Three deadly sins of rational budgeting

Presidential candidates are avoiding the hard choices about federal entitlements

Excerpt:

Because we're running a deficit of $244 billion, much of the spending increases are likely to be financed. Interest on the federal debt is running about $250 billion, or 9 percent of the total budget.

Solving the larger problem of entitlement spending, though, receives scant attention from the candidates vying to be Bush's successor.

"The campaign rhetoric hasn't made me feel any better about all of this," Bixby said.

Candidates from both parties have said little about the rising cost of entitlements because slowing the advance of the big money requires hard choices — saying no to good programs or popular tax breaks, for example.

That's not a message that plays well in an election year.

"Both sides are over-pandering to their base," Bixby said. "The implication is that Republicans won't ever raise taxes and Democrats won't ever cut benefits."

Actually, if we're going to bring the deficit under control and embrace fiscal discipline, we'll have to do both.

Instead, Congress and the administration opt to simply embrace what Bixby calls the "three deadly sins of rational budgeting": delay, denial and diversion.

Comment: We are close to the finacial tipping point. Politicians are studiously avoiding the giant elephant in the room!