iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jeffrey Sachs

Jeffrey Sachs

GET UPDATES FROM Jeffrey Sachs

The People's Budget

Posted: 04/ 8/11 09:52 AM ET

Just when it seemed that all of Washington had lost its values and its connection with the American people, a bolt of hope has arrived. It is the People's Budget put forward by the co-chairs of the 80-member Congressional Progressive Caucus. Their plan is humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy. Unlike Paul Ryan's almost absurdly vicious attack on the poor and working class, the People's Budget would close the deficit by raising taxes on the rich, taming health care costs (including a public option), and ending the military spending on wars and wasteful weapons systems.

There are now four budget positions on the table. Far to the right is Paul Ryan's plan, an artless war on the poor that would take a meat-cleaver to Medicaid (health care for the poor), food stamps, support for child care, the environment, and the rest of government other than the military, Social Security, and Medicare (that is, until 2022, when the slashing would begin on Medicare coverage as well). Ryan would keep taxes below 20 percent of GDP (specifically, 19.9 percent of GDP in 2021), at the cost of destroying entitlements programs and other civilian spending.

Then there is President Obama's budget, which is really a muddled proposal in the center-right of the political spectrum. It would keep most of the Reagan-era and Bush-era tax cuts in place. Like the Ryan proposal, Obama's tax proposals would keep total taxes at around 20 percent of GDP. The result is a major long-term squeeze on vital programs such as community development, infrastructure, and job training. Also, Obama's plan never closes the budget deficit, which remains as high as 3.1% of GDP in 2021.

In the progressive middle is the People's Budget. Like Ryan's plan, the People's Budget would cut the budget deficit to zero by 2021, but would do so in an efficient and fair way. It would close the budget deficit by raising tax rates on the rich and giant corporations, while also curbing military spending and wrestling health care costs under control, partly by introducing a public option. By raising tax revenues to 22.3 percent of GDP by 2021, the People's Budget closes the budget deficit while protecting the poor and promoting needed investments in education, health care, roads, power, energy, and the environment in order to raise America's long-term competitiveness. The People's Budget thereby achieves what Ryan and Obama do not: the combination of fairness, efficiency, and budget balance.

The fourth position is the public's position. The Republicans often say that they want Congress to respect the voice of the people. The voice of the people is crystal clear. In one opinion survey after the next, the public says that the rich and the corporations should pay more taxes. The public says that we should tamp down runaway health care costs through a public option, one that would introduce competition to drive down bloated private health insurance costs. The public says that we should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and reduce Pentagon spending. (Just yesterday, Defense Secretary Gates let loose the predictable Pentagon canard that we should stay in Iraq if the Iraqi government asks for it. Better yet, we should respond to what the American people are asking for: to bring our troops home).

The fact is that the People's Budget is the public's position. That's why it is truly a centrist initiative, at the broad center of the U.S. political spectrum. Ryan reflects the wishes of the rich and the far right. Obama's position reflects the muddle of a White House that wavers between its true values and the demands of the wealthy campaign contributors and lobbyists that Obama courts for his re-election. Many Democrats in Congress have also gone along with the falsehood that deficit cutting means slashing spending on the poor and on civilian discretionary programs, rather than raising taxes on the rich, cutting military spending, and taking on the over-priced private health insurance industry. Only the People's Budget speaks to the broad needs and values of the American people.

The current budget negotiations have been a dialogue among the wealthy. The big debate has focused on which programs for the poor should be axed first. There has been no discussion of raising taxes on the rich, and quite the contrary, the White House and the Republican leadership agreed to further tax cuts last December. Obama has repeatedly expressed regret at slashing community development, energy support for the poor, and other programs, but he is not fighting the trend, only regretting it.

Most of Washington has stopped listening to the people. Campaigns are now so expensive that most politicians do anything to court the favor of the rich. Yet ultimately the public will prevail. Twice before in American history -- during the Gilded Age of the 1880s and in the 1920s, just before the Great Depression -- big corporate money effectively owned Washington. But in both eras great progressive leaders (including the two Roosevelts, Theodore and Franklin) came along to restore the true meaning of American democracy: a government truly of the people, by the people, and for the people. With public protests against government by the rich now spreading in Wisconsin, Ohio and beyond, and with the launch of the People's Budget by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a great national movement to restore American democracy has begun.

 
 
 

Follow Jeffrey Sachs on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jeffdsachs

 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,194
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (24 total)
04:44 PM on 05/25/2011
The People's Budget won't pass the GOP House,sadly. I love that budget,I like the President's budget,and I hate Paul Ryan's budget. Fortunately,the Democrats can kill the anti-people's budget in the Senate.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:09 AM on 04/28/2011
Wow, that's a pretty strong plan. I bet Ellison and Grijalva are swamped with media requests. We're going to get pretty tired of seeing them on all the Sunday chats, Charlie Rose, and incessant interviews with every radio talk host across the country.... ; ]
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JLSR
Fan of fairness and logic
01:04 AM on 04/23/2011
I hope someone in the Administration is going to take a serious look at the "People's Budget" as proposed by the Progressive camp. It is the only one that makes the most sense. Whereas, Ryan's will rack up trillions in the next 10 years, as will President Obama's--the Progressive "People's Budget' will pay off the deficit within 10 years. Why is there any discussion?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
TheRevV
My micro-bio is microbial.
12:49 PM on 04/26/2011
There's only discussion because the corp0rate-owned media ignores progressive proposals and heavily favors Repubs in general in all things...
If that doesn't work, the c0rporate-owned media will make it a choice between a far-right approach and a so-called "centrist" approach...
03:04 PM on 04/22/2011
Let the facts prove that liberals’ belief that military spending is the root of the budget mess lacks a factual backbone by reviewing the percent of budget of these two:

George H.W. Bush’s 1st budget FY 1990:
DOD 23.1%
HHS 14.0%

Barak Obama’s 1st budget FY 2010:
DOD 19.3%
HHS 24.7%

Source of stats: Office of Management and Budget Historical Tables, Table 4.2

We have gone from 14.0% spending for HHS in FY 1990 to a whopping 24.7% for 2010. "Curb military spending"? DOD has declined from 23.1% to 19.3% for FY 2010.

Jeffrey Sachs stated Mr. Ryan’s plan is an “artless war on the poor..." The historical tables of the USA’s budget shows exactly why social services need to have a “meat-cleaver” put to them.

“Reduce baseline Defense spending by reducing strategic capabilities, conventional
forces, procurement, and R&D programs.” In today’s very dangerous world, to call this progressive budget anything but national suicide is an understatement. They seem to be talking unilateral disarmament more than a serious budget.

It is clear, Mr. Sachs, that based on historical facts of the decline in DOD percentage and the rise of HHS, you failed to take a serious look at what you wrote and the “progressive budget” you endorsed. HHS spending must have a "meat-cleaver" put to it for national survival.

The liberal talking point of “curb military spending” falls flat on the factual ears.
05:01 PM on 04/25/2011
Do your numbers include the true costs of 2 wars? Because at least under Bush, these costs weren't including those numbers in the budget, they were supplemental costs added outside of the budget. I believe that we need a strong military, but I know it needs updating and I know there is a lot of waste. We are paying for things even the Pentagon said it does not need or want. I'd rather cut these programs and boost pay.
12:15 AM on 04/26/2011
The numbers are on budget items from the official US budget. There can be off-budget items for war costs, but keep on mind, there can also be off-budget costs for social services also.

I wish we would pull out of the wars. We will accomplish nothing and we should stop hoping we can bring "democracy" to these types of nations used to anarchy. The cost in lives, injuries and $ is atrocious.

Defense spending is not what is driving the USA to bankruptcy. "Superfunction" Human Resources in the US budget is 69% of the entire budget, far more than triple what Defense spending is. I mentioned HHS spending that is more than Defense spending but that is just part of the overall HR spending. Clearly, HR spending is the single largest component of why we have a 1.645 TRILLION deficit and over a $14 trillion debt.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jonathan herrera
08:38 PM on 04/25/2011
The same can be said about conservatives who look at entitlements as the problem and focus without looking at the entire US budget. Guess what the military is part of the budget. Besides the entitlements and military do take a chunk of the budget.
12:23 AM on 04/26/2011
Jonathan, entitlements are the problem. As I answered "nnyl", superfunction "Human Resources" (HR) takes up 69% of the entire budget, more than triple what Defense spending is. Read in my comment to "nnyl" what I said about the wars--in an nutshell, I would stop the wars immediately and pull the troops home. We can fight terroism by stop funding terrorist nations through the IMF and World Bank, etc. and other ways.

This is not a liberal thing or conservative thing, it is simply fact--what is driving us to bankruptcy is the rising trend and huge budgets for HHS, and HR, the 69% of budget monstrosity--and growing due to the aging of the population.

Source of stats: Historical Tables, Office of Mangement and Budget
04:58 AM on 04/17/2011
I watched the GOP declare that we must reduce our budget by eliminating entitlements, reducing taxes on the super wealthy and ending most of our social programs. It is a crazy budget. Way over the top. No Christian charity for the poor and suffering. no jobs, no bullet train, no healthcare, no safety net, no reduction in taxes for the middle class, no rebuilding America, is it possible the GOP leadership actually believe their own falsehoods. Could it be, the billions of dollars spent in advertising, creation of the tea party from the old John Birch society wing nuts, and the bills handed to them at fundraisers, has clouded their view of the world around them? Town hall meetings are basically supporters, when do they see the opposition except on talk shows or in the legislature. They have lots of demands on their time. No time or desire to check on reality. It’s a business plan that doesn’t include humanity. The GOP doesn’t see individual suffering, except when it’s personal. Their Evangelical Christian religion applauds the greater good of being Saved by their religion. The great works of Gandhi and Mother Teresa are considered a lesser good. The GOP is even off the hook with God. They have God and money, is that enough. The GOP leaders are playing with fire. The GOP will soon find out that slick advertising and a lock on the game, is not a winning hand when so many of our citizen’s lives are shattered.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:40 PM on 05/05/2011
Well said.
03:42 PM on 04/14/2011
Here is my budget plan:
1. Fair tax - A national sales tax of 27% with a rebate to families based on the number of people in the household to cover necessities of life. Eliminate the IRS, income tax, capital gains tax, social security and medicare withholdings tax, estate tax, and corporate tax. Under this plan, the wealth would pay more because they spend more. Collections would be much easier. The amount you pay would not be determined by the quality of your CPA or lawyer.
2. Eliminate all of Obama's czars
3. Eliminate the Department of Energy
4. Eliminate the Department of Education
5. Ban all lobbyist
6. 25% tariff on all goods from China with a 5% annual increase until they stop manipulating their currency
7. Withdraw from Afghanistan - The Russians were there for a decade and could not win
8. Take over the Iraq oil fields and only leave after we have collected the money we spent on the war.
9. Stop defending South Korea until they agree to pay us and remove their unfair trade practices.
10 Raise the social security retirement age to 75
11. stop providing services to illegal aliens
12, Open all areas of the US to energy exploration
06:38 PM on 04/14/2011
plan continued:
13. Reform tort law so that the party or the attorney from the side that loses pays all legal expenses for both the plaintiff and defendant.
14. Reduce dependence on foreign oil by encouraging all commercial and government vehicles be converted to run on natural gas. The US has more natural gas than any other country in the world.
15. End aid to foreign countries. The government will give money to foreign countries after a natural disaster but if a citizen is a victim of a natural disaster they will only loan money.
16. End farm subsidies for products no one wants or uses.
17. End all green energy subsidies. The free market works when the time comes that an alternative energy source is available and less expensive than fossil fuels the market will demand that product.
06:58 PM on 04/14/2011
18. Term limits for congress and the senate.
06:59 AM on 04/14/2011
Wake up American and listen to Jeffery Sachs.
07:26 AM on 04/14/2011
If his solutions await my arrival, I'll stay in dreamland.
01:09 AM on 04/14/2011
This country has a major spending probable not a revenue problem. The Obama administration has made this even worst. In his 2.5 years in office, the national debt has increased by $4.33 trillion (yearly deficit of $1.73 trillion). From 2000 to 2008, the national debt increased by $4.33 trillion (yearly deficit of $542 billiion). Obama has managed to do in 2.5 years what it took Bush 8 years to do. If he continues at this pace he will have increased the debt by $6,9 trillion by the end of his first term and if re-elected by $13.8 trillion by the end of his 2nd term and this does not even include Obama care. If he is re-elected and Obama care begins he will likely add $16 trillion to the national debt by 2016.
06:04 PM on 04/13/2011
I am more of a conservative on the political spectrum. I believe that the problems with our government debt are so severe that there should be a combination of large spending cuts and likely some increase in the tax rate. I have reviewed that Congressional Progressive Caucus budget recommendations. The tax increases are huge. The removing the cap on FICA would be a 6.75% tax increase on everyone earning more than $105,000 and a 12.5% increase on the self-employed. In addition to increases in the income tax rate. Taxing capital gain as ordinary income is also a bad idea. Historically, increasing the capital gains tax has resulted in decreased federal revenue. If the rate is increased from 15% to the marginal rate, there would be a massive sell off of stocks and a drop in the DJI average as people would sell and take profits prior to the increase. This would also discourage saving and investing.
02:31 PM on 04/15/2011
I believe that most of America would say "to hell with the DJI average". Wall Street is rich enough already.

Our country was on much more solid footing when our GDP relied on productivity by the middle class, not gaming the financial system.
03:31 PM on 04/15/2011
What about retired people who have saved all their lives and are living on their retirement income? If the stock market crashes, these people would see their savings gone. I agree that we need to put Americans to work. The way to do that is to make this the most business friendly country in the world. We need to decrease corporate taxes (the US has the second highest corporate tax rate in the developed world), eliminate un-necessary regulations, place a 25% tariff on all good from China, and reform the tort law system. I know Americans make the finest products in the world. We need to create a business climate that makes the US the best place to do business.
I am involved in a business that manufactures medical devices. We were considering opening a factory in the US but elected not to because of the cost. We can manufacture this device in Asian and ship it to the US for $1200 per unit. To make exactly the same item in the US, it costs $2500 per unit.
05:30 PM on 04/18/2011
Capital gains are different than interest income so its unlikely to impact savings. Trading stocks is not investment in new capital formation. So it does very little for the real productive economy. Its just speculating on chits on the wall street casino. The role it does play, is provide an exit possibility for the original investors who do capitalize a company. In that the capital markets have role that is useful. The only problem I see is that so many people in the middle class have their retirement income tied up in either capital gains on their home or retirement funds, that it would be a burden to retirees - but then the marginal tax rate of most retirees is pretty low...
10:58 PM on 04/18/2011
the current rate of 15% is only on long term capital gains (securities held for at least 18 months). short term gains are currently taxes at the individuals marginal rate.

This increase will taxes only on securities held for 18 months or longer. That will discourage long term saving and investing.
01:44 AM on 04/13/2011
The people need to insist that we get back to where one income can support a family of 5. That was stolen from us and the politicians and rich are still laughing about it. There's no excuse for it.
01:20 AM on 04/13/2011
We need to have a national lottery with the winners being selected from their tax filings. A $50,000 prize given to 20,000 in the poor category and 5000 in the middleclass category. This would insure people filed their taxes and had an ID and make a lot of people happy.
07:19 AM on 04/14/2011
Surely, you jest. I like your profile pic though. Cute.
03:01 PM on 04/14/2011
If you think about it, it's a petty cost that will insure folks get an ID (being that seems to be such an issue these days), and you'd have a lot of people that don't file, filing. It definitely would stimulate the economy. $1,25 billion is pretty cheap although it doesn't have to be those particular numbers. How about the total of all prizes is equal to the amount we give in foreign aid?
09:56 PM on 04/12/2011
It is interesting to note that Repugs have come out swinging and put a rediculous plan on the table while Dems have forgotten the art of negotiation.

You have to start from a position of rediculousness if you want to have room to compromise.

I therefore propose the taxpayers budget for 2012.

Raise the tax rate for those earning more than $150,000.00 a year to 96%.
Immediately eliminate all tax expenditures and carveouts from the tax laws.
Implement an automatic transaction tax on wallstreet traders and money changers of 25% of each transaction, across the board.
Legalize Marijuana throughout the United States and commit to spreading the legalization to all other countries.
End the war on DRUGS and Pardon all former drug offenders expunging any drug felonies from their records.
Pay reparations to former drug inmates reflecting their wrongful incarceration.
Ban divorce and require all republicans to adopt a child from a broken home to solve the homeless problem.
Require that all citizens contribute to the energy problem by installing solar panels on their homes and tieing in to the grid for distributive generation efficiency.
The government GSEs will need to finance these at the prime lending rate.
Make medicare optional for all citizens. Everybody in, Nobody out.
Private insurance is not banned but is also NOT Subsidized by public money.
Unionize Congress. Require all Congressmen and Senators to join a union and pay union dues.

I think that should be a good starting place.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diana Black Bandelow
Live and let live. And question EVERYTHING.
10:44 AM on 04/13/2011
96%!!!! Wow, even as a liberal I'll admit that's quite high.
06:31 PM on 04/13/2011
I'll bet the repugs will give up something big to prevent that from happening
11:01 PM on 04/13/2011
It does make sense to take future compromising into account when laying out your position. Your take on this is a bit extreme, and I don't quite get the emphasis on drug legalization, but in general yours is a good idea. It has no chance of being considered by anyone in office. Even the dire need to avoid national bankruptcy will not drive corruption out of our government.
05:56 PM on 04/17/2011
> I don't quite get the emphasis on drug legalizati­on

Haha I do.
09:28 PM on 04/12/2011
Politicians keep saying the American people sent them to DC to cut spending, BULL, they sent them there to create jobs.
11:03 PM on 04/13/2011
We are in such a deep hole that we will never be able to dig ourselves out. We are all just hanging on waiting for the inevitable crash, hoping we'll be gone before it comes.
01:18 AM on 04/14/2011
The government can't create jobs. The government can encourage job creation by lowering taxes and removing regulations so business can hire in the United State. Business have a goal of making money. If it is easier and less costly to do business in another country that is what they will do. If the government could create jobs, the $1 trillion stimulus bill would have worked.
11:20 AM on 04/14/2011
FDR, my friend, created jobs. It's not theory. It happened.
02:36 PM on 04/15/2011
The fallacies in this statement:

1) Government can't create jobs. Yes, it can. By creating a position and funding the salary for that position, government can most definitely create a job.

2) Businesses have a goal of making money. This is precisely the issue. Businesses are in it to make money. Not jobs, not infrastructure, not good will, not social justice. They are in it for the money. Profits will always come second to people, in the eyes of business.

3) The Stimulus did, in fact, create jobs. If you don't believe me, go look up the youtube videos of Republican politicians taking credit for creating X-many new jobs in their states/districts. Where do you think that money came from?
09:24 PM on 04/12/2011
Run Jeff run!
04:51 PM on 04/12/2011
90% of new maximum for SS tax would kill the economy and cause a nationwide collapse. Think about it, you would basically be working for free.
06:18 PM on 04/13/2011
It think that the rates (6.75% for individuals and 12.5% for self-employed) would stay the same, but 90% of income in excess of the current cap would be subject to FICA taxes. For example, if you earned $205,000 then $90,000 would be subject to FICA ($205,000 minus the current cap $105,000 times 0.9). If you are employee that would equal a tax increase of $5,625 or self-employed that would equal an increase of $11,250. Those increases are from FICA alone without an increases in income tax.