Your daily “entitlement” death vigil
by digby
Everybody’s coming up with new reasons why we need to cut social security, Medicare and Medicaid. Paul Ryan, as you know, has decided that we need to cut them in exchange for some of the sequestration cuts to defense. And it appears that there might be some appetite among Democrats for that as well, if this article is to be believed:
Democrats have begun to telegraph a possible path forward in the coming budget conference, suggesting a possible compromise that would include trading a relaxation of the sequester for “permanent structural changes to mandatory programs,” according to a Senate Democratic aide. The thinking goes: Republicans could argue that they traded budget cuts that last only until 2022 for permanent changes. Just what Democrats would accept in terms of changes to mandatory programs is still murky, though; Democrats are being deliberately vague about what they might be willing to swallow.
“I know that Democrats are willing to compromise to get a deal, and I’m hopeful Republicans will as well,” Murray said recently.
Now other Republicans are getting on the bandwagon with lugubrious handwringing over sequestration and demanding that we rob the future to pay for today:
Despite strong congressional support for science, the future of the United States’ scientific initiative could be in jeopardy. But the real driving force behind the threat is often obscured in the media by short-term distractions. America’s national debt hovers dangerously close to $17 trillion for the first time in history. Any honest economist will tell you a government can’t afford to pay for everything. Governing is about making difficult choices.
We must set priorities and get our nation’s spending under control. To accomplish this we must reform entitlement programs. If we don’t, experts warn, future funding for other budget priorities, including scientific research, could be in jeopardy.During the partial government shutdown in October, many in the scientific community expressed concern about its impact on federally funded research. As chairman of the House Science Committee, I take these concerns seriously. But over the long term, the temporary shutdown may prove to be the least of our worries.
It’s important to first put America’s scientific investments in context. Funding for U.S. science agencies comes out of what is referred to as the “discretionary” budget. Congress has more control over how this money is allocated than so-called mandatory spending, which includes entitlement programs. Discretionary spending makes up less than one-fifth of all federal spending. And nondefense research and development, R&D, is only a fraction of that.
R&D funding, as a percentage of the overall discretionary budget, has historically been incredibly stable, ranging from 10 percent to 13 percent over the past 40 years.And federal research and development programs have always enjoyed broad bipartisan support: Shifts in political power between the parties have had little effect. But budget experts warn that growth in entitlement spending will squeeze this stable funding stream.
Excluding national defense, the government’s largest expenses are for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And spending on these programs is projected to skyrocket in the coming years largely because of the rising cost of health care and an aging U.S. population. Increases in entitlement spending will place enormous pressure on other budget priorities, including our nation’s science funding.
Actually health care costs are coming down and projections show that they will come down more if the health care reforms work as planned. But then I’m sure Lamar Smith assumes they will all be repealed eventually so that’s not an issue. And, as we all know, Social Security has its own dedicated funding stream which has absolutely nothing to do with funding for science and R&D, so that’s just a big pile of nonsense.
But we are seeing a sort of consensus forming around the sequester cuts being the new exchange for the slashing of the earned benefits programs. Whether that will fly with Democrats is uncertain, but it certainly looks like Republicans are happy to demagogue the current spending cuts to that end.