stimulus packages, has provided an opening
to challenge the effectiveness of Keynesianism as the
default policy option for government. And the revived
energy of grass-roots conservatives has given electoral clout
to the movement’s intellectual and constitutional
arguments.
Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise
Institute, the conservative research organization, said, “The
optimistic view is that we have a confluence of the business
cycle, of the demography and of the politics that makes it
not just possible to achieve real change, but impossible that
we not deal with these things if we want this country to
continue on the path envisioned by the founders.” So just
Log In With Facebook
Grete Waitz,NorwegianMarathonChampion, IsDead at 57
The Issue ofAbortion Returnsto Center Stage inU.S. Politics
Log in to discover more articlesbased on what you‘ve read.
PRESENTED BY
What’s This? | Don’t Show
Log in to see what your friendsare sharing on nytimes.com.Privacy Policy | What’s This?
What’s Popular Now
Sign up to receive exclusive products and experiencesfeaturing NYTimes.com's premier advertisers.
Privacy Policy
TimesLimited E-Mail
We don’t have any personalized recommendations foryou at this time. Please try again later.
Log In Register Now HelpHOME PAGE TODAY'S PAPER VIDEO MOST POPULAR TIMES TOPICS
Week in ReviewWORLD U.S. N.Y. / REGION BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEALTH SPORTS OPINION ARTS STYLE TRAVEL JOBS REAL ESTATE
AUTOS
SIGN IN TOE-MAIL
REPRINTS
SHARE
RECOMMEND
MOST E-MAILED RECOMMENDED FOR YOU
Subscribe to The Times
MORE IN WEEK
In Iraq, BottomsRead More »
In Budget Debate, Democrats and Republicans Reassess Gove... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/weekinreview/17deficit.ht...
1 of 4 4/20/11 9:05 AM
FiveThirtyEight: The High Stakesof Republicans' Budget Vote (April15, 2011)
House Republicans Propose $4Trillion in Cuts Over Decade (April4, 2011)
two and a half years after a presidential election that was in
part a repudiation of conservative governance, and with the
nation still smarting from the aftereffects of a financial
crisis that grew out of failures of markets and regulation,
President Obama finds himself in a somewhat surprising
position: forced to articulate and sell a vision of how
liberalism and the institutions it built in the 20th century can be updated for the
constraints of the 21st.
The speech he delivered Wednesday at George Washington University in Washington was
his most ambitious effort so far to do so. In it, he harnessed the language of both left and
right to argue against the extremes on both sides while suggesting that many of their core
principles were not mutually exclusive — in other words, that Great Society values can
endure in a Tea Party moment.
He defined “patriotism” as a shared sense of responsibility for the vulnerable and less
fortunate. Basic standards of security for the elderly and poor and government investment
in a more prosperous future, he said, can not only coexist with a tradition of “rugged
individualists with a healthy skepticism of too much government,” but are also a vital part
of what makes America exceptional.
“We are a better country because of these commitments,” he said. “I’ll go further — we
would not be a great country without those commitments.”
Republicans in Congress, he suggested, would shred that tradition under cover of a debate
that is only nominally about the budget. “The fact is,” he said, “their vision is less about
reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America.”
Conservatives would and did object to his implication of heartlessness, but not necessarily
to his assessment of their ambition.
The Republican plan put forward by Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the chairman
of the Budget Committee, and adopted by the House on Friday as its policy blueprint for
the next decade contains a substantial dose of deficit reduction but is really a manifesto for
limited government.
It would take big steps toward privatizing Medicare, slash upper-income tax rates, repeal
last year’s health care law, bite deeply into nearly all federal programs and try to cap the
size of government relative to the economy. But it also imposes a self-consciously moral
judgment on the government’s role, suggesting that the same kind of demand for added
personal responsibility that was embedded in the 1996 overhaul of welfare should now be
applied more broadly, to food stamps, housing aid and health care for the elderly and the
poor.
“The safety net should never become a hammock, lulling able-bodied citizens into lives of
complacency and dependency,” Mr. Ryan’s budget proposal says.
William A. Galston, who was a domestic policy aide to President Bill Clinton and is now a
scholar at the Brookings Institution, said Mr. Ryan deserved credit of a sort for addressing
head-on the implications of the Republican Party’s increasingly rigid antitax posture,
which since it took root in the late 1970s has put greater and greater pressure on budgets
and the social programs they support.
“It represents the first serious effort to begin to bring Republican social policy
commitments in line with their fiscal and tax commitments,” Mr. Galston said.
But he said Democrats, too, faced a credibility test. “They have held fast to the security
programs in place since the 1930s, but without being able to successfully challenge the
antitax orthodoxy,” he said. “The problem the Democrats have is that they can no longer
say with a straight face that raising taxes on the wealthy is going to enable them to pay
over the next generation for the programs they cherish. So what do you do?”
Movie reviews, features and trailers -
nytimes.com/movies
Museums Special SectionALSO IN ARTS »
A flooded museum innovatesSignificant art exhibitions in 2011
ADVERTISEMENTS
Ads by Google what's this?
Setec InvestigationsComputer Forensic Investigations
Expert Witness & Litigation Support
www.SetecInvestigations.com
MORE IN WEEK INARTICLES)
In Iraq, Bottoms Up DemocracyRead More »
In Budget Debate, Democrats and Republicans Reassess Gove... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/weekinreview/17deficit.ht...
2 of 4 4/20/11 9:05 AM
A version of this article appeared in print on April 17, 2011, on pageWK1 of the New York edition.
That question is being asked quietly within both parties, each of which faces its own
internal tensions about how to proceed.
There are Republicans who fear that voting for the Ryan plan will put them out of step
with their constituents. There are Democrats who think the tax-and-spend label is all too
accurate. There are Republicans who might countenance voting for tax increases, and
there are Democrats who are willing to meaningfully scale back the benefits promised by
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
In the Senate, a group of Democrats and Republicans operating independently of party
leaders is trying to come up with a plan that neither party would like but both would
accept as necessary. But they are debating basic values; it would no doubt be much easier
if the argument was just about numbers.
Get 50% Off The New York Times & Free All Digital Access.
Ads by Google what's this?
9 Best Stocks to Own NowHere's a list of recommendations
that several top analysts agree on
www.DailyTradeAlert.com
Get Free E-mail Alerts on These Topics
Federal Budget (US)
United States Politics and Government
National Debt (US)
Taxation
MOVIES »
The Lives Sports ChangeIndelibly
DINING & WINE »
The $410 Corkscrew
SPORTS »
Fuld’s Value to the RaysGoes Beyond Numbers
OPINION »
Disunion: TheGreat SumterRally in UnionSquareThe brazen assault onFort Sumter causedNortherners, despitetheir many differences,to unite.
U.S. »
Poor Season for Sunshine IsGreat One for Spores
OPINION »
Room for Debate: PresidentDonald Trump?
Home World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Autos Site Map
© 2011 The New York Times Company Privacy Your Ad Choices Terms of Service Terms of Sale Corrections RSS Help Contact Us Work for Us Advertise
SIGN IN TOE-MAIL
REPRINTS
Selected for you by our sponsor:
Obama fires the opening shots in 2012 campaign (Financial Times)
N.C. storm victims get tax relief (BankRate.com)
Question time for BP as investors finally have their say (Financial Times)
How to Claim Lottery Money (eHow)
INSIDE NYTIMES.COM
MORE IN WEEK INARTICLES)
In Iraq, Bottoms Up DemocracyRead More »
In Budget Debate, Democrats and Republicans Reassess Gove... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/weekinreview/17deficit.ht...
3 of 4 4/20/11 9:05 AM
MORE IN WEEK INARTICLES)
In Iraq, Bottoms Up DemocracyRead More »
In Budget Debate, Democrats and Republicans Reassess Gove... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/weekinreview/17deficit.ht...
4 of 4 4/20/11 9:05 AM