Announced efforts top $7 trillion, but cost to taxpayers will be far lower.
Exact figures remain elusive, like most of the way the government handles and accounts for money, and it's complicated by a simmering alphabet soup of programs aimed at revving up the economy. The bottom line also depends on whom you ask....
So far, cash commitments made by various bailout efforts — including the Treasury's $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program bailout and various lending programs by the Federal Reserve — are just shy of $3 trillion, Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for TARP, told the Senate Finance Committee March 31.
But the net cost to taxpayers will be much lower — more like $356 billion in direct spending — according to an analysis published last month by the Congressional Budget Office.
--"What's the real tab for the bailout? Take your pick " by John W. Shoen, msnbc.com
It's amazing how apparently ignorant or slyly disingenuous political players can act--particularly those who would have us believe that Obama's team has cavalierly, irresponsibly, spent $7-10 trillion for no good reason at all. It's as though they're saying that is just what Democrats do, or if you are a conservative Democrat, that is what liberal Democrats do. No one is pushing back very hard to make clear that these programs--most all of them--are completely consistent with the best macro-economic research and the views of the vast majority of the best economists today, whether Democrat or Republican. They may divide along party or ideological lines about how the money should be spent, but they all agree that the banking system bailout and the economic stimulus packages are essential.
And another fact that seems repeatedly and conveniently omitted is that most of the government support is not in the nature of unconditional spending of gifts. The msnbc.com article:
An analysis by msnbc.com concludes that Congress, the Fed and government agencies have announced plans to spend $7.2 trillion to fight the economic downturn, with the vast majority of that coming in the form of loans and loan guarantees.
So, this article is as welcome in it's clarifications as it is interesting. And it helps us put the Obama administration's various remedial and stimulus plans in better perspective. It also offers an entertaining and interactive "bailout breakdown" chart that allows you to add one separately identified spending program after another to an enlarging circle that keeps a cumulative total. It's fun. And if you want more of a discription of each of the programs, you can jump over to another article: "Bailout acronym soup: A handy guide," msnbc.com.
And now, Obama has appointed a Chief Performance Officer and a Chief Technology Officer to oversee a budget review process with the stated purpose to "trim the fat and waste from the budget." Good idea, and a first for presidential budget oversight. Many items have already been identified and, if we are to take the President seriously, many more will follow. The president:
"In the coming weeks, I will be announcing the elimination of dozens of government programs shown to be wasteful or ineffective," he said. "In this effort, there will be no sacred cows and no pet projects. All across America, families are making hard choices, and it's time their government did the same.
"As surely as our future depends on building a new energy economy, controlling healthcare costs and ensuring that our kids are once again the best educated in the world, it also depends on restoring a sense of responsibility and accountability to our federal budget," Obama said. "Without significant change to steer away from ever-expanding deficits and debt, we are on an unsustainable course."
He has praised the efforts of Defense Secretary Gates in this area, and others in the congress--both Republicans and Democrats. Could it be that when the dust clears, Obama's presidency will not only have boldly saved us from a depression and restored us to economic health, but also brought more responsibility and accountability to the federal budgeting process than any Democrat or Republican in the last half century? So far, so good? You bet it is.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30115091/
No comments:
Post a Comment