The Truth Behind Obama's Proposed Spending Freeze: Sen.. James Inhofe

The American people aren’t buying at least one major component of President Obama’s State of the Union Address.  In an effort to address out-of-control federal spending and our nation’s deficit woes, Obama said:

“Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years.  Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will.  Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don’t.  And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will."

On the surface, this rhetoric might sound good, but the American people know better.  A recent Rasmussen Poll found that a mere 9 percent of Americans think the freeze touted by the President as fiscal discipline will actually reduce the deficit in significant way.  In the same poll, 81 percent say the President’s plan will not make a major impact on our deficit.  Of those, 42 percent said it will have NO impact.

The President’s plan faces two problems:

First, his proposed spending freeze only addresses a very small fraction of the federal government’s total budget.  The plan doesn’t address the two largest items in the federal budget:  Social Security and Medicare.  Without real solutions to the problems posed by these big-ticket entitlement items, the looming fiscal disaster our nation faces will just be pushed off to future generations.

Second, the President wants to freeze spending levels in fiscal year 2011 at the fiscal year 2010 levels.  Given the unprecedented explosion of federal spending the Democrats have instituted during the last year, what he is offering seems more like a budgetary bait-and-switch that does not truly address our nation’s fiscal problems.  As you can see from the below chart, instead of freezing spending at the bloated levels of the past year, we should return to the comparatively more modest spending levels of previous years.  Increasing spending by over 20 percent, and then freezing at that level it is not a real solution to Washington’s run-away spending and debt problems.

January 2010 Jim's Journal