Families across the country live within their means and invest in their family’s futures. It’s time we did the same thing as a country. That’s how we’ll grow our economy and attract new jobs to our shores. And that’s how America will win the future in the 21st century.
That's how Barack Obama's Facebook feed introduces the FY2012 budget, a blueprint for federal spending and investments. Of course, Congress will wrangle over the budget proposals, and Republicans are already whining about how it's not doing enough to cut spending. (Sarah Palin, for example...)
So, what does this dysfunctional American family look like? What do we value?
The interactive graphic at the White House website is worth a closer look - something that every Democrat should bookmark and keep around. The graphic gives us a visual image of a very large set of numbers, helping to put in perspective the relative sizes of our obligations (e.g., Social Security represents just over 20% of the total budget) and how they fit together. A talking point from the conventional wisdom - i.e., that Medicare and Social Security "entitlements" are taking up more than half of the budget - is shown to be false. Medicare and Social Security make up around a third of the total budget.
But a growing sector of the budget is about meeting our obligations and doing what we've already committed to do. For example, net interest payments on our national debt make up around 6.3% of the FY2012 budget. And Social Security and Medicare are, basically, commitments that we've already made to care for the elderly and the most vulnerable in our society. Similarly, veterans healthcare represents around 1.3% of the total FY2012 budget.
So, what are our family values as Americans? Are we a nation that keeps its promise to seniors? Are we a nation that honors its veterans? Are we serious about investing in the future?
The education portion of the budget is less than 3% of the total for FY2012. Infrastructure spending - on mass transit, highway improvements, etc. - is also less than 3% of the FY2012 budget. National defense spending (not including law enforcement, immigrations, and disaster response) is over 19% of the budget - an amount almost as large as our Social Security outlays.
What does it say about our national family and its values that we spend more money on guns than on teachers? What does it say about our values if we're willing to break our promises and cut Social Security benefits? To be sure, it is honorable if America's seniors want to do what they can to limit Medicare costs and their burden on the next generation. But are we going to be the kind of nation that refuses to lift older Americans up out of poverty and fear?
Healthy families commit to supporting the self-determination of each family member. They don't hold one another hostage. They set each other free. Healthy family members are willing to make sacrifices, where necessary, for the greater good. Healthy families see their connections in a positive light, and they don't tolerate an attitude that says, "I've got mine, and I'm not sharing with you." Healthy families hold one another accountable, but they don't hold one another back.
In his weekly address on Saturday, President Obama told the story of Brenda Breece, a teacher whose husband was forced into early retirement by the closing of a Chrysler plant.
This is what Brenda told me:
I feel my family is frugal. We go to the movies - once a month. But usually we just wait for them to come out on TV. I watch the food budget. We combine trips into town [and] use coupons ... and we trim each other's hair when we need a haircut.
So Brenda and her husband know what they can do without. But they also know what investments are too important to sacrifice.
In Tennessee, Democratic governor Phil Bredesen made a similar state of the State speech in 2010 . He also talked about the "family budget" and the commonsense value of spending within your means:
My goal throughout this recession has been to remain true to the principle of the “family budget” that I talked about when I first became governor. It’s nothing more than the commonsense idea that we’re going to adjust our expenses to match our income, and we’re going to be very careful about using money from our savings account. It’s the way sensible families have to manage through these times, and while the numbers for state government are much larger than for any family, the principle is the same.
In addition, while there was no way to avoid some use of our rainy day funds as revenues continued to fall, it has been important to me to have our finances stabilized so that I could pass on to the next Governor a budget that matched recurring revenues and expenses. I’ve spoken before about the value I place on good stewardship.
Bredesen, who kept a job approval rating over 70% in Tennessee despite growing antagonism toward the Democratic Party in the state, was able to govern in an effective and progressive way despite the pressures from Republican majorities in both the state House and Senate. While education, healthcare, and labor advocates bristled at many of Bredesen's management decisions, there is also a sense that he was doing the best he could with the hand he was dealt. His leadership and management philosophy kept the state from falling further behind during a recession that saw unemployment jump over 10% in the state during 2009.
If President Obama can lead the US Government in a similar manner, chances are good that he will have a clear path to re-election in 2012, along with coattails that can carry other like-minded Democrats in Congress.