Domestic Discretionary Spending Flat Since 2001; Not Responsible for Growing Debt

Press Release

"In the media today there is a great deal of discussion about growing our way out of the current fiscal crisis. To grow will take real investment in our public sector to modernize our national highway system, to invest in high speed rail, to rebuild our bridges and to ensure our public safety by shoring up our levees, dams and our borders. In short, domestic discretionary investments are not the problem, they are in fact a vital part of the
solution to our economic and fiscal challenges.

"While defense and other war related costs -- adjusted for inflation -- have
experienced substantial growth of 74%, ($364 billion) in the ten years since 2001, these costs are clearly related to the cost of countering terrorism, defending the homeland, and supporting a larger veteran population. We need an honest debate on how much is needed to preserve our security, but let me say this -- we can only substantially cut these programs
at our Nation's peril.

"Although non-defense discretionary spending in nominal dollars has increased, when taking inflation and population growth into account the amount contained in the FY 2011 Continuing Resolution represents no increase over what we spent in 2001, a year in which we generated a surplus of $128 billion. So the right question to ask is: Are we
really spending too much on non-defense programs? The answer is clearly no. non-defense discretionary spending levels are essentially unchanged from 2001. There is no reason we shouldn't be able to afford them today.

"The focus of our deficit talks should not be on domestic discretionary spending, but on the real reason why we are not running a surplus: historically low revenues, soaring mandatory spending, and the cost of war."

Source