Experts on addiction always say that the first step to solving the problem is admitting you have one. Thankfully, some lawmakers have taken that first step and are crying for help.

A bi-partisan group from the House and Senate – Reps. Cooper (D-TN) and Wolf (R-VA) and Sens. Conrad (D-ND) and Gregg (R-NH) – have been pushing legislation (pdf) that would create a Commission to “significantly improve the long-term fiscal imbalance” (a.k.a perpetual deficits) of our national budget—a package that Congress would have to take or leave on an up or down vote. The Conrad-Gregg Commission would have ten members appointed by Democrats and eight by Republicans, but adoption of any recommendation would require approval of at least 14 members.

To almost everyone but Congress, the scope of our nation’s budget problems were obvious for quite a while. It’s not just the cost of the bailout and the stimulus. We all know how we got here. Back in the halcyon days of the surplus and booming economic growth (remember those?), the President and Congress lived too hard: bloated farm and highway bills, a new prescription drug benefit, and off-budget wars.

We’re looking at a $1.5 trillion budget deficit in 2010 on top of a nearly $1.6 trillion deficit from last year. Deficits over the next ten years total $9 trillion. That’s more than the entire debt accumulated in our nation's history through 2007.

Unsurprisingly, interest groups on the left and right have their long knives out for the Commission. The left is worried that entitlement cuts will be the first step; the right wants a guarantee that all possible revenue raisers will be taken off the table. But protests on both sides avoid the main problem, kind of like an alcoholic saying they’ll quit drinking as long as they can have a beer now and then.  

There are some problems with the Commission proposal.   Chairmen of powerful committees are howling about their loss of power, saying they should be in charge of finding savings and additional revenue. Sorry – been there, haven’t done that. The long-term budget situation is too bleak to simply rely on a promise to deliver. To address these concerns, the Conrad-Gregg proposal requires a majority of three-fifths of both the House and the Senate to enact Commission recommendations.  That may seems like a reasonable standard for what could be far reaching changes, but it may well mean that the recommended changes never make it in to law. 

Also, the Commission as currently designed could not present any recommendations until the week after Mid-term elections.   The only reason for this timing is political cover for incumbents.

The President has indicated he is open to a Commission proposal from Congress, but is also contemplating establishing a similar deficit reduction commission by Executive Order.  Some Congressional leaders have pledged to take up the Presidential commission’s findings later this year (after elections, no doubt). Unfortunately, this option doesn’t have the heft of a legislatively established commission. In fact, the last President had a similar Commission on tax simplification and reform. That report is probably still being used as a doorstop in some offices around Washington.

The bottom line is that this is a budgetary all-hands-on-deck. We have to look at spending cuts and revenue raisers. We cannot afford to leave any stone unturned. With a $12 trillion—and counting—debt, we have to try something else.  In the midst of an incredibly difficult economic situation, the public is growing increasingly concerned about the nation's mounting debt.  So if Congress isn't willing to take the next step and address their budgetary problem, they may face a taxpayer intervention at the ballot box.