The Republican Party continues to find ways to demonstrate how out of touch it is. Last week, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan and other committee Republicans released their federal budget proposal for 2014.

The so-called “Path to Prosperity” is virtually a carbon copy of previous plans offered not only by congressional Republicans, but also by the Romney-Ryan presidential pair that lost in an electoral landslide this past November.

At the center of this proposal are two components: cutting taxes and gutting federal spending. The idea here is that cutting taxes across the board, especially for the very wealthy, will spur economic growth, which eventually leads to an increase in overall revenue.

The problem with such a plan, however, is that cutting taxes worsens deficits. We saw this happen when the Bush tax cuts were enacted in the early 2000s. In order to rectify this problem, Republicans propose widespread spending cuts, with a notable exception: appropriations for the U.S. Department of Defense.

There’s no doubt our country has enormous budget deficit and debt problems to address. And while Ryan’s proposed solution may sound plausible on paper, reality offers little evidence to support it. In fact, much of the reason we’re in this mess is because we tried cutting taxes before. The deficits those cuts created were made even worse by attempting to pay for two wars on top of them.

At the center of the budget and tax code debate is the role of the federal government itself. For the last 30 years, a mainstream Republican talking point is that government is too big and inefficient. Although the political process is often slow and chaotic, government can work. We’ve seen it establish successful programs like the Environmental Protection Agency and the GI Bill.

The real way to grow our economy is by passing a budget that invests in our people. By making investments in such programs as energy research, job training for veterans and education, we will be better equipped to compete and innovate in the economy of the future. It’s how we’ve grown before.

In the mid-20^th century, a tax rate of 90 percent for top earners allowed the government to invest in education and research. The returns on these investments were astounding. We went to the moon, developed the Interstate System and built a robust middle class. Prosperity came not through cutting taxes for the wealthy and slashing spending, it was made possible by doing almost the exact opposite.

The Democrats’ budget proposal, introduced March 18, takes needed measures to return our economy to prosperity by closing corporate tax loopholes and limiting tax breaks for the wealthiest individuals. The budget also includes investments in education, infrastructure and clean energy — areas sure to spur much needed job creation.

The federal budget debate should be important to people in our generation. College students like us have real concerns about the future. We face an improving yet uncertain job market, and many of us have student loans to pay.

The Democratic plan includes provisions designed to address these concerns. It preserves funding for federal Pell Grants, which help low-income students afford college, and prevents student loan interest rates from doubling this coming July. The Republicans’ plan offers no solutions to these issues.

With Congress facing an April 15 deadline, passing a budget is going to be a messy political battle that is sure to intensify in the coming weeks. The end product is likely to appear very different from either proposal offered by Democrats and Republicans, leaving loyalists on both sides frustrated and pessimistic.

Liberals can only hope congressional Republicans remember the electorate’s rejection of their budget ideas this past November and show they’re willing to compromise. If not, our only chance at passing an ideal budget and tax code depends on Democrats taking back the House in 2014.

David Swenton is a junior political science and writing and rhetoric major. He can be reached at daswento@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @DavidSwenton.

Published on March 21, 2013 at 2:59 am