The Real 'Entitlement Mentality' That Is Bankrupting America
Many Republicans talk of an entitlement mentality that threatens the character and finances of the United States. In their view, the problem is that too many voters feel entitled to goodies provided by the government and financed by taxpayers.
It is true that so-called entitlement programs are growing as a share of the federal budget and the national economy. Along with spending on national defense and interest on the federal debt, spending on entitlement programs consumes the overwhelming majority of the federal budget. But a close look at the data shows that it's not a voter sense of entitlement that is driving the process. Quite the contrary.
The two biggest entitlement programs — Social Security and Medicare — are seen by voters as trust funds they pay into during their working lives and then get back in their retirement years. That's what President Franklin D. Roosevelt sold voters back in 1935. He wanted the "contributors" to have a "legal, moral and political right to collect their pensions." That's what voters still want today. Seventy-three percent believe the best way for the program to operate is to protect the trust funds and make sure there is enough tax revenue to pay the promised benefits. Just 10 percent want to scrap this approach and have the government pay benefits out of the general operating budget.
There are problems with the public perception, of course, starting with the fact that the way our politicians have defined "trust funds" is fraudulent. But those problems reflect the failings and deceptions of politicians rather than voters. In Social Security and Medicare, voters are not looking for a handout. They are looking for a return on money invested.
Perhaps because of their distrust of the politicians, two out of three voters now think workers should be able to consider the relevant trade-offs on their own. For example, those who would like to retire later could pay less in taxes now, while those who would like to retire earlier could pay more in taxes now. That's an investing mindset, not a sense of entitlement.
But politicians in Washington continue to blame the voters for allegedly wanting more government than they are willing to pay for. The effort of politicians to pin the blame on voters diverts attention from the real entitlement mentality that threatens to bankrupt the nation: A political class that feels entitled to rule over the rest of us. Government spending has gone up in every years since 1954 because political leaders have pursued their own agenda rather than listening to voters.
Over the past 58 years, voters have consistently elected presidents, senators and congressman who promised to cut government spending, but it has never happened, not even once. As shown in my new book, "The People's Money," voters are ready to support the kind of long-term thoughtful changes needed to balance the budget and eliminate the federal debt. The only thing standing in the way of a solution is the nation's political leaders from both parties.
While most voters view excessive government spending as the problem, those who feel entitled to rule over the rest of us see the voters as the problem. And that's the real entitlement crisis facing the nation today. The political class wants to govern like it's 1775, a time when kings were kings and consent of the governed didn't matter.
To find out more about Scott Rasmussen, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit www.creators.com.
- Scott Rasmussen's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
You almost said it...
Submitted by c5then on Mon, 03/12/2012 - 9:53am.
The fact that politicians can make a career out of spending taxpayer money on themselves, their staff and their offices to make their lives as cushy and as luxurious as possible has created this problem. Not to mention that they get special treatment and are seen by many as "leaders" and quasi-nobility.
The systems and the whole political process has been tweaked and corrupted so as to favor the incumbent by orders of magnitude. Additionally the electorate has been conditioned that the issues and archane processes are hard and dificult to navigate and understand and therefore "experience" is necessary or even manditory.
The fix is to have term limits (if two is good for President, then it's good for all other offices too). And to eliminate the retirement benefits for federally elected positions. This would ensure that we always have a fresh crop of legislators from the general population to lend common sense to the discussions and debates. It also insures that those making the laws know that they will have to live under them in a short time.
This is ofcourse very difficult to do today, because the very people who will be harmed by the term limits are those who will need to vote for them. But we must try and put people into the Congress who are citizens first, not politicians. If we can do that, maybe we have a chance. After all, Amendment 22 that limited the President to 2 terms, was put forth and passed right after our experience with the worst President up till that point, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. After his attempted power grab and Supreme Court stuffing plan and economic disater, the country realized that limiting the President to 2 terms was necessary to maintain our liberty. Hopefully we will see that the House and the Senate are no different.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
I'll go ya one better...
Submitted by wizardjr on Mon, 03/19/2012 - 12:29am.
In addition to term limits, anyone taking government money MUST recuse themselves from voting for any politician who could affect that money stream.
To allow more and more people to vote themselves money from other people's pockets is the surest road to ruin.