Liz Peek
  • Articles
  • Videos
  • Radio
  • About
  • Contact
Screen Shot 2018-02-08 at 3.01.38 PM
February 8, 2018

Guns, butter, designer shoes: Senate budget deal feeds the swamp

Liz Peek Articles

Guns, butter and designer shoes! That’s what the Senate budget deal looks like — a spoiled fashionista’s shopping list. The old-fashioned notion of compromise appears to have disappeared in favor of a free-for-all giving everyone on both sides of the aisle pretty much everything they wanted.

Republicans got a huge (and needed) hike in the defense budget, while Democrats got a laundry list of goodies, including four more years of a children’s health insurance program on top of the six already guaranteed in the last spending bill. What was the point of that?

Democrats and the liberal media complained that the Republican tax cuts were excessively stimulative to an already expanding economy and amounted to pouring gasoline on a fire. They warned that higher rates and looming inflation would follow. Those concerns apparently disappeared under the blissful prospect of wanton check-writing and vote buying.

Politically, the impact of the proposed spending bill, which hikes outlays by $300 billion over two years, is mixed. Many Americans are tired of the incessant drama from our nation’s capital. They are also fed up with Congress not being able to do their job and pass a budget, instead lurching from one deadline to the next.

The Senate bill postpones for two years the need to revisit the debt ceiling, which is a welcome reprieve. That is the irritating moment when high-minded Republicans take the floor and object to paying for the spending their votes have already authorized.

But tranquility may be a high price to pay for Republicans who with this agreement cede their role as the prudent overseer of the nation’s purse. Some accused them of treachery in passing a bill that cuts taxes. Do not confuse higher federal spending with reduced revenues.

One leads to greater federal bloat and inefficiency, the other means returning to individuals and businesses their own money, which they will invest and spend more widely than government bureaucrats.

Here’s why the Senate proposal matters, to you, the reader, and to your friends and families: Higher spending, coupled with the tax cuts, will accelerate the already-accelerating economy.

One of Wall Street’s top economics teams has estimated the increased spending will result in 0.3-percent additional growth. That may not sound like much. But it is enough that immediately upon seeing the terms of the budget agreement, investors pushed yields on the 10-year Treasury up close to 2.9 percent, the highest since January 2014, and dumped stocks.

That’s because investors expect the Federal Reserve will move more aggressively to curtail inflation, by raising interest rates faster than they had previously forecast. When rates go up, the cost of mortgages, car loans and credit card debt, for instance, all become more expensive, causing consumers to cut back.

Also, higher rates mean that fixed income instruments like bonds become relatively more attractive compared to stocks. With interest rates at near-zero levels for the past several years, investors looking for decent returns had to buy stocks; nothing else provided meaningful returns. That is now changing.

There are two other worrisome aspects of the spending bill. One is the impact on the national debt, which today stands at a little more than $20 trillion. Rising budget deficits will add to that staggering total.

In fiscal 2017 (ending Sept. 30) the government spent $666 billion more than it took in; in this current year, that figure will likely increase, perhaps approaching $1 trillion. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget had predicted the budget deficit for fiscal 2019 would total $1.12 trillion; that was before this spending bill.

Why does the deficit matter? First, interest on our debt is going to eat up more of our budget with every tick up in interest rates. Under Obama, the nation’s debt soared from $11.9 trillion at the end of fiscal 2009 to roughly $20 trillion.

But the impact was all but invisible because interest rates were so low. Interest payments on all government debt (including some state issues) totaled $414 billion in 2010; that increased to only $433 billion in 2016, despite the leap in borrowings.

Today, rising rates will mean that the amount of money the government spends to service our debt will rise rapidly. For the first four months of the current fiscal year, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that interest outlays rose $13 billion, or 14 percent, because they predict higher interest rates.

If rates continue to increase, the debt service totals will quickly become one of our biggest budget items, backing out needed spending on items like infrastructure.

President Obama should have taken advantage of the extra-low rate environment created by years of monetary easing to lengthen the maturities of the nation’s debt portfolio, but he did not.

The move would have highlighted the jump in debt under his management, a revelation Democrats were eager to avoid. Instead, most of our borrowings continue to be in short-term securities, an irresponsible decision that leaves the country vulnerable to rising rates. Thank you, Obama.

