House Progressive Caucus Unveils Bold Budget to Bankrupt America Quickly

The Huffington Post has published a budget plan from the House's Congressional Progressive Caucus, a crew that includes folks such as Sen. Bernie Sanders and Reps. Keith Ellison, Xavier Becerra, Alan Grayson, and Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Titled "Back to Work" - why do political documents seem to channel Rodney Dangerfield or Norm McDonald movies? - the plan rightly focuses on economic issues such as record-high levels of long-term unemployment. But when it comes to spending - the one number that government can actually control in a given year - the budget plan puts drunken sailors to shame.

Where the GOP budget calls for shelling out $3.5 trillion in 2014, the Progressive Caucus wants to make it rain with $4.5 trillion in spending in 2014, or about $900 billion more than the feds will spend this year (go to Table S-1).

The GOP - in distinction to their cheapskate rhetoric - would spend $5 trillion in 2023, or 42 percent more than they propose for 2014. The Progressive Caucus wants to kick 2023 spending up to an amazing $6 trillion. They would also raise a slew of taxes while claiming that their plan will "create 7 million American jobs and increase GDP by 5.7%" in "the first year alone." Good luck with that.

How unrealistic is this budget? It assumes that tax revenues will average 21.5 percent of GDP over the next 10 years. Since World War II, the government has raised more than 20 percent of GDP in taxes exactly once (see Table 1.2) - 20.6 percent in 2000 - and the highest five-year average came in at 19.8 percent. This budget is more aspirational than an Anthropologie catalog.

It's not all bad, though: the Progressives call for returning Pentagon spending to 2006 levels, which would certainly be more than enough loot to keep us safe from our various enemies. That's something that most libertarians - and even some conservatives and Republcians - could get behind.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    the Progressive Caucus wants to make it rain with $4.5 trillion in spending in 2014

    When you factor in the multiplizer, that's gotta be at least a ten billion dollar bump to GDP.

    Happy Days Are Here Again!

  • Pro Libertate||

    Again, if spending trillions we don't have is good, why not quadrillions, googolplexes, infinity?

    The absurdity of believing government to be magically free of economics or even simple accounting is staggering. Government can borrow more than anyone else and can print money. Otherwise, it's not magically free of economics, and those extra powers have very stark limits.

  • ||

    Sheep following their marching orders don't really ponder such questions, ProL. It's almost as if you're asking them to think. Which I know that you know they aren't capable of.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this?

  • ||

    I don't know, can he read lips? FUCK YOU.

  • sarcasmic||

    You don't understand. Money is wealth. Money is value. How do you describe something's value? In terms of money. So you can't have value without money. You can't have wealth without money.

    That means that when the government prints money, it creates value. And if you say otherwise, just give me all your money. See how it works?

  • Loki||

    "I like money" - Congressman Frito

  • phandaal||

    Uh, we owe the debt to ourselves. And we can print it. And everyone wants dollarz!

    /krugman

  • Paul.||

    I like your infinity plan. I believe that Rattner tweeted the other day that deficits and stuff like that don't matter. I think Rattner's on board.

    Infinity paid internships!

  • Pro Libertate||

    What I like about political reality is that no matter how absurd a joke I make about it, political reality one-ups me.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    I miss Rodney Dangerfield. :(

  • AlexInCT||

    NO RESPECT!

  • Mainer2||

    My wife was putting the kid to bed the other night, and I heard her say, go kiss daddy goodnight. He said, why? I haven't been bad.

    No respect, I tell ya.

  • Mainer2||

    So I went to McDonalds the other day, and they told me, you don't deserve a break.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    Norm MacDonald is underrated.

  • Killazontherun||

    Funniest episode of Conan ever was one where Norm told a rape joke. Relax feminist, it was man on man.

  • fish||

    It's not all bad, though: the Progressives call for returning Pentagon spending to 2006 levels, which would certainly be more than enough loot to keep us safe from our various enemies. That's something that most libertarians - and even some conservatives and Republcians - could get behind.

    The proglodytes understand that they have to hold up their end of the "Warfare - Welfare State" system. Rest assured that there will be plenty of money available to continue "Bringing the pain" to Afghan weddings.

  • wareagle||

    it's always the same for the progtards: cut defense, expand everything else. Yes, I'm for cutting the Pentagon, too, but the "too" is key to that sentence. And last I checked, defense is a genuine Constitutionally-mandated function of fedzilla, unlike food stamps, pre-school, or birth control.

