The Omnibus Debate

Overspending is a pertinent problem facing the lawmakers in Congress. In 2012 discretionary spending reached $1.3 trillion and mandatory spending $2 trillion, while only bringing in $2.5 trillion in revenue. Since the turn of the century back in 2000, non-mandatory spending by the government has topped out a whopping $16.1 trillion just in the past 13 years (Boccia, Frasser & Goff 2013). This persistent overspending on programs and services that are not necessary to the functionality of the country is what is causing the deficit to rise year after year. To remedy this issue the government must either increase the revenue it brings in through taxes and trade or reduce the amount of money it spend or perhaps even both. In 2012 thirty-one cents of every dollar that Washington spent was borrowed (Boccia, Frasser & Goff 2013). Most of which went to large programs such as Social Security and Medicare and if these large, growing programs, or just the budget in general, do not undergo financial reform it could spell disaster for the economy and fiscal state of the nation.

The recent clash between the president and congress about raising the debt ceiling made the front page on every newspaper throughout the country and generated controversy of unimaginable proportion among the citizens of the United States of America (College for Financial Planning). No macroeconomics issue is more controversial today than the impact of large public debt on the economy and on future generations, but, however, there appears to be a huge disconnect between professional, political leaders, and the ordinary public about the national debt and its impact on the current and future

Economically there are many challenges we face as a country with our current fiscal policies. Since the 2008 financial crisis, there have been many debates in regards to how we should go about managing our financial system. Unfortunately, we as team believe that in order for us to stabilize our nation financial issues we are going to have to make restrictions in certain channels, which might affecting our way of life. One area needing attention is government spending and how it has to be reduced, and this would have a ripple effect in certain areas. Our elected officials will have to come to a compromise and determine which sectors are costly and can be reduced.

Ted Cruz’s approach to the situation is cut the government spendings and lower the national debt. The debt ceiling is rapidly approaching; Ted has argued over not to raise the limit, but use this time to start large cuts in government spending. Ted Cruz is very much so against any government spending. Ted would even go on to say that “It’s a sad statement that the easiest way to get bipartisan agreement in Washington is to increase spending, debt, and taxes” (Patten, 2013). Cruz also oppose any measure to cut military pensions by just 1 percent. This would only cut around 23 billion dollars from the national debt, but it is a start, which Ted Cruz opposes. When confronted by this, he would describe himself as “profoundly optimistic” in weather American can get back on track (Patten, 2013).

Close to half of each dollar spent on healthcare is inefficiently used both at a clinical and administrative level. Three other areas that funds are not appropriately in are insurer overhead and profit and over priced pharmaceuticals. Projected figures for the first year estimate that just in administrative costs alone the citizenry should see approximately twenty billion dollars worth of savings in the first year. Another area that will put approximately $5.2 billion dollars back into the budget will be that this program will allow the state purchasing power for mass quantity pharmaceuticals and durable equipment. Finally by increasing the emphasis on preventative care and making a primary care physician available to all will add another $3.4 billion. Last but definitely not least, it is estimated that this bill will dramatically reduce fraud approximately $800 billion dollars in healthcare spending. Total savings for the first year are projected to be approximately $29 billion dollars. The projected plan is to use this money for the purpose of providing healthcare to the populous that is currently without health insurance. With these savings and more efficient use of funds all residents will have comprehensive healthcare that at this point was leaving twelve million without it as well as not increase spending (Amaro

The American government has struggled with the issue of taxes and the budget for over a hundred years. Class conflict, adversarial political parties, and convoluted economic philosophies have resulted in a never-ending debate over taxation. The New York Times newspaper article, “Senate Panel Vote Backs Budget Plan”, from June 1993, discusses the current feelings of the time in regards to the budget and taxation. Moreover, the article mentions factors such as democrat-republican debate, trickle down economics, and high verse low taxes for the middle class. The issues discussed in this 1993 article differ only slightly from the taxation conversation of today. However, now in 2011, we face a budget crisis that threatens the American economy

One of the most controversial bill was made a law on March 23, 2010. President Obama signed the bill that passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA), more commonly referred to as Obama Care. “The ACA represents the most sweeping reform since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965”(Shi&Singh, p. 111). The opposition to implementation to ACA should not have come as a surprise and certainly was not implemented as smoothly as intended. It was passed via compromise, thus creating loop holes in a fragile new system in the infancy stage. Such a drastic, yet necessary, reformation in health care came at a time of financial insecurity in a nation that is only a few years out of a recession. Taking on the responsibility