President Trump was elected promising to drain the swamp. He and members of the administration have been criticized for trying to cut spending at the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department and other agencies.

But our legislators are not on board; they want to fatten the swamp creatures. That is how it has always been and for the moment, it appears the White House is not strong enough to resist.

 

Published on The Hill

Stock slide bites boastful Trump, but rising wages great for GOP Stocks rise to cap roller-coaster week

Related Posts

Screenshot 2025-05-16 at 8.43.36 AM

Articles

DOGE isn’t meeting its goals — you can thank the political establishment

Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Articles

Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda

Articles

Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda

Recent Posts

  • Screenshot 2025-05-16 at 8.43.36 AMDOGE isn’t meeting its goals — you can thank the political establishment
  • Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliensDemocrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens
  • Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agendaRepublicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda
  • Screenshot 2019-06-26 07.54.58What Kamala Harris buzz is telling us. Read between the lines, America

Tweets by Liz

Unable to load Tweets

Follow

Liz on Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Liz Peek

12 hours ago

Liz Peek

My Morning Rant:
I am alternately peeved and sympathetic with Chip Roy, Ralph Norman and the others who torpedoed Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill. But after reading the fine print this morning and realizing that reforms to Medicaid don’t kick in until 2029 !!!! I am disgusted. I get that states need some time to adjust to a change in rules regarding Medicaid eligibility – maybe a year or 18 months — but do they really need four years? No, they do not. The extended timeframe is an obvious play to put political repercussions off until after the midterms. Legislators from swing districts fear losing their seats because able-bodied adults lose their free ride. They want to put off any change as long as possible.
On the other hand, those vulnerable legislators will almost certainly get canned if the 2017 tax cuts don’t get extended and Trump’s agenda crashes. We need both to get the bill passed, and to make it tougher.
The conservatives calling for bigger spending cuts are completely correct. Just ask Moody’s, which in recent days downgraded U.S. debt. Imagine, the United States of America has lost its triple-A status. (The other two major ratings agencies had already made this downgrade.) This would be a wake-up call except that most of our country is asleep, lulled into a false sense of complacency by hours spent on Tik-Tok or watching the NFL. We all need downtime, for sure, but we also need to pay attention to what’s happening with our country’s fiscal outlook. It isn’t good. Even the Fed, no friend to the Trump administration or to fiscal austerity, has announced it will cut staff and overhead. Of course, why the Fed has a headcount of 24,000 is a mystery. How can they employ so many people and still get it wrong most of the time? This is the group that never spoke out against Biden’s reckless spending; it’s quite the switch.
Simply put, the country endorsed a huge surge in government spending to compensate for the wrong-headed directives during Covid that shut down schools, businesses and churches. The government under Trump wanted to keep Americans employed and the economy ready to rebound, which it did. Biden kept the spending at max level, refusing to let a crisis go to waste. Democrats in Congress and the Fed went along, spurring the highest inflation in decades.
Now we have to go back to the trend-line pre-Covid spending; the bill on the table doesn’t do that. Republicans must do better if they want to keep the majority.
… See MoreSee Less

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 30
  • Shares: 4
  • Comments: 9

Comment on Facebook

Right on, as usual! Thanks for all your clear-headed messages.

We need a balanced budget amendment! Deficit spending needs to end!

Just sick of BOTH parties. Neither are there for the Working Americans. BOTH parties responsible for the theft going on. Repubs should have read the bills that gave away money..

Nailed it

Liz Peek Well written, my friend!

Convention of States is looking better everyday.

Honestly you should be somewhere in Trumps administration Liz.. Just sayin

Is TERM LIMiTS in this big beautiful bill? Everything else is.
If not, why not?
Past time to cut the deadwood and get “servants” of We the People seated who will do the job more responsibly..

Following.

View more comments

Liz Peek

2 days ago

Liz Peek

What happened to DOGE???
… See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

DOGE isn’t meeting its goals — you can thank the political establishment

DOGE chief has been thwarted at every turn — by judges, Democrats and their media allies, even Republicans.

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 5
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 2

Comment on Facebook

The Uniparty doesn't want their gravy train turned over.

Democrats are Americas virus.

Liz Peek

3 days ago

Liz Peek

My Morning Rant:
John Hawley, Senator from Missouri, is out with a blistering attack on Republicans in Congress who want to “cut” Medicaid spending. He declares those in favor of Medicaid reforms contained in the House bill “a noisy contingent of corporatist Republicans — call it the party’s Wall Street wing” who are not on board with working-class Americans and who want to “build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor”. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/opinion/josh-hawley-dont-cut-medicaid.html
What rot. Working Americans of all classes are sick and tired of an ever-growing amount of their hard-earned taxes going to fund those who are not working. This is not a Wall Street issue- it’s a fairness issue. Though some groups say most Medicaid recipients are working, that is not true. A study by AEI showed that “In December 2022, 44 percent of non-disabled working age Medicaid recipients without children worked at least 80 hours” per month, compared to 72% not receiving Medicaid. Focusing on “prime working ages of 25 to 54, the share working at least 80 hours was 51 percent among Medicaid recipients and 84 percent among non-Medicaid recipients.” So why would 49% not be working?
Here’s the problem: the Medicaid changes that GOP legislators want to make don’t target “the working poor”, they target able-bodied men and women who are not working, and who historically would not have qualified for Medicaid benefits. Only when Obama rescinded the work requirements for Medicaid did the program blow up entirely and become the drain on the fiscal purse that we see today. As he states in his op-ed, Hawley’s problem is this: “Today [Medicaid] serves over 70 million Americans, including well over one million residents of Missouri, the state I represent.” Hawley, who was elected last fall by a 14-point margin, fears he’ll lose ground with those million recipients if he embraces fiscal common sense. Or maybe he fears losing the support of healthcare professionals, who donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaign. www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/josh-hawley/summary?cid=N00041620
Our country has seen a long-term decline in able-bodied men working. The labor participation rate for that group is 89.1% which sounds high until you realize that it was 97.1% in 1960. That’s a huge slide, with troubling implications for U.S. productivity. If you believe, as I do, that work is healthy, it is also bad news for the individuals who are, at least in some cases, gaming the system.
Instead of railing about sincere efforts to reform an out-of-control entitlement, why doesn’t Hawley turn his attentions to improving job opportunities and training in his state? Or attracting more employers? And, where are his ideas for cutting federal spending, which is too high and which is hurting our nation? Some $50 billion in Medicaid outlays funds fraud or constitutes “improper payments.” What is Hawley doing to confront that?
Maybe I would be more impressed with his arguments but for his having published his screed in the New York Times- is that the most efficient way to speak to working-class Americans? Bernie Sanders probably thinks so, and so does Josh Hawley.
… See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Sen. Josh Hawley – Campaign Finance Summary

Fundraising profile for Sen. Josh Hawley – Missouri

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 4
  • Shares: 1
  • Comments: 2

Comment on Facebook

We have to end the idea that working for McDonalds at the counter is the end game career wise. It’s what you do in high school and college to pay your bills. If you want to be in that industry, you need to think manager then owner as that is the career.

Uniparty in action. They are there to Take money, not help The People.

LOAD MORE

Tags

AGENDA AIR FORCE BIG GOVERNMENT BORDER WALL CHINA CLINTON CONGRESS CYBERWAR DEMOCRATS DRAIN THE SWAMP E-VERIFY ECONOMY ELON MUSK FILLIBUSTER FREEDOM CAUCUS FREEDOM WATCH GOP GORSUCH GRADUATION HACKING HEALTH CARE HILLARY IMMIGRATION INFRASTRUCTURE KUSHNER MEDIA MIDDLE EAST MOODY'S NUNES NYC OIL RAND PAUL STOCK MARKET SUPREME COURT SUSAN RICE TAXES TAX REFORM TECHNOLOGY TED CRUZ TERROR TRUMP TURKEY WALL STREET WEATHER WELLESLEY
[themify_map address="233 78th Street New York, NY 10032" width=100% height=250px zoom=14]
  • Articles
  • Videos
  • Radio
  • About
  • Contact
©2017 LizPeek.org. All Rights Reserved.
Site by Steeplechase Strategies