Dems’ new offer to GOP: How about $20 billion more in cuts for the rest of the year?

posted at 9:43 pm on March 28, 2011 by Allahpundit

Combined with the $10 billion that’s already been cut as part of the two short-term budget resolutions that have passed, that would mean total cuts this year of roughly $30 billion — halfway between the GOP’s demand for $61 billion and the Democrats’ demand for, well, squat.

Serious tactical question: Is this worth doing?

The White House and Democratic lawmakers, with less than two weeks left to avoid a government shutdown, are assembling a proposal for roughly $20 billion in additional spending cuts that could soon be offered to Republicans, according to people close to the budget talks…

House Republicans are preparing a budget resolution for 2012 that would make major spending reductions in entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and give states more flexibility in how they spend federal Medicaid money.

Separately, Senate GOP leaders are urging all 47 Republicans in the chamber to sign on to a proposed constitutional amendment to balance the budget and demand a vote on it.

Whether we cut $61 billion, $30 billion, or $1 billion, we’re still being hit with an avalanche of new debt. All three amounts are chump change vis-a-vis this year’s $1.5 trillion deficit. So why not make a deal on the current meaningless budget and focus all our energy on where the real money is — a balanced-budget amendment and entitlement reform, which will mean full-scale political war later this year? Philip Klein elaborates:

So the question facing conservative activists is whether to focus all their energies on the short-time budget fight that deals with $61 billion in cuts over the next several months, or place more emphasis the next fight that could affect spending for decades to come.

Many conservatives would argue that there isn’t a tradeoff involved — that if anything, if Republicans show themselves to be weak on the smaller immediate budget battle, that there’s no way they’d be able to tackle the real long-term budget challenges. And there’s certainly truth to that.

Yet there’s also the risk that if the government ends up shutting down on April 8, the public will blame Republicans (however unfairly) and suddenly the idea of cutting government spending will become unpopular. Under this scenario, it becomes a lot less likely that a chastened GOP would be willing to go to battle over the much thornier budget issues.

Paint me a picture in which the GOP makes a deal on the current budget and then, because of that deal, somehow finds itself unable to tackle entitlements and a balanced budget amendment. The base might tolerate a compromise on this year’s spending if it’s presented, accurately, as a bargain designed to take care of unfinished business and let them transition to the real war for solvency. The base will never tolerate the GOP refusing to take on the real long-term budget challenges, but that may be the position they find themselves in if they roll the dice now on a government shutdown and the public sides with Democrats. Why not try to shore up credibility with centrists now by agreeing to a meaningless compromise in order to preserve political capital for the big battle to come? They know if they run from that battle it’ll mean a third party; they have no choice but to fight and die if need be. Why not give them that chance instead of forcing a potentially catastrophic battle on this much, much smaller hill now?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Why do I think that 20 billion in a roundabout way will actually equal 0?

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 28, 2011 at 9:45 PM

If they think that $20B is that doable, why not immediately take that, and start on more next week?

cthulhu on March 28, 2011 at 9:48 PM

Why not try to shore up credibility with centrists now by agreeing to a meaningless compromise in order to preserve political capital for the big battle to come?

And what happens when the Dems balk at any cuts in spending for the 2012 budget and threaten a government shutdown? I agree that a shutdown now is a bad idea. But at some point, the GOP will have to call the Dems’ bluff on their unwillingness to cut anything whatsoever.

And it’s not like the Dems haven’t provided them with plenty of ammo. Just run nonstop ads of the tapes from Planned Parenthood sting, the tapes from the NPR sting, Harry Reid lamenting the loss of taxpayer-funded cowboy poetry, and Michael Moore advocating the confiscation of all the wealth of the rich.

Doughboy on March 28, 2011 at 9:49 PM

missing a zero…

clement on March 28, 2011 at 9:51 PM

Why shouldn’t they take the deal? There’s no way that the public believes that a $60 billion cut is “draconian.” Democrats are spouting that but they aren’t getting any traction, which is why they’re offering unreasonable “compromises” now.

The Republicans need a big win if they are going to tackle entitlement reform – and they must tackle entitlement reform. If I don’t see the words, “Social Security” or “Medicare” in the budget in April, I swear that I shall never vote for a Republican again until they do appear, and I don’t think I’m alone.

A defeat for the Dems on this would signal that they’ve already lost the PR battle. I fully expect that we’ll lose the House if we tackle entitlements this year, and I accept that.

KingGold on March 28, 2011 at 9:52 PM

And what happens when the Dems balk at any cuts in spending for the 2012 budget and threaten a government shutdown? I agree that a shutdown now is a bad idea. But at some point, the GOP will have to call the Dems’ bluff on their unwillingness to cut anything whatsoever.

Indeed. You call it when entitlement reform is on the table.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

$500 billion today…

… another $500 billion tomorrow, and another $500 billion after that until the budget is balanced.

Period!

If not, shut her down…

… The future of our Country depends on it. It’s as simple as that!

Seven Percent Solution on March 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

How generous,of the American Taxpayers cash!!

canopfor on March 28, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Why not try to shore up credibility with centrists now by agreeing to a meaningless compromise in order to preserve political capital for the big battle to come?

*shakes head* When have the republicans ever been able to save or leverage political capital? This assumes there is any good will or honest negotiation on the other side. The rule of thumb for conservatives is always give them an inch, they take a mile. The GOP has to be very careful how they present their tactics to the base, or they won’t get the support they need on 2012.

Firefly_76 on March 28, 2011 at 9:54 PM

… The future of our Country depends on it. It’s as simple as that!

Seven Percent Solution on March 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

Seven Percent Solution:Spoken,like a True Patriot!:)

canopfor on March 28, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Indeed. You call it when entitlement reform is on the table.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

I’m fine with that if that’s their plan. But they better follow through on it. And the reforms better be substantial. Simply raising the retirement age a couple years is not enough.

Doughboy on March 28, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Indeed. You call it when entitlement reform is on the table.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

No, because then it won’t be a bluff. The Democratic Party is made of the dependency culture. Losing the entitlements battle will cut them deeply. They will die on this hill, and we will have to (metaphorically of course) effectuate that.

Demagoguery of entitlement reform is how they ensnare old people. Medicare and Medicaid ensnare the poor. Reduce or reform both, and the Dems are finished.

KingGold on March 28, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Why do I think that 20 billion in a roundabout way will actually equal 0?

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 28, 2011 at 9:45 PM

It’ll be less than zero…It’s a spending bill for goodness sakes!

True_King on March 28, 2011 at 9:57 PM

Why not try to shore up credibility with centrists now by agreeing to a meaningless compromise in order to preserve political capital for the big battle to come?

Sure, why not? Then another “compromise” that gains nothing in another few weeks, and another after that. Each time, the shutdown threatens, and each time the Republicans wet themselves and give in. After all, those hills don’t look any more attractive to die on than the one they’re on right now, and the Democrats certainly aren’t going to change.

Finally in 2012 the milquetoast Republicans lose in a landslide, abandoned by those who voted them in in 2010.

Which is what the Democrats have in mind all along.

This has never been about the budget for Democrats. It’s about an election.

tbrosz on March 28, 2011 at 9:58 PM

This article and the Politico article seem to be an attempt to ‘soften the battlefield’ to get the mindless sheep of the GOP to go along with raising the debt ceiling.

Rndguy on March 28, 2011 at 9:59 PM

So they go to battle later and IF something big squeaks by, O vetoes it.

Cut now.

Cut later.

artist on March 28, 2011 at 10:00 PM

The democrats demand wasn’t “squat”, they actually wanted us to continue spending more.

JavelinaBomb on March 28, 2011 at 10:00 PM

No, because then it won’t be a bluff. The Democratic Party is made of the dependency culture. Losing the entitlements battle will cut them deeply. They will die on this hill, and we will have to (metaphorically of course) effectuate that.

Yes, and shutting down the government now WON’T effectuate that. Entitlements are an entirely different ballgame from a chicken contest over discretionary spending. You’re fantasizing about a scenario where the shutdown occurs, the public sides with Republicans, and then the Dems say, “Oh, we’d better concede on entitlements now!” They won’t. They’ll demagogue it fiercely no matter what because they know seniors will freak.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Take the deal…today…now…immediately.

Then come back next week and get another $20 billion or more on the table…repeat as needed.

However, if the Dems wish to be regarded as sincere, committed to budget reform, then they should get on the bandwagon and help kill Obamacare before it is allowed to get up and running. Sure, there are reforms that are needed to address real issues regarding health insurance for Americans, and at the federal level since we cannot buy health insurance in one state while living in another for the most part….though simply removing that obstacle would be fairly cost efficient fro the feds, and provide wider access and engender real competition among the insurers.

Then the Dems need to get on board with stopping the spending and cutting the budget. Allowing the feds to spend or commit to no more than 15-18% of GDP in any given fiscal year or over the range of a fiscal year seems a good place to start.

But this piecemeal stuff…while we are still spending like there is no tomorrow…Umm, perhaps they know something we don’t?? /

coldwarrior on March 28, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Spoken,like a True Patriot!:)

canopfor on March 28, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Thank you my friend…

… and I know you know it is that serious.

Seven Percent Solution on March 28, 2011 at 10:00 PM

In the words of Kevin Anderson, “How about I give you the finger *middle finger* and keep on working towards that $100 billion?”

teke184 on March 28, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Indeed. You call it when entitlement reform is on the table.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM

Bless your heart. You actually believe that GOP establishment types will take on entitlements. Isn’t there a headline thread about deflating poll numbers for budget slashers? Politicians are too invested in their own hides to take on entitlements. Sometimes I think this is just the end result of democracy, seeds of its own destruction. People will vote themselves OPM and politicians will continue to promise OPM until the system collapses.

Firefly_76 on March 28, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Oh, and the GOP will betray you

True_King on March 28, 2011 at 10:02 PM

As long as we keep obsessing on the budget, we’re inevitably going to lose this debate!
The budget isn’t the problem; it’s a symptom. The problem isn’t what the Federal Government costs: the problem is what the federal Government does! We need to stop whining about cutting expenses and start debating about cutting functions and programs.
There’s too much power at the top of the federal pyramid, too far away from the people, and it’s becoming more politically unstable with every election cycle.

Lew on March 28, 2011 at 10:04 PM

We need a truce on social issues spending cuts!

artist on March 28, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Don’t we rack up something like $72B in interest per day on the current debt? And if so, doesn’t all this BS become pointless as it will never move us one inch towards the black?

predator on March 28, 2011 at 10:05 PM

$1T = one thousand billions. (Or, a million piles of money, each of them a million dollars big.)

Tzetzes on March 28, 2011 at 10:06 PM

Nobody is even mentioning that old pesky Debt Ceiling I have noticed….

Mord on March 28, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Yes, and shutting down the government now WON’T effectuate that. Entitlements are an entirely different ballgame from a chicken contest over discretionary spending. You’re fantasizing about a scenario where the shutdown occurs, the public sides with Republicans, and then the Dems say, “Oh, we’d better concede on entitlements now!” They won’t. They’ll demagogue it fiercely no matter what because they know seniors will freak.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 10:00 PM

I’m not so delusional as to envision such a scenario, Allah. The entitlements fight is going to draw copious amounts of blood from both sides, and I suspect it may even swing the presidential election. But the PR war over discretionary spending is a precursor to the larger battle. If we can say to them, “Well, you cut this, so why not that? And you cut that, so why not this other thing,” that will give us more power in future negotiations.

But if we buckle now – and it will be a buckle to settle for effectively one-fourth of what they promised in the campaign – that’s the end. Conservatives will not step up and defend further cuts, and Democrats will smell blood in the water and end the cuts. Entitlement reform will go nowhere.

As for seniors freaking, sure, it’ll happen. The solvency of the country costs a majority. But if I were in the GOP, I’d not-so-subtly intimate that Social Security insolvency means that the benefits for the old will get slashed too. And not by a small amount.

KingGold on March 28, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Until the GOP decides to do the right thing (shut down) and fight the war AT ALL COST risking their political careers nothing will happen.

The poll sniffers and the peanut gallery will nip at their heels ’til the bleed to death.

GO. FOR. IT. ALL.

winston on March 28, 2011 at 10:08 PM

The 800lb pie in the room

Kini on March 28, 2011 at 10:08 PM

The Republicans made a huge mistake promising only 100 billion in cuts,and then another mistake lowering it to 61 billion. They need to own up to that. But if you agree to only 30 billion for the year, i.e, if we can just let things slide this year, why not the next year? People won’t understand that. If it’s a crisis it has to be taken care of immediately.

chris999 on March 28, 2011 at 10:09 PM

I’m not so delusional as to envision such a scenario, Allah. The entitlements fight is going to draw copious amounts of blood from both sides, and I suspect it may even swing the presidential election. But the PR war over discretionary spending is a precursor to the larger battle. If we can say to them, “Well, you cut this, so why not that? And you cut that, so why not this other thing,” that will give us more power in future negotiations.

Do you understand that if they force a shutdown now and the public sides against them, the goal of entitlement reform will be dead before it began? You’re gambling an enormous amount on nothing, basically. If you’re going to gamble, at least GET to entitlement reform first.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Rndguy on March 28, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Damn, I type slow, heh. It is going to get raised. Everyone is going to be surprised and outraged.

Mord on March 28, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Why do I think that 20 billion in a roundabout way will actually equal 0?

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 28, 2011 at 9:45 PM

It’ll be less than zero…It’s a spending bill for goodness sakes!

True_King on March 28, 2011 at 9:57 PM

They’ll “cut” 20 billion from the bill but add on earmarks to the others down the line.

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 28, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Not this August, nor this September; you have this year to do what you like. Not next August, nor next September; that is still too soon … But the year after that or the year after that they fight.

The eternal GOP motto!

sharrukin on March 28, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Whatever else they do, Republicans should absolutely refuse to raise the debt ceiling. They can point to the Democrats’ irresponsibility as the reason.

We don’t have to worry about the government-shutdown-phobia on the debt ceiling vote.

Kohath on March 28, 2011 at 10:13 PM

No more debt! But I love the picture, it really could be from the opening of SNL.

tim c on March 28, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Tip ;)

New Black Panthers On Obama: His Wife Should Leave The N-Word

http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-black-panthers-on-obama-his-wife.html

Nearly Nobody on March 28, 2011 at 10:14 PM

The budget isn’t the problem; it’s a symptom. The problem isn’t what the Federal Government costs: the problem is what the federal Government does! We need to stop whining about cutting expenses and start debating about cutting functions and programs.

Lew on March 28, 2011 at 10:04 PM

+1000!!!

The Dems are not in charge of the House and cannot ram down their pet “takeover” legislations anymore. They are therefore resorting to running down the clock, being content with the status quo, and will go all out to protect their “turf”.

The GOP has fallen into the trap of debating HOW MUCH to cut instead of WHAT to cut as summed up nicely in Lew’s comment.

The GOP should QUIT playing games with the Dems and get to work by downsizing the Govt – I fully expect Wisconsin-type demos to result as the Dems go into full-scale defence mode.

TheRightMan on March 28, 2011 at 10:17 PM

Do you understand that if they force a shutdown now and the public sides against them, the goal of entitlement reform will be dead before it began? You’re gambling an enormous amount on nothing, basically. If you’re going to gamble, at least GET to entitlement reform first.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 10:11 PM

If the public sides with the Democrats in a government shutdown this time, we’ve lost already. What’s more, a shutdown during the entitlements fight will drive the point well home that reforming entitlements is never an option.

What then? Insolvency? We’ll never get austerity while Democrats are in charge – you know this better than you know your own real name – and a future GOP majority that’s been hit with this will have no viable future but to keep the gravy train running at full steam.

Bringing about a shutdown over discretionary spending will, at the very least, bring NPR and Cowboy Poetry as the face of the opposition. Under your envisioning, Target Number One is Grandma, and Target Number Two is Poor Inner-City Black Family with a Single Mom. You tell me which we’re more likely to win.

KingGold on March 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM

I think we may be done.

Lanceman on March 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM

The base will never tolerate the GOP refusing to take on the real long-term budget challenges, but that may be the position they find themselves in if they roll the dice now on a government shutdown and the public sides with Democrats.

The whole point of these 2 billion-per-week cuts is to force the Dems on the defensive, making them the bad guys if they refuse to accept the cuts and force a shutdown. It’s a good strategy, and the Republicans should stick with it.

This “compromise” isn’t acceptable. The $61 billion for the remainder of the fiscal year was supposed to be the compromise after they promised to cut $100 billion. I’ve defended the GOP’s actions so far because I know how difficult it is to keep public opinion on your side if they are being inconvenienced as they would were the government to shut down. But they’ve got a good strategy and they just need to stick to it.

Reject this deal and propose another CR with $2 billion per week in cuts. If the Dems vote against it then they can take the heat for a shutdown. If they cave, then $2 billion per week in each CR amounts to twice as much as this lame deal.

Caiwyn on March 28, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Dems’ new offer to GOP: How about $20 billion more in cuts for the rest of the year?

Pound sand.

petefrt on March 28, 2011 at 10:24 PM

If the GOP senators had any brains, they’d leave DC in sufficient numbers to negate a quorum.

SouthernGent on March 28, 2011 at 10:28 PM

The 800lb pie in the room

Kini on March 28, 2011 at 10:08 PM

Kini:Excellent linky,thats a keeper,thanks!:)

canopfor on March 28, 2011 at 10:29 PM

I’m not convinced that One Big Win is the only way to go, or even the best. A series of battles over things that the Dems cannot win on, an ever-growing list of Cowboy Poetry moments, might convince most of the unconvinced voters that the Dems are about as serious about cutting the budget as Charlie Sheen is about sobriety and celibacy.

And that might open the door to really fixing the problem.

njcommuter on March 28, 2011 at 10:29 PM

The base might tolerate a compromise on this year’s spending if it’s presented, accurately, as a bargain designed to take care of unfinished business and let them transition to the real war for solvency. The base will never tolerate the GOP refusing to take on the real long-term budget challenges, but that may be the position they find themselves in if they roll the dice now on a government shutdown and the public sides with Democrats. Why not try to shore up credibility with centrists now by agreeing to a meaningless compromise in order to preserve political capital for the big battle to come?

Exactly.

I was sort of making a similar argument in the headline thread. I understand that many are frustrated at the lack of large cuts this year, and the incremental nature of the cuts thus far, but GOP leadership has been walking a very tight rope here, and has thus far done is smartly, and with strategy, in order to get some cuts (not remotely what we’re racking up in debt, but still) and still maintain the general American public on their side. Democrats have been forced to concede (because not even their stooges in the media would be able to cover for them for causing a government shutdown over $6 billion or so in cuts, Cowboy Poetry be damned), but they’ve been desperately hoping that the GOP – or rather, elements within the GOP – force a shutdown NOW. If it happens NOW, they’ll demagogue it so heavily that the public will turn on Republicans, and entitlement reform does NOT happen. Don’t believe it will happen? Just go back and re-read that Bloomberg poll from a couple weeks back, the one that showed how most Americans – across all party lines – don’t really think entitlements are a big deal to worry about.

Point is, the 2011 FY budget isn’t the climactic battle in the overall war. The fight over the 2012 budget, and perhaps this new proposed amendment, THAT is where the real fight should be. Prepare for THAT fight.

Vyce on March 28, 2011 at 10:31 PM

If the GOP senators had any brains, they’d leave DC in sufficient numbers to negate a quorum.

SouthernGent on March 28, 2011 at 10:28 PM

If that was possible?

That would be so rich and delicious!

sharrukin on March 28, 2011 at 10:33 PM

$20B should cover a piece of Obama’s new war.

Valiant on March 28, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Tip ;)

New Black Panthers On Obama: His Wife Should Leave The N-Word

http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-black-panthers-on-obama-his-wife.html

Nearly Nobody on March 28, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Nearly Nobody:OUCH,and it paints,er,taints the Obama’s as
Militants!

And, with the New Yorker Cartoon,awhile back
it makes sense!!
=================================

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44831000/jpg/_44831351_cartoon_ap226b.jpg

canopfor on March 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM

And what happens when the Dems balk at any cuts in spending for the 2012 budget and threaten a government shutdown? I agree that a shutdown now is a bad idea. But at some point, the GOP will have to call the Dems’ bluff on their unwillingness to cut anything whatsoever.
Doughboy on March 28, 2011 at 9:49 PM

When it comes to debating the 2012 budget, all cards should be on the table. Including forcing a shutdown. And the Republicans are going to have to be smart about it, though, they’re going to have to get some message unity and hammer home, REPEATEDLY, that the new budget has to be balanced, entitlements need to be reformed, etc.

But that’s then. Shutting the government down NOW could, and probably would be, disastrous. The 2012 budget is a different story. If you force a shutdown in the fall, so be it.

Vyce on March 28, 2011 at 10:39 PM

i think we have to wait until 2012 to do anything major. Here’s a quote from M. Walsh

For some on the left, too much is never enough — because, by definition, it can’t be. They operate on a modified version of the old Brezhnev Doctrine, which stated that once a country went communist, it could never go back: Once a government program is in place, it can never be cut or rescinded, only fattened. It doesn’t even matter whether it’s effective. The self-interested and the self-deluded have too much to lose to give up the fantasy of the perfect nanny state.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/barbarians_within_Hgv74LXgQnxXQ3MEkJXMIO#ixzz1Hx5XhzHl

the interesting thing is the sudden rise of CPUSA. I’ve seen two references to them over the last couple of days. One was the vid of the guy saying he hasn’t seen the pols this radicalized. I.e. they’ve come out of the closet now that someone is asking for some “sacrifice”.

And remember stossle’s thing on freeloaders. he was basically describing the fifty plus percent of the people that have been bought, co opted, extorted or whatever.

this is a gerneration movement. a few billion here or there is not the point.

r keller on March 28, 2011 at 10:39 PM

Do you understand that if they force a shutdown now and the public sides against them, the goal of entitlement reform will be dead before it began? You’re gambling an enormous amount on nothing, basically. If you’re going to gamble, at least GET to entitlement reform first.

Allahpundit on March 28, 2011 at 10:11 PM

We need to put the people in charge of the message who are the most effective at it, such as Christie and Rubio and Ryan. Let them take the lead on explaining it to the public, because just trusting the Republicans to do anything at all about this without enormous public support (and pressure) behind them is akin to marching up Hamburger Hill without a rifle.

IF this is going to be won at all, it’s going to take US getting the word across to everyone that our kids are in danger – it’s that simple. And if this and earlier generations insist on getting the money they paid into entitlements, at least they’re doing it informed and the kids will know that their parents/grandparents don’t give a hoot about them.

http://www.beatcanvas.com/pics/child_atlas.jpg

beatcanvas on March 28, 2011 at 10:51 PM

If the GOP forces the democrats to shut down the Federal Government defending a bundle of dollars, the GOP will get crucified. If the GOP forces the Democrats to shut down the Federal Government defending a laundry list of stupid and wasteful programs, the GOP will win the debate AND the election.
Raise the debate to the level of ideas and we win every time. Lower it to the level of dollars and we put everyone to sleep and lose.

Lew on March 28, 2011 at 10:56 PM

Get the list of programs in the $20B and put them in the next CR.

Short term CRs with billions of dollars in cuts each time are the way to go for general funding. There is so much crap spending the Dems won’t be able to muster the support necessary to oppose piecemeal cuts.

Entitlement reform should be addressed independently. By all means keep talking but I doubt there’ll be any progress until after the 2012 elections when the Rs have the Senate too. That shouldn’t stop us from cutting elsewhere.

edshepp on March 28, 2011 at 11:05 PM

It’s start now or civil war later. Check Igor Panarin. First I laughed, now, not so much.

Mason on March 28, 2011 at 11:11 PM

They say 20 billion more for the year. GOP says 51 billion more for the year. It sounds like the number will round up somewhere in between around 35 to 37 billion. It is better than nothing I guess.

Real budget cuttig awaits a new president. I do not see Obama doing anything but cosmetics on budget cutting while he keeps full pedal to the metal on spending; hoping that the economy will benefit from it or that it at least gives him an avenue to credit himself for any improvement that does happen. He will never admit that his massive increases in debt and regulation in fact hobble the economy.

KW64 on March 28, 2011 at 11:19 PM

WHEN is Congress going to bite the bullet? I don’t give a rat’s ass if it’s today, tomorrow or next week, or next month, or 6 months from now.

There’s going to be bitching no matter when the cuts come down. Might as well do it now and let the cry babies start whining.

Or do nothing. And you can kiss everything goodbye within 3 years. What then?

GarandFan on March 28, 2011 at 11:20 PM

Mason on March 28, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Makes you stop and think (then curl up into a fetal position under the desk for a few moments) that a former KGB officer has this good of a grasp on the shaky underpinnings in recent America.

Me? I’ll stick with the electoral process…unless it becomes clearly evident that it is no longer permitted to operate.

Then?

Don’t even want to go there.

coldwarrior on March 28, 2011 at 11:21 PM

How about 100 billion and Al Franken gets a face transplant?

disa on March 28, 2011 at 11:34 PM

GOP leadership to Dems — how about you sit on your hands a while and think about across the board to 2006 levels for all
but entitlements…!

GOP Losership to Dems — aaaaa, hmmmmm,,,,, oooo… well…. wwwwwwhew…..

drfredc on March 29, 2011 at 12:00 AM

Anything short of the $100 Billion originally promised by the GOP is a failure on the part of the Republicans.

A balanced budget amendment will not pass as long as the Dems control the Senate, BTW what happened to Pay-Go?

The Republicans must start entitlement reform as a part of the 2012 budget – anything less is a failure.

Should this group of Republicans fail – fire them in the next election (along with the Democrats) and start anew. Perhaps we can get the political class to understand this must be fixed now, not later.

jackal40 on March 29, 2011 at 12:30 AM

i don’t know, it appears the folks are turning against the good gop in wisconsin…I can see them turning on the congressional gop…cripe…we need to seriously do something before we hit rock bottom

cmsinaz on March 29, 2011 at 12:47 AM

i don’t know, it appears the folks are turning against the good gop in wisconsin…I can see them turning on the congressional gop…cripe…we need to seriously do something before we hit rock bottom

cmsinaz on March 29, 2011 at 12:47 AM

Our entire economic system is in congestive heart failure.

I’m getting tired of some of these tired memes and punching bags of the far right. Hasn’t gotten us anywhere.

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 29, 2011 at 1:16 AM

So far, the R’s have garnered $10 Billion in cuts across the 2 CR’s. Now, the dems are offering $20 Billion in more cuts. If accepted, the dems will crow about how they are twice as serious on cutting spending as the R’s are…McConnell caved on obamacare, who has confidence that he won’t cave when push comes to shove regarding spending?

Gohawgs on March 29, 2011 at 2:06 AM

This is turning into the perfect storm that Harry Reid wanted.

The 2011 CR, the 2012 budget and the increase in the debt limit now all have to be voted on at the same time.

Which means Reid can extract more concessions from the GOP to get them all passed because all are under a time limit.

They don’t call the GOP the Stupid Party for nothing.

Wethal on March 29, 2011 at 7:36 AM

Twenty billion is the rounding error for the budget.

John Deaux on March 29, 2011 at 8:08 AM

Democrats playing chess.
GOP playing checkers. Badly.

Good Lt on March 29, 2011 at 8:09 AM

The base will never tolerate the GOP refusing to take on the real long-term budget challenges….

And your evidence that the GOP Establishment worries about the base is…? The GOP’s willingness to drop the original, campaign-pledged $100B cut is pretty good evidence they don’t.

One other point: there are a lot more Republican-run state governments than there were in 1995 and they’re fairly feisty. A federal shutdown, this time, might be greeted with state takeovers of federal facilities that are important to state economies, like national parks. That would not only mitigate the shutdown, it would also show the Public that the federal government isn’t as essential to all things as it likes to claim. That may be an outcome the Democrats would do a lot to avoid.

PersonFromPorlock on March 29, 2011 at 8:20 AM

Our entire economic system is in congestive heart failure.

I’m getting tired of some of these tired memes and punching bags of the far right. Hasn’t gotten us anywhere.

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 29, 2011 at 1:16 AM

Absolutely. Arguing about trivial cuts is mere distraction.
Meanwhile Bