Letter to the editor: Sacrifices must be made to reduce national deficit

The Republicans are back in power in the House of Representatives after the past elections with many congressmen, especially those who had tea party support, saying that their No. 1 goal is to lower the federal deficit. Many economists feel if the deficit is allowed to continue to grow we will have rampant, uncontrollable inflation or deflation. Either one would drastically lower the standard of living for many, many people. Recovery from this disaster could take many years.

There are three ways to cut the deficit. Raise more revenue (increase taxes), make spending cuts or a combination of both. The Bush tax cuts will end Jan. 1 if Congress does not extend them. Nearly all Republicans are in favor of keeping the tax cuts in place. Letting the tax cuts expire would create more revenue.

Couldn’t this new source of revenue (or at least part of it) be “earmarked,” so to speak, to lower the deficit? Why wouldn’t Congress do this if lowering the deficit is so crucial to our economic survival?

Many Democrats are against spending cuts, especially in Medicare and Social Security. These two federal programs make up a huge percentage of where federal money is spent. To make a dent in federal spending and the deficit, substantial cuts have to be made in both programs.

So the question remains: How (or can) the deficit be brought under control? Another question arises: What does “under control” mean? A 25 percent reduction? Fifty percent? Eliminate it altogether? I’m sure the Democrats and Republicans have their views on this as well.

I would agree, though, that nearly all people in Congress want the deficit lowered. But past history tells us that this is true only as long as the end result does not affect their congressional district, state or chance to be re-elected. What about North Dakota? I was greatly intrigued by a comment made by Rep. Earl Pomeroy during the last Rick Berg-Pomeroy debate. The deficit was brought up. Both agreed it was a serious problem. Pomeroy said Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had a list of cuts in the military that would help reduce the deficit and that Americans needed to go along with those cuts. His comments reminded me of the uproar in North Dakota by both political parties when a past military commission suggested that the Grand Forks Air Base should be closed. Rightly or wrongly, the GFAB remains open and cuts were made at other military installations but not in North Dakota.

Gen. George Patton once famously said, “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his.”

A great description of how Congress has worked! It is important to make tough decisions and sacrifices to solve major problems ... as long as someone else does it.

The only problem with that thinking is that we may be getting to the point of no return with the deficit problem. We don’t need any more political decisions. We need at least a few statesmen to lead the way out of this mess.

Tom Tracy

Jamestown

Tags: opinion, letters, politics, house, economy, budget, deficit