The Public Trough: The Democrats’ Double Standard on Spending

It is now becoming painfully obvious that the congressional budget process, instituted in 1974 as a means of controlling government spending, has become hopelessly politicized and the Democrats’ primary vehicle for frustrating Republican attempts to cut taxes and spending. The recent Senate debate on the First Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 1980 makes clear the extent to which the Democrats exercise a double-standard when it comes to amending the budget.

In theory, the budget process restraints spending because new spending bills cannot be considered unless they conform to the budget resolution. But in practice, the Democrats have no difficulty exceeding the budget limits when it suits their purpose. This year, for example, they merely tacked a third budget resolution for FY 1979 (which we are already halfway through) onto the budget resolution for 1980.

The tables are entirely turned, however, when Republicans try to cut taxes or spending. All of a sudden, the budget resolution becomes sacrosanct and may not be violated. If Republicans try to cut taxes they are told that taxes cannot be cut unless spending is also cut. But when Republicans try to cut spending the Democrats respond with three arguments: First, they say that across the board spending cuts are improper, that proponents of spending reduction ought to spell out specifically where the cuts should be made. When the specific cuts are spelled out, however, Republicans are told that line-item cuts cannot be specified in the budget resolution.

If this does not deter the spending cutters, then the Democrats say that spending cuts will have to be made in the defense budget, because this is the only place discretionary cuts can be made, all other expenditures being “uncontrollable.”

And lastly, the Democrats argue that spending cuts, even if combined with tax cuts, will produce “negative reflows.” Thus they turn around the Republican arguments for tax reduction and say reduced spending will reduce economic growth, increase unemployment, and increase demands for government spending.

The Democrats’ strongest argument against any spending or tax cuts, however, is that amendments to the budget resolution from the floor of the Senate infringe

“Democrats can find ways to deviate legally from the budget when they want to spend more—but not when Republicans want to spend less.”

upon the Budget Committee’s responsibilities. The place to offer amendments, they say, is in committee where they can be discussed and weighed against other options. Thus both Edmund Muskie and the ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, Henry Bellmon, have joined, together with virtually every other member of the committee, to oppose any changes in the budget resolution.

Unfortunately, the Budget Committee’s unity fell apart around 11:00 p.m. on April 25 when Senator Muskie proved once again that there really is a double standard. The issue involved a $500-million increase in spending for food stamps for fiscal 1979 offered by Senator Warren Magnuson, powerful chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, at the Administration’s request. Although no such request had been made during the Budget Committee’s hearings or markup, and though it involved a significant departure from its recommendations, Muskie supported the increase.

This brought an angry response from another member of the Budget Committee, Republican Pete Domenici. Domenici charged that he had been forced to support the Budget Committee up and down the line for three days, voting against numerous amendments he strongly favored, in order to maintain the integrity of the committee. Then, at literally the eleventh hour, Muskie himself had thrown it all out the window with his support for a $500-million increase in spending. Domenici said that Muskie’s actions had made a mockery of the budget process. And although the amendment subsequently passed it was clear to all those present that Domenici had delivered a damning indictment.

Up until now, the Senate Budget Committee has operated pretty much on a bipartisan basis, with Muskie and Bellmon working closely together. This situation may change radically in 1981 when Domenici becomes the ranking Republican with Bellmon’s retirement. Muskie may well come to regret his actions of April 25, 1979.