THERE THEY GO AGAIN – AT 9:05 A.M. ET:  The Democrats in the Senate have come up with a budget plan.  Guess what it contains?  Take a good guess.  From The Weekly Standard: 

Senate Democrats finally have a budget proposal that most of the caucus seems to be satisfied with.

According to the Hill, Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) presented a proposal to the Democratic caucus today that contains an even split of spending cuts and tax hikes.

And...

If a "50-50" budget requires $2 trillion in tax increases over the next decade, it's likely going to take a lot more than repealing the Bush tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans, which, according to the White House's numbers from its FY2011 proposal, would only reduce the deficit by around $700 billion. This means tax hikes on the middle class, such as an increase in the federal gas tax as recommended by the fiscal commission, are most certainly on the table. Such a proposal could pass the Budget Committee, but would the Democratic senators seeking reelection next year vote for a budget that would necessarily raise taxes on the middle class?

Just what the nation needs.  Higher gas prices.  Isn't that what you were thinking this morning?

Besides, while an even split between tax increases and spending cuts might satisfy liberal Democrats in the Senate, historical evidence shows that among developed countries facing severe debt crises, those that cut more in expenditures than they raised in taxes were on average more successful in winding down their debt. And while the details of the "50-50" budget haven't been released, it's unlikely the $2 trillion in spending would address the largest spending driver of our debt--Medicare.

All these details.  So much bother.

Frankly, I can't see moderate Democratic officeholders from swing states going anywhere near this plan, unless they want to spend more time with their families. 

At the same time, basic math may make some tax increases necessary, as has occurred under both Democratic and Republican administrations.  The Medicare cost crisis is real, and Americans are making it clear they don't want benefits reduced.  That's a bad combination.  I suspect Americans would be willing to accept a targeted increase in Medicare premiums if they honestly believed they were getting something for it, and if they saw real efforts to rein in Medicare costs.  I think, given the politics of the country, that it will come to that.

May 11, 2011