In his op-ed, Jindal proposes that, as part of the budget negotiations, Republicans press for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. The reason the “fiscal cliff” is scary is that it theoretically entails reducing the budget deficit next year by half a trillion dollars — a contractionary effect strong enough that, if left in place (which it won’t be), would send the economy back into a recession.In other words, Jindal is arguing for something that would make the job match his resume.
But of course if we had a balanced budget amendment in effect, we wouldn’t be implementing half a trillion in immediate deficit reduction. We’d be implementing a trillion in deficit reduction. And such fiscal cliffs would become a regular feature of American budget policy.
Update: Left out the best part.
Bobby Jindal, in an op-ed today, seems to think the metaphor is not overwrought enough “Today it’s the fiscal cliff, but that surely will not be the end of it; next year it will be the fiscal mountain, after that the fiscal black hole, and after that fiscal Armageddon”So Jindal has found a way to incorporate Creation AND Armageddon into public policy. We're still waiting to see the practical application of his exorcism skills but that must be coming.