It takes very little to disrupt the slow but steady healing progress our nation has undertaken in the wake of the financial crisis of seven years ago. As President Barack Obama once said, by signing the Affordable Care Act into law, “everyone should have some basic security when it comes to their health care” (Stolberg, Sheryl Gay) . Something as influential as a universal health care bill is no exception to delicate recovery the United States economy has undertaken over the past several years. As in the Affordable Care Act’s name, health care should be affordable for people of all tax brackets. While many are concerned of the repercussions this health care bill will not only have on employment opportunities but also higher taxes,

“Ten Trillion and Counting,” presented by Frontline provides quite a picture of America’s national debt as it surpasses the trillion dollar mark. They ponder the financial well being of current and future retirees while also exposing on how America got into this mess, and what the Obama administration plans to do during his term. America is able to close the gap year to year in its national budget by selling bonds and T-bills. Foreigner countries who continually purchase these obligations are beginning to grow. Much like the Bush administration, the Obama administration has started borrowing big with plans to cut the budget years down the road. It is clear for anyone to see that this borrowing and the future promises of cutting cannot go

Evaluating the positive and negative impacts of such fundamental reform to the health care system is filled with uncertainty. As with any new legislation, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) required financial projections that would be shared with lawmakers and the American people. The CBO projected that “the ACA would increase health insurance coverage by 32 million people and would raise federal government spending by almost $1 trillion over the subsequent decade, but would also raise revenues and reduce spending by even more so that the bill overall reduced the federal budget deficit.” (CBO, 2010) These CBO projections have played a vital role in the on-going legislative arguments over the ACA.

United States federal budget. Social Security is the largest entitlement program in the United States. In 2013, the total Social Security expenditures were $1.3 trillion, 8.4% of the $16.3 trillion GNP (SSA.gov). There has been an issue in the White House of either opposing the cut in Social Security spending or advocating for a hike in payments. Expanding Social Security instead of reducing it would benefit seniors, especially considering America’s struggling middle class and that there are more impoverished people than ever before.

On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the most comprehensive reform of the U.S. medical system in at least 45 years. The ACA transforms the non-group insurance market in the United States, mandates that most residents have health insurance, significantly expands public insurance and subsidizes private insurance coverage, raises revenues from a variety of new taxes, and reduces and reorganizes spending under the nation’s largest health insurance plan, Medicare. If fully implemented, the ACA promises to lead to a dramatically different health care landscape for the United States in the years to come. Projecting the impacts of such fundamental reform to the health care system is fraught with difficulty. But such projections were required for the legislative process, and were delivered by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). CBO projected that the ACA would increase health insurance coverage by 32 million people and would raise federal government spending by almost $1 trillion over the subsequent decade, but would raise revenues and reduce spending by even more so that the bill overall reduced the federal budget deficit. These CBO projections were central to the legislative debate over the ACA. In this paper, I will discuss the impact of the ACA in more detail, and describe evidence that sheds light upon the accuracy of the projections. I begin by reviewing in broad detail the structure of the ACA.

Our nation’s fiscal issues are on a common source of frustration among citizens, so well-known that it was almost anticlimactic when Standard & Poor downgraded our credit rating. This downgrading, which occurred in 2011, was a very symbolic blow to what is considered by most as the most powerful economic nation in the world. The credit rating company said that the nation’s debt has made the United States ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective, and less predictable” (Washington Post). While many consider this downgrading a political critique of the political leaders of America, it is also a simple political conclusion. The AAA rating the

To begin, government spying creates potential risks to public trust, personal privacy, and civil liberty, which is why dometic programs that allows bulk data to be stored should be put to an end. With the Patriot coming to an end, the senate voted to end NSA’s bulk data collection programs to end on may 13. “[T]he House overwhelmingly passed the USA Freedom Act by a vote of 338-88 . The bill would take the storage of bulk telephony metadata away from the government and would instead rely on the telecom

Throughout most of the country’s history, the United States’ federal government maintained a reasonable level of national debt. For example, the total national debt in 1981 was $998 billion. Since then, however, the government has generated significant budget deficits, and the level of debt has risen to $16.7 trillion in 2013 (Calleo, 39). Budget deficits are caused