Issue #2: Spending what we can afford

 In 2007, Congress passed the pay-as-you-go budgeting measure. Another name used for it is "paygo", which means that when the government makes any tax cuts, they have to be offset with any spending reductions somewhere else. This law was passed to help cut down the national debt, which is currently more than $8.8 trillion. The government gets all of the money from the U.S. population, foreign countries, and nost notably the Social Security trust fund. The government's debts form a yearly deficit, which increases the national debt by nearly $2.9 trillion a year. The paygo rule tries to show that the members of Congress care about fixing the nations' debt. Paygo tries to hold the Government to the same standard as the american people and business', that they can only spend what they can afford. Supporters argue that paygo will eliminate wasteful spending, and can be suspended in times of crisis, such as an recession. Oponents argue that paygo will hike up taxes to pay for new programs, and will hurt the American people and the economy. They say the debt should be paid off with industrial growth rather than budget cuts and tax increases. It will not help the government stop the growing reach of the Alternative Minimum Tax, and  it can restrict Congress' ability to respond to national emergencies.

 I think that the paygo rule can be both beneficial and harmful to the American economy. I don't see how oponents can say that its a bad thing when the only counteract they can come up with is "industrial growth will help stimulate the economy and help the debt." Sure it would be nice to have industrial growth but how do we do that exactly? You have to actually make a plan instead of just saying something as vague as "industrial growth". Make a legit plan people! Supporters show some good points of how the paygo plan can be helpful. I like that it holds the Congress to the same standard as the people of the U.S. President Obama praises the return of the paygo budget legislation that he thinks will get the government out of a destructive pattern of overspending.

Issue #1: War Dollars

Issue #3: Social Insecurity