big picture

In the news this past week was much conversation regarding spending money. Whether it’s funding the federal government or finding one more creative, Christmas gadget, we focus much on how we spend our money. I think, however, we often focus on foolish things.

Let me not appear to be disrespectful, friends; it’s not my intent. It’s just that we fall so easily prey to becoming passionate about a singular aspect of spending that we sometimes ignore the big picture.

Look at the federal government’s spending bill — which next to the Gruberization of Obamacare and controversial CIA report — was perhaps the most significant story out of our nation’s capital this past week. While passage was bipartisan but narrow in the House — and  faced a similar fate in the Senate — note also the bipartisan criticism. Republican critics, such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), demanded the bill be stripped of money that could be used to implement Pres. Obama’s Executive Order on immigration. Democrat critics, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), demanded the bill be stripped of provisions that roll back part of a controversial banking bill, even questioning the “maturity” of the provision’s supporters. Yet both the Cruz’s and Warren’s of the world — who are supposed to represent us — are focusing on something less than the big picture.

Over no time during the past six years have our leaders passed an annual budget.

Allow me to say that again in another way: our federal government has not adhered to a budget for the past six years.

For whatever reason (and I’m sure entrenched partisans will willingly and quickly cast blame on someone else), during the Obama administration, the federal government has never passed a budget. Instead of being guided and limited by a standard practice that most successful business entities must acknowledge, the federal government simply keeps passing “continuing resolutions” — “CR’s” — never wrestling with the bigger problem.

This lack of wrestling is what allows for ample waste and long term problems. This lack of adherence is what allows for the current, uncontrolled spending of the federal government, such as $387,000 spent on a study of the effects of Swedish massage on rabbits… $371,026 on if mothers love dogs as much as they love kids… and $856,000 to teach mountain lions how to walk on treadmills. In other words, an annual budget forces legislature and the White House to specifically address spending and cut out money we don’t have (… i.e. love those dogs and lions, but not sure massive monies should be spent…).

We seem to be growing complacent in the reigning in of exploding spending, and thus when the Cruz’s and Warren’s and White House, etc. focus on a singular aspect, passionate as they may be, they are still focused on something lesser. How will spending ever be under control if we can’t agree on how much to spend? What domestic entity has ever succeeded by such a process? Where is the courageous, big picture leadership? Where is the leadership to adopt an annual, wisely limiting budget?

This week comes my annual Christmas brunch (fire up), a wonderful, community event where my sole goal is to love on the participants — genuinely and generously — jumpstarting their celebration of the season. It is a marvelous event — fun to partake in and a true privilege to host — sharing all sorts of goodies and gadgets.  The goodies and gadgets are actually far less important than the celebration. The event is thus so sweetly good because we never lose sight of the big picture.

P.S. That’s important.

Respectfully…

AR