  • califernian||

    or the drug war

  • califernian||

    or the TSA

  • califernian||

    or the SEC

  • Juice||

    Isn't that actual interstate commerce?

  • ||

    Hey Nick, why don't you call me some time when you have no class?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    The GOP - in distinction to their cheapskate rhetoric - would spend $5 trillion in 2023, or 42 percent more than they propose for 2014. The Progressive Caucus wants to kick 2023 spending up to an amazing $6 trillion.

    A trillion here, a trillion there; nothing which cannot be counterbalanced by cutting White House tours. Or at least restricting visits to the paying customers. What's the Lincoln Bedroom going for, these days?

  • CE||

    Oh, we'll be hoping for 6 trillion by 2023. Look what happened in the past 10 years.

  • Hyperion||

    Ok, here's what the GOP needs to do. Come on Rand, don't let us down now.

    Propose that we double that measly and stingy 4.5 trillion to 9 trillion for 2014. Write it up, introduce it, and tell the Dems that if they don't approve it that they are greedy, heartless 1 percenters who want women and children to die. And don't worry about revenue, let's borrow it all. After all, Ezra Klein just stated that the problem with todays federal deficits, is that they are too small! And he has charts! And no one's more economic genius than Ezra Klein, except for his most excellent master, Paul Krugman, and he agrees!

    Let's do it, GOP, stop being a bunch of pussies, let's get this over with. Give the progs all they want, and more!

  • The Heresiarch||

    This was my take after the election. Whatever speeds the collapse, good. I'll be in Costa Rica, thank you.

  • Hyperion||

    It's the only way out of a slow and painful death.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    if spending trillions we don't have is good, why not quadrillions, googolplexes, infinity?

    *Hurriedly scribbles recommendation to Nobel Selection Committee*

  • CE||

    Hey, if you want to grow GDP, the easiest way is to increase government spending, because someone messed up the formula for GDP. They set it to GDP = C + I + G + (X-M), when it should be GDP = C + I - G + (X-M).

  • BakedPenguin||

    Well, government spending isn't totally wasted. how about C + I - (G * .97) + (X-M)

  • R C Dean||

    Hey, if you want to grow GDP, the easiest way is to increase government spending,

    Bingo. US GDP is $15 trillion and change. That extra trillion in new spending is, by formula, 6.6% of GDP right there. I don't understand why they aren't claiming their plan will increase GDP by at least 6.6%, because it will.

  • Spoonman.||

    A tacit admission that the multiplier is less than one, perhaps?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    71 members.

    I could be argued that should have a parliamentary system.

  • ||

    This budget is more aspirational than an Anthropologie catalog.

    Some days it seems like the sole purpose of HyR is to shit on all my happiness.

  • ||

    I don't get it. Does it have something to do with shoes or tampons, or whatever the hell women talk about?

  • ||

    It has to do with the fact that ampersands are allowed again by the spam filter, but nicole hasn't figured that out yet.

  • ||

    Shut up & go fuck yourself.

  • ||

    We can't all do what you do at work, Warty.

  • ||

    Hey, it worked! Also, shut up and go fuck yourself.

  • ||

    Shoes and clothes, Warty, shoes and clothes. And absurd catalogues.

  • SugarFree||

  • ||

    I will simply note that I am too ashamed to tell you guys about my real Anthropologie feelings. And that should tell you something, considering how little shame I usually have.

  • ||

    At least half of us haven't seen you naked yet, so you still have quite a bit of shame left.

  • ||

    What makes you think it's half? Maybe people just didn't want to make you feel left out.

  • ||

    Zeus and Shame

    Whenever someone mentions a lack of shame I reflexively reference this (it's not the most fun translation of it, but it'll do).

  • ||

    Nice, I never heard that one.

  • Mainer2||

    Is that like my old man the anthropolagist ?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olkvcHP5Iqw

  • Hyperion||

    Ampersands work now...

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    white smoke means they prefer deep dish pizza.

  • WTF||

    No, they're mostly Italian,and in Italy, and therefore understand that 'deep dish' is not pizza.

  • ||

    He's Canadian, you can't expect him to understand.

  • Archduke Pantsfan||

    2/3 of them aren't Italian

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Shit in your purse, Nikki.

  • ||

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this?

  • R C Dean||

    Me, too.

  • ||

    ".....a crew that includes folks such as Sen. Bernie Sanders and Reps. Keith Ellison, Xavier Becerra, Alan Grayson, and Sheila Jackson-Lee."

    For fuck's sake, how can anyone take this seriously? All I had to read was 'progressive caucus' and I didnt bother reading any further. These are the people that are outright communists, want to see the flag that Armstrong planted on Mars, claims that Cheney turns into a bat and flies away after his speeches, and think that Guam might capsize if we station too many Marines there.

    Why is there even an article about them publishing a budget? Fuck the progressive caucus, and fuck the worthless shitbags that elect them.

  • Hyperion||

    At least Sanders is honest, he admits that he's a communist. That gives him one up on the rest of them, for whatever that's worth.

  • Loki||

    When I lived in Houston I had the priveledge of voting against Sheila Jackson-Lee. See how well that turned out. That was over 10 years ago and that useless twat is still there.

  • albo||

    crew that includes folks such as Sen. Bernie Sanders and Reps. Keith Ellison, Xavier Becerra, Alan Grayson, and Sheila Jackson-Lee."

    Yikes! That's the exact cast of my dreams when I eat chile just before bedtime.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    DRAT!

    I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this?

    Poo-tee-weet, I suppose.

  • Hyperion||

    White smoke! We have a Pope! The world is saved again!

  • Pro Libertate||

    An Argentine? Uh, oh, there go the Falklands!

  • ||

    The Brits threw off the tyranny of the Pope just to protect the Falklands!

  • ||

    I can predict my dad will be using this line very soon.

  • some guy||

    Anyone remember what happened the last time we increased the budget by ~1T$ in a single year? The bureaucrats were literally incapable of spending fast enough to keep up. Turns out even "shovel ready projects" aren't shovel ready when they have to go through a federal program manager. These progressives are doubly ignorant. First they think spending this money will help the economy. Second, they think appropriating this money will magically result in it being spent instantly, thus boosting the economy instantly.

    (Ok, they are more than doubly ignorant, but I don't feel like going into the other things they don't know.)

  • some guy||

    the Progressive Caucus wants to make it rain with $4.5 trillion in spending in 2014, or about $900 billion more than the feds will spend this year

    They would also raise a slew of taxes while claiming that their plan will "create 7 million American jobs and increase GDP by 5.7%" in "the first year alone."

    Seriously. We just did this less than 4 years ago and it didn't fucking work. It didn't even come close to working. What is it they say about trying things over and over and expecting a different result?

  • R C Dean||

    Oh, it worked just fine, for the most part. Cronies were paid, bureaucracies expanded, etc.

  • sarcasmic||

    Define "work."

    If you're on the government payroll or in a politically connected business, it worked very well.

  • GILMORE||

    What is it they say about trying things over and over and expecting a different result?

    politically acceptable

  • ||

    So what's a guy gotta do to get a federal grant for that new 'busa I've been eyeing? For the children, of course.

  • Paul.||

    Titled "Back to Work"

    Why didn't they choose the more accurate, "Work will set you free" mantle of the progressives?

  • GILMORE||

    Since World War II, the government has raised more than 20 percent of GDP in taxes exactly once (see Table 1.2)

    Clearly they weren't trying hard enough

  • albo||

    Putting progressives in charge of the budget is like putting Charlie Sheen in charge of your medicine cabinet.

  • Killazontherun||

    House Progressive Caucus Unveils Bold Budget to Bankrupt America Quickly

    Okay. That's the bed headline I'm going to see today.

  • Killazontherun||

    bed? Goddamn you Freud!

  • buybuydandavis||

    "create 7 million American jobs and increase GDP by 5.7%"

    Wow. I thought Ryan was delusional with his 4.5% GDP growth rates.

    Looks like both parties are committed to outright lies in the fundamentals of their budgets.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    "Wow. I thought Ryan was delusional with his 4.5% GDP growth rates."

    The questionable rate was about revenue growth not GDP growth

  • buybuydandavis||

    One thing I'm wondering - are Progressives figuring that they may as well just keep borrowing and borrowing as long as people are stupid enough to lend to us, because we'll be defaulting soon enough anyway?

    Default on 16 trillion, 20 trillion, 50 trillion.

    "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    How unrealistic is this budget? It assumes that tax revenues will average 21.5 percent of GDP over the next 10 years.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement