The unserious President and his spending addiction

Opinion Journal:

...

The President insists his party is offering serious spending cuts and entitlement reform. He also likes to talk about "balance," which to him means real tax increases immediately and speculative spending cuts some time in the distant future. Behind the scenes the White House has only ever agreed to token reform and cuts. Here's a number for the debt history books: Mr. Obama's final offer in the Biden talks was a $2 billion cut in 2012 discretionary spending. The federal government spends more than $10 billion a day.

Now we're days from the August 2 default deadline set by the Treasury Department, and the President's only response has been to blame everybody else for deficient seriousness.

Mr. Boehner reached out to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this weekend, only to have Democrats continue to insist any deal include a sweeping debt ceiling increase that provides the White House with political cover through the 2012 election. The Speaker's goal now should be to get his House members to design a package of cuts—no matter how small—that can pass both chambers, and pair this with a debt ceiling increase that avoids default. Even many Democrats agree with Republicans on a base of about $1 trillion in cuts over 10 years. Mr. Boehner would also be wise to make sure his bill doesn't include a mandatory balanced budget provision, or any other clause that the White House can label a poison pill

Mr. Boehner can then toss this fix to the Senate, and let Democrats decide if they want to trigger a default. If the bill falls short of President Obama's and Mr. Reid's demand for a big enough debt increase to push any further fights until after the election, then let the White House or Senate Democrats take responsibility for killing it on those political grounds.

...

That appears to be where we are headed. Obama is very likely to trigger his own default by vetoing this legislation. He is that irresponsible.