You're watching...
Former Gov. Phil Bredesen, (D-Tenn.), former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin and former Sen. Evan Bayh, (D-Ind.), on the need to cut government spend...
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
I feel it's really I think ultimately got that -- -- -- -- -- real -- -- wanna point out that the you know.
I'm going over the debts and doesn't cut spending the fact that the treasury doesn't have the money doesn't relieve them of the obligation to spend it it's the law of the -- to spend -- well at least I was like you know.
We don't want it -- it and what it actually says it's extend you anymore credit.
Until you get your books in order why should I give you more credit to -- and when it.
You haven't figured out how you're gonna live within your means why is that wrong -- But no that's right in fact the fact that you know your teenager has overspent the credit card doesn't mean you don't pay the bill you tell I am not can't let let let him that he acted absolutely.
My point is if you wanna cut spending you have to -- -- cut spending just hitting the debt -- does not do it we have two separate issues here one is the debt ceiling the second is the sequester.
Doug is right the debt ceiling does not expiring doesn't automatically cut spending but the -- does -- cut -- in a very across the board manner.
Social Security Medicare Medicaid are exempted but there are deep cuts to the military and other non discretionary spending that we'll actually go into effect.
What I'm anticipating is that those things will happen simultaneously.
And that will force people back to the bargaining table a few days to come up with at least a temporary patch.
But what's -- problem in the long run is the real problem we haven't mean governor.
Deal that because this is a fundamental disagreement between two groups of people one side believes that the government should get larger.
And have a bigger role -- needs more revenue to do that the other side thinks we need to shrink government and those are so diametrically opposed points of yield.
I don't know how even -- we're at this crisis point how do you resolve that really -- fundamentally different point of -- -- well.
A look that different point of view has been going on since you know Hamilton and Jefferson argued about these issues almost two and a half centuries ago is not gonna go away.
What we can do is agree that whatever we decide -- that we're gonna pay porch we're not gonna borrow the money we're not gonna do stupid things like play with the debt ceiling over over that issue.
I'm interest settle down.
And you know this notion that somehow you're sending a signal -- the administration congress ought to be looking in the mirror this administration does not spending anything that the congress did not appropriate.
On the -- part of what's going on the is they're blaming everyone but themselves and they are the people who were appropriated the money and -- these laws -- not paying for what we've done.
I mean you're Democrat you're saying we can't spend beyond our means I mean that's I think I think you might get your cargo -- for that because there.
A lot of Democrats right now that want to keep spending at this -- to leave within our means.
Means massive reform and and -- big cuts into major programs are you comfortable back governor.
-- what we have got to find ways to stabilize an -- terms of the entitlements the social insurance programs.
I'm I think I'm a Democrat I think it's vitally important that these programs are stable -- properly funded they're guaranteed to be there when people who are depending on them.
Which is almost every American for things like Medicare and Social Security.
That -- be there meeting to me it's only sensible financial management sensible governance as a Democrat.
To make sure that these things are balanced and how are we gonna have to compromise on how.
Elaborate they are to get it to get buying it from everybody sure yeah but we've got to deal with this issue of these entitlement programs mean that they're on a trajectory -- just yeah.
Why is that is that realistic.
-- I think it it is realistic Melissa -- -- the math it's mandatory if you look at the long term financial obligations of the country.
A large chunk of that the majority is -- these entitlements so we need to mix a very modest adjustments to ensure that in the long run.
There -- solvent and we can make those commitments meet those commitments the American people the politics of it is very difficult to the extremes on either side.
View compromise is a dirty word -- -- punish people politically for that so it's only when the alternative to compromise becomes even worse.
That the parties are finally forced to the table it's not the way it ought to be.
But unfortunately it's the way it is right down until the American people stand up into the voting Booth insist on something better yeah we're likely to keep going through the -- The last -- the politics -- top of the -- is tough to argue there's a big gap there.
Right then -- -- -- rooted in reality because we cannot grow our way out of these obligations there today we can't tax our way out of them there's there's still -- banks so.
Either we're going to reform them now for the gonna collapse later so they're going to change either in a bad way -- -- -- way the other gig going -- and the other reality is that.
Of the last fourteen -- -- raise the debt ceiling eleven of them have come with something that looks like attacking the deficit so it is business as usual to raise the debt ceiling and do the right thing on the deficit.
They got to get to iron out okay what fantastic power panel thanks to all three of you for spending your time -- that's really appreciate it so.
