Progressives Have a Budget Alternative—and Nobody Is Paying Attention

[muriel_volestrangler]

And that include us, on Democratic Underground - you and me. We've had:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024657206 - no replies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024667189 - no replies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024657856 - no replies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017181814 - 1 reply
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024657232 - 2 replies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024661841 - no replies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024687230 - no replies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024702695 - 4 replies (this thread concentrated on the healthcare aspect - it is just that we find the word 'budget' boring?)

This ought to be a major topic of discussion here, given all the other shit we find the time to chat about. If we, self-proclaimed progressives who want to talk about politics, aren't in the least interested in a sensible progressive budget, how can we expect Democratic politicians to talk about it to constituents? To say "yes, Democrats have plans to create jobs, fix infrastructure, help people in need, and still lower the deficit in the long term, because America would be working". Maybe if places like DU paid attention, Democrats would decide to run with this as a positive vision for the future in the 2014 elections. Maybe we'd hang on to the Senate, and make progress in the House.

Anyway, scold over, and kudos to those who've tried so far to get DU to pay attention. Here's the article:

On March 12, the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) released its own budget for the 2015 fiscal year. The idea of the Better Off Budget, as they call it, is to sketch out a liberal alternative for how the government should collect and spend money—that is, a budget vision that’s a bit to the left of President Obama’s and way to the left of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s.
...
And while nobody expects the proposal to become binding—Democrats don’t have the votes, not even in the Senate—it’s not clear why this proposal isn’t part of the conversation. Predecessors of the Better Off Budget won praise from well-respected and mainstream economists, including Paul Krugman and Dean Baker. And while you might expect such approval from progressive intellectuals, the proposal has fans elsewhere on the ideological spectrum. The Economist has called it “courageous” and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget commended it as well.

It’s not hard to see why. The primary goal of the Better Off Budget is to close the “output gap” that opened after the financial crisis—that is, to tap the economic resources that have been idling for the last few years, leading to higher unemployment and lower wages. Obama’s budget seeks to do the same thing, but wouldn’t close the gap by nearly as much. Ryan’s budget would more or less ignore the gap altogether. In 2013, the gap—measured as potential gross domestic product versus actual gross domestic product—stood at $790 billion. The CPC budget closes it in three years by investing in infrastructure, state aid and a government jobs program. By 2017, the Economic Policy Institute estimates, it will create 8.8 million new jobs.

The new spending would not lead to higher deficits, by the way. On the contrary, the House progressives are also calling for higher taxes on the highest earners and corporations—enough to bring in more than $6 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. That would more than make up for the new spending. Overall, living within the budget would reduce the deficit to 1.4 percent of GDP in 2024.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117135/qa-rep-keith-ellison-cpcs-better-budget

[eridani]

1. I suspect the lack of attention is due to the fact that Repukes control the House

Still, we could be putting this out more with LTEs and such.

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. Yeah, but that shouldn't stop a conversation about what a good budget looks like

Paul Ryan puts out a load of shit, that won't pass the Senate, and gets endless publicity in the media, and even on DU.

We have all this theory about framing and Overton windows; if we don't even make an effort to make our edge of the window clear, then it drifts to the right. We worry about losing seats in the midterm elections, because of apathy in the centre and left (you don't have to be left wing to like this budget - so much of it is basic economics and common sense), but this is something that should appeal to most voters.

Yeah, LTEs, contact your Dem congressman or candidate, to either thank them for supporting it if they have, or urge them to if they haven't, include it in stuff you post elsewhere on the net where 'neutral' voters might see it - anything.

[yeoman6987]

4. Ends emergency funding for Overseas Contingency Operations.

Ok. So this is impossible. How would we pay for the work we did looking for the Malaysian Aircraft. That has a price tag of 15 million at least already. How about the security we provided during the Olympics? That cost quite a bit of money. We need to have a slush fund for Overseas Contingency Operations or a way to pay for unusual situations.

[SamKnause]

2. I am familiar with the Better Off Budget.

It is an excellent budget.

K&R

Maybe it will get some exposure.

[Scuba]

5. This excellent plan could get more attention if the President touted it. Why doesn't he?

He campaigned as a progressive. Was that a ruse?

[LonePirate]

6. I am proud to have been one of those seven original replies. This is a budget worthy of our support.