Price and Perdue Voice Concerns Over CBO Projections
This week, the Congressional Budget Office released its 2016 Long-Term Budget Outlook showing the national debt rising to 141 percent of the U.S.A.’s GDP by the year 2046 as well as Medicare and Social Security facing an increased threat of insolvency. Unsurprisingly, the CBO’s bleak predictions have left many in Congress concerned over the nation’s fiscal stability, including Georgia’s own Rep. Tom Price, chairman of the House Budget Committee, and Senator David Perdue who sits on the budget committee Senate-side.
In statements obtained from both of their offices, Price and Perdue vocalized their serious concerns with the state of the United States’ economy. Decrying the financial burden at stake for future generations, Price had this to say:
“These debt projections portend a horrible fiscal legacy that is being left to our kids and grandkids with a correspondingly weak economic growth outlook that will mean less opportunity for our nation and its citizens in the years to come.”
Senator Perdue cited a reining-in of spending as a potential step towards solving fiscal instability, explaining that mandatory spending can play a huge role in increasing the debt throughout the next decade. Both members of the Georgia delegation called for a reform to the budgeting process with Price making the argument for a balanced budget and Perdue asserting that the debt cannot be attended to without first fixing the nation’s budgeting methods; however, Perdue still believes that solving the budget process is only one of many steps that are necessary, saying:
“Fixing the budget process alone will not solve the debt crisis…In addition, we have to face up to the reality that the Social Security and Medicare trust funds go to zero in less than 15 years. We have to save Social Security and Medicare. Growing the economy and arresting the spiraling nature of our health care costs are also necessary to save these programs and rein in this out of control debt.”
You can view the full text of Price’s statement here and Perdue’s statement here.
About Author
tate.mitchell
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Time to put aside the politics and solve this problem!
It would be nice if their fellow Republicans in Congress would actually pass a budget.
First, quit spraying Hellfire missiles around the world. Their $110,000 cost doesn’t even leave a pockmark on the budget but the ultimate ramifications multiply by a thousandfold.
Perdue’s rants on the budget while urging an increase to defense spending are ludicrous.
As I said we need a real adult debate on this issue.
Closing a Georgia military base to increase the overall efficiency of military spending? No doubt Perdue thinks its a non-starter. Cuts will have to be made somewhere else and be borne by non-supporters.
They’re going to have to raise taxes. They can sunset it though. Once we’ve paid back all that’s been taken from SS then end the tax.
Allow younger workers, like those entering the workforce to decide whether to stay or go—if the latter, then they would be responsible for providing for their own retirement. If the system is as popular as people say it is, then most people will stay in. Amazing that some people think their SS taxes are saved for them up in DC, when the reality is that money is spent immediately on current retirees. Like the late Libertarian Harry Browne said one time, the system is like robbing Peter to pay Paul, then robbing Patty to pay Peter, and then finding somebody to rob to pay Patty.
SS was developed BECAUSE people don’t save for retirement. They may think they will, but most don’t. We don’t need pictures of Grandma eating dog food all over again.
Also, “that money is spent immediately on current retirees.” So what? Then when we get old somebody else’s money goes to us. As long as we always have people it should work fine.
There should be a huge surplus in SS right now from all those Baby Boomers paying into it for all those years when there weren’t as many older people, but Congress stole that money and spent it. $2.7 trillion. There is nothing wrong with the system except that we often elect irresponsible people to “manage” our money.
This study needs to know that nobody abbreviates the University of Georgia as “UG”: they are referred to as UGA or Georgia.
Or leg-humpers.
Raise taxes: That is for the compliant. The government does not have the will or ability to collect what is on the books today. It is a national pastime to beat the taxman and get something from the government. And a cornerstone of both parties for any chance of getting elected. We reward debt and clever tax avoidance while enjoying government largess.
Social security: it is an easy actuarial fix we can’t agree on, lots of options, bump the retirement age, collect with no ceiling, get IT proactive on disability fraud….
Retirement age should have been raised to 70 years ago. Raise it to 70 over the next ten years and be done with it.
And our two candidates offer no solution. Hilly wants to expand SS and Trumpet says there is no problem with SS. The candidates that wanted to fix SS are long gone.
Benevolous, with regard to my “contributions” being spent by current retirees, then what happens as the number of workers keeps diminishing? Sounds like a Ponzi scheme to me, which if you or I tried in the private sector, most likely we’d be in jumpsuits busting rocks on the side of the road, under some shotgun-wielding corrections officers…it is basically a way to buy votes; the more people you have in the system, the more difficult it is to make any changes. That is why Democrats don’t want means testing for affluent retirees; support for SS would be lessened if the wealthy could get out of it. Kind of like RobertsCare…
The late Libertarian Harry Browne made some points about 15 years ago, still applicable today, about Social Security (in his book The Great Libertarian Offer): “No matter how much you’ve paid into Social Security, the politicians have put nothing aside for your retirement. Every dollar they’ve taken from you has already been spent. Anything Social Security eventually pays you will be taken by force from the paychecks of younger people—probably including your own children and grandchildren…Politicians aren’t interested in plans to make your retirement secure through private savings…They want to keep you locked into the present system. ‘Saving Social Security’ is a mantra for both Democrats and Republicans. to them, it means saving their control over your life. No politician is suggesting you have the right as a free American to drop out of Social Security whenever you want. Or that you should be allowed to control completely your own earnings or your own retirement…No chance. All the suggestions for saving Social Security are about gaining power and ducking blame—putting off the problem, raising taxes or giving the government more control and calling it reform.”
But I guess for some politicians, we don’t have enough entitlements…heck, Socialist Bernie wants free public college tuition…didn’t know that was something mentioned in the Constitution, but I guess it is if you believe it is a “living, breathing document” that “evolves” with the times……..