Congress can extend a deadline, pass a continuing resolution, create a temporary fix, or simply decide that the hardest questions will be easier to answer next year. I have spent much of my career around the federal budget and appropriations process, and I have seen how useful those tools can be.
But eventually, time runs out.
That is the larger question raised by the House Budget Committee’s recent field hearing on America’s fiscal future. Former Sen. Rob Portman, who also served as OMB director, argued that Congress may need a bipartisan fiscal commission that would put difficult fiscal choices before lawmakers and force a vote.
But a commission cannot simply be the 2011 “supercommittee” with a new name. That panel had bipartisan membership and a deficit-reduction target. It still ended in a stalemate.
The process was there. The political will was not.
Worse, the math has only gotten harder. The Congressional Budget Office projects debt held by the public will rise from 101% of gross domestic product this year to 120% by 2036. Net interest costs are projected to grow from about $1 trillion this year to $2.1 trillion a decade from now.
Congress can pass a continuing resolution. It cannot CR its way out of compound interest.
There are other clocks running as well. Social Security’s retirement trust fund is projected to exhaust its reserves in 2032. Congress will act at some point. The question is whether it acts while there is still room to maneuver or waits until a crisis dictates the terms.
If Congress creates a fiscal commission, it should learn from past failures.
A serious commission needs bipartisan ownership, not simply bipartisan membership. The White House and congressional leaders from both parties need to buy into the process from the beginning. Neither side can dictate the outcome or wall off the difficult questions. Just as important, the commission should make its case to the American people along the way rather than unveil a painful package at the end.
There also must be an endgame. If a meaningful bipartisan majority reaches agreement, Congress should have to vote. Otherwise, we risk producing another report that sits on a shelf.
No procedural mechanism can manufacture political courage. But history gives us reason for optimism.
In 1983, with Social Security nearing a financing crisis, President Ronald Reagan, House Speaker Tip O’Neill, and lawmakers from both parties reached an agreement built on the work of a bipartisan commission. Fourteen years later, President Bill Clinton and a Republican-controlled Congress enacted a bipartisan balanced-budget agreement.
Both occurred during divided government.
That may run against conventional Washington wisdom. But Washington has sometimes appealed to its better angels when power is divided. When neither party can simply impose its will, both must negotiate and both must own the outcome. Shared power can mean shared responsibility and, more importantly, shared political risk.
If voters produce a divided government again after November, that will not solve the fiscal problem. But it could create an opening.
Republicans and Democrats remain far apart on taxes, spending, entitlements, and the size and role of government. Any durable agreement will require both sides to accept provisions they would not choose on their own.
That is not a failure of compromise. It is the nature of governing in a divided country.
The question is whether Washington can make difficult choices while there are still choices to be made.
CONGRESS PUSHED A $1.8 TRILLION SPENDING FIGHT PAST ELECTION DAY. THAT’S THE POINT
A better-designed fiscal commission, shared political responsibility, and a willingness by both parties to accept something less than total victory could give Congress a chance to act before the cliff is directly ahead.
The math will eventually force action. The choice is whether Washington acts deliberately while reasonable options remain — or waits until a crisis leaves us with fewer alternatives, all of them harder and more painful for the country.
Leslie Belcher is the managing director of government affairs and public policy at Steptoe, where she leads the firm’s appropriations practice. She previously served as chief of staff to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole (R-OK).