Durbin, Schakowsky and the deficit

The term shared sacrifice has gotten a lot of mileage since last week's release of the presidential debt commission's proposal for cutting the deficit by nearly $4 trillion in the next 10 years.

Unfortunately, shared sacrifice is a concept Washington rarely gets excited about. The phrase was barely whispered before the election. It appears too few leaders, and perhaps Americans themselves, will admit the pain of reducing red ink would have to be spread far and wide.

The commission's proposal is provocative, and therein lies its genius. Co-authors Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson heeded President Barack Obama's admonition that “everything has to be on the table,” and they created a smorgasbord of options including shifts in the tax structure, changes to economic safety nets and big spending cuts. But beyond its political shock value, the document has the potential to reopen the conversation and set our nation on a healing course of action.

Immediately after the proposal was announced, Democrats and Republicans tripped over themselves to denounce its gutsier recommendations.

But passing Debt Mountain along to future generations would be unconscionable, and the necessity of unpleasant solutions cannot be ignored. Americans who cling to the idea that “other people” will have to make sacrifices are out of sync with reality. Leaders also must recognize that what is viewed as untouchable the mortgage interest deduction, federal pensions and Medicare, for starters cannot be immune from consideration.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, a member of the commission, said, “There are things in there that I hate like the devil hates holy water. I'm not going to vote for this thing.” On her website, Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Evanston, also a panel member, wrote that “something must be done, but it certainly cannot be done on the backs of America's elderly and disabled. Any proposal to cut SS or Medicare is a non-starter.”

Many may agree with the positions of Durbin and Schakowsky, but all should find such dismissive tones offensive. Unless they can accept the maxim “you can't please everyone,” the wheels of the deficit reduction cart will spin for yet another congressional session.

Both have stated an investment in a strong and growing economy should be a priority. Who would disagree. But the focus of that strategy is on the now. The new proposal's long-term approach justifies its consideration as well.

Fourteen of 18 commission members must approve the plan for before it can be sent to Congress for the refining process. Illinois is the only state with two congressional members on the panel two key voices that can make a difference. Letting an opportunity such as this fall flat while offering no solid alternatives would be a show of negligence.