President Obama has taken some heat of late for compromising on some Republican demands regarding the current budget situation. This sort of compromise is acceptable, but only if Obama pushes for compromise in return from Republicans. If he is to continue making concessions, he needs to use them as a political tool to help advance his own agenda.

Within the budget debate, an important way Obama can push for change is by working to craft fiscally conservative budgets that still provide important government services. Re-discovering and embracing true fiscal conservatism can not only get  the U.S. out of its current budget difficulties and maintain deficit-free budgets, but can justify a socially productive government open to compromise.

American government has lost a sense of fiscal conservatism, especially among supposed conservatives. Since the 1980s, Reagan’s and both Bushs’ presidencies have overseen massive increases in national debt, while Clinton alone managed a surplus while still supporting social programs and cutting taxes for the poorest Americans.

A large part of what kept these Republican presidents from balancing a budget is the misplaced logic of ‘trickle-down’ economics that tax cuts need not be accounted for in the federal budget. In the words of  former Chair of the Senate Budget Committee Judd Gregg, “These tax cuts pay for themselves.” That is to say, a decrease in revenue need not be offset by a similar decrease in spending.

The supply side economic logic insists that tax cuts encourage spending, which has not been the reality. More often than not, the wealthy receiving breaks simply hold onto their money rather than reinvest in industries which would directly benefit working-class Americans. According to studies by Bush’s own treasury, increased revenue from his cuts repaid at most 10 percent of their cost to the federal budget, meaning they have certainly not paid for themselves.

It seems wrong to boil down the complexities of the U.S. budget to such a simple point as tax cuts for the wealthy, but it is important to note that according to the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities, the Bush tax cuts account for 49 percent of the deficits during his presidency.

Despite the persistence of facts and logic, Republicans in Congress refuse to allow these tax cuts to expire. This leads me to the theoretically simple solution of compromise. The U.S. political system could use more compromise, and I think the current budget discussions are a great place to start. Obama needs to take a more  aggressive  stance, when the time is right, and use this ammo to push for significant budget overhaul.

Compromise has become something of a dirty word recently in reference to some of Obama’s concessions to Republican leaders in the budget discussions, yet is a crucial part of the democratic process. Republican do, after all, currently represent around 50 percent of the country, and our democracy should not arbitrarily nullify their interests.

At the same time, Republicans need to be open to compromise when facts and evidence are not on their side. It should not be unrealistic to hope that compromise now could beget compromise later. Ideological compromises could be, in a sense, stored up for larger, more important victories in the future, such as ensuring the Bush tax cuts are not renewed in 2012.

The current budget discussion provides an important space for Obama to make strategic compromises with Republicans. Reduced spending and increased taxes need not be mutually exclusive routes to reduced budgets and fiscal conservatism, a goal both parties share. While I discuss the Bush tax cuts at length, they are just one example of a major concession worth trading for.

Here, there is an opportunity for a culture shift in Washington, D.C. where compromise is no longer stigmatized, but a normal part of the democratic process. It remains to be seen if the Republican leadership can accept the realities of their economic beliefs and reciprocate the compromises Obama has already made. The shared goal of reducing national debt should be achieved through compromises on both sides, which will improve the economy, and hopefully the political culture, of the United States.