The Voice of Young Conservatives Blog

Government debt currently stands at a staggering $15 trillion. Even more troubling, over the next 10 years the CBO projects that Washington will rack up another $13 trillion.

Set against that backdrop, finding $1.2 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade shouldn’t have been difficult. Nevertheless, the so-called Deficit Supercommittee has failed to do just that. In a joint-statement by co-chairs Rep. Hensarling (R-TX) and Sen. Murray (D-WA), they came to the conclusion that a deal would not be done before tonight’s deadline.

“We have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee’s deadline,” the statement reads.

“Despite our inability to bridge the committee’s significant differences, we end this process united in our belief that the nation’s fiscal crisis must be addressed and that we cannot leave it for the next generation to solve.”

The “significant differences” the statement diplomatically alludes to is whether higher taxes should be used to make up for Washington’s spending addiction.

A good case could be made that tax hikes shouldn’t be included in any deficit reduction plan. After all, the CBO projects that even if the Bush-tax cuts are extended, government revenues will rise above their historical averages over the next few years. Moreover, a quick glance at the White House’s “Historical Tables” shows pretty plainly the role that spending has played in creating our unsustainable debt. Consider this: in 2001, just a short decade ago, total federal government spending was $1.8 trillion; today, that figure has more than doubled to $3.8 trillion. By contrast, our population has only grown by less than 9 percent.

Nevertheless, in the spirit of compromise and reaching a deal, Republican members of the Deficit Supercommittee indicated their willingness to give a little on Democrats tax demands. Sen. Toomey (R-PA) offered a plan that would have raised tax revenue by about $300 billion over the next decade by limiting tax breaks in return for lower rates. And that’s on top of other revenue sources like $40 billion from changing the formula for adjusting tax brackets for inflation and $200 billion spectrum sales and user fees.

In essence, it was a 2-for-1. New revenues would have flowed into Washington’s coffers for deficit reduction and the long-overdue process of reforming our broken tax code would be accomplished.

But Democrats were having none of it. The lowest they were willing to go on new revenues was $1.3 trillion, which would have ranked as the second largest tax hike in American history. Notably, this is a much more hardline stance than they took during the heated debt-limit negotiations in which a tentative agreement was reached to cut $3.2 trillion in return for $800 billion in new revenues, a 4-to-1 ratio of cuts to taxes. In contrast, a 3-to-1 ratio would have allowed the Deficit Supercommittee to succeed in its mission.

Even worse, Democrats actually wanted to use the Deficit Supercommittee to increase the deficit. Their proposal included a budget gimmick that used “savings” from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to pay for new spending on infrastructure!

Only a true spending addict would use a committee whose sole purpose was to reduce the deficit to spend more and increase the deficit.

But while the Super Committee turned out to be less than, well, super, that doesn’t mean Washington can simply sit by while we continue down the road to bankruptcy. Spending can still be cut. Government can still be made smaller. Waste and duplication can still be rooted out. If Democrats aren’t even to do those commonsense things, then Americans should find representatives who will in 2012.