Inquirer Editorial: Tell the truth about cuts

Government overspending is provoking voter anger in this election, and many candidates for public office are pledging to tackle deficits in Washington.

But when you ask what they intend to cut, candidates in both parties routinely fall back on the old "waste, fraud, and abuse" dodge. They know they won't win votes by promising to cut specific programs.

Eliminating all waste and fraud from the federal budget, however, would add up to only a small fraction of annual government spending. It wouldn't come close to solving the problem.

If candidates were being honest about the hard choices that lie ahead, they might point to the example of Britain.

Officials in the United Kingdom recently announced severe cuts in spending to bring down the bloated budget deficit. Government departments will be cut an average of 19 percent, and nearly half a million government workers will lose their jobs over the next four years - about 8 percent of all public-sector employees.

Police budgets in Britain will be cut 4 percent. The retirement age will be raised, sooner than planned, to 66 from 65. Military spending will be cut 8 percent over four years. Public-housing tenants face higher rents.

In spite of the steepest cuts in 60 years, it's not enough to balance Britain's books. The British government also is raising taxes. A value-added tax, paid on most consumer goods, will rise in January from 17.5 percent to 20 percent. That would be equivalent to a 14 percent increase in a U.S. national sales tax. The government also is imposing a permanent tax on banks.

Britain is in worse fiscal shape than the United States, but not by much. Its public deficit is 11.5 percent of total economic output; the U.S. deficit stands at 10.7 percent of gross domestic product.

There's some debate whether the new government of Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron is cutting too much too soon. But his austerity actions give an idea of the real sacrifices required to reduce massive deficits quickly. It's not simply a matter of ferreting out all the welfare cheats.

In Washington, a bipartisan debt commission appointed by President Obama is preparing to make recommendations for balancing the federal budget and reducing debt. Most of its suggestions reportedly involve spending cuts.

But some of the proposals on the table would amount to tax increases, such as reducing the allowable deduction for mortgage interest, and eliminating child-tax credits. Also under consideration is not allowing employees to pay their portion of health-insurance coverage with pretax dollars.

These tax breaks, and others, cost the U.S. government about $1 trillion per year.

The choices ahead to significantly cut government spending will involve real pain for families' budgets. Candidates who only talk about reducing waste and fraud are either deluding themselves or hoping to fool voters.