logo
    • Magazine
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Racial Justice
  • Economic Justice
    • Collections
  • Climate Justice
  • Health Justice
  • Leadership
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Subscribe
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Complimentary Webinars
    • Premium On-Demand Webinars
  • Membership
  • Submissions

A Cap on Gov’t Spending and a Magic Number

Rick Cohen
November 18, 2010
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print

November 15, 2010; Source: Truthout | The nonprofit significance of Dean Baker’s commentary on Truthout.org is not that he enjoys Rand Paul’s worship of Aqua Buddha. Baker, the director of the Center for Economic Policy Research thinks Paul’s oddly named river god and new recommendations from President Obama’s deficit commission chaired by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson are both a bit odd.

The deficit commission recommended capping government spending at 21 percent of GDP. Why 21 percent? That mystifies Baker as much as the origins of Aqua Buddha, both of which he ascribes to “some sort of religious significance.”

As a good economist, Baker notes that there is no obvious problem if federal government expenditures go above 21 percent. To keep government spending below the mystical 21 percent threshold, we would guess that Simpson and Bowles are intimating that some functions get transferred to the private sector, which could include shifting some public services to charitably supported off-budget nonprofits.

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

On one hand, it may be that the Simpson/Bowles recommendations will be dead on arrival when the report is formally released, particularly due to its recommendation of doing away with the mortgage interest deduction and its call to raise the retirement age (by the year 2075) to 69. On the other hand, it could be that the impending budget stalemate between the Democratic White House, the Republican House of Representatives, and the electorally shell shocked, but still Democratically held Senate leads decision-makers to reach for something, anything that might give them a roadmap out of their tax and spending bind.

The Simpson/Bowles commission report might be just the instrument to use for fashioning a way out of the impasse. If so, nonprofits might want to be prepared for the programs they administer to be cut to accommodate the magic number 21.—Rick Cohen

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
About the author
Rick Cohen

Rick joined NPQ in 2006, after almost eight years as the executive director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). Before that he played various roles as a community worker and advisor to others doing community work. He also worked in government. Cohen pursued investigative and analytical articles, advocated for increased philanthropic giving and access for disenfranchised constituencies, and promoted increased philanthropic and nonprofit accountability.

More about: Nonprofit NewsPolicies and LawsTax Policy

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

Join Today
logo logo logo logo logo
See comments

Spring-2023-sidebar-subscribe
You might also like
Losing Forward: Lessons from Organizing for Narrative Change
Jung Hee Choi and Joseph Phelan
Seattle’s Sugary Drink Tax Pays Off, but There’s Bigger Fish to Fry
Carole Levine and Ruth McCambridge
Housing Advocates Decry Proposed Diversion of Tax on Rich SF Businesses
Ruth McCambridge
In Illinois, Two Wealthy Men Battle over What Fair Taxes Are
Martin Levine
Now You See It, Now You Don’t: Deciphering the Dubious Payroll Tax Deferral
Steve Dubb
Facing Recession and Federal Indifference, Cities and States Eye Tax Increases
Ruth McCambridge

NPQ Webinars

April 27th, 2 pm ET

Liberatory Decision-Making

How to Facilitate and Engage in Healthy Decision-making Processes

Register Now
You might also like
Losing Forward: Lessons from Organizing for Narrative Change
Jung Hee Choi and Joseph Phelan
AOC’s “Tax the Rich” Dress Dazzles Met Gala, while...
Anastasia Reesa Tomkin
Foundation Giving Numbers for 2020 Show 15 Percent Increase
Steve Dubb

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

NPQ-Spring-2023-cover

Independent & in your mailbox.

Subscribe today and get a full year of NPQ for just $59.

subscribe
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Copyright
  • Careers

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.