The Corner

Dealing with Budget Deals

Ezra Klein responded earlier this week to my article on Grover Norquist, disputing Norquist’s argument that deals that include spending cuts and tax increases should not be made because the spending cuts disappear. Quoting Alan Viard of the American Enterprise Institute, he notes that the Social Security deal of 1983 did deliver on its spending cuts.

Ryan Ellis, director of tax policy at Norquist’s organization, Americans for Tax Reform, e-mailed me this response: “Ezra Klein makes no distinction between vague and ultimately unenforceable discretionary spending cuts on the one hand, and a defined Social Security benefit formula change on the other. The latter is far, far easier to see through. The former has been tried — and failed — at least twice (1982 and 1990). Klein’s conclusion should really be that if you want the most likely to happen spending cuts, look to the growth of entitlement programs. Discretionary is 13 gobs of Jello sticking to a wall, repeated every year.”

I think Ellis is quite right to say that entitlement formula changes that reduce benefits are more likely to stick than discretionary spending cuts. (Think about it this way: Because of the way Congress does appropriations, to enforce a discretionary cut Republicans might very well need to block all funding for several departments of government — which is very hard to do politically for any length of time. To keep an entitlement formula change in the law, Republicans would just have to hold tough and decline to reverse that change in the House, the Senate, or the White House.) But Ellis’s point means that if the right kind of grand bargain came along — one that involved the right kind of changes to the entitlement laws — one of Norquist’s main arguments for opposing all tax-increasing deals might not apply.

Ramesh Ponnuru — Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor for National Review, a columnist for Bloomberg View, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and a senior fellow at the National Review Institute.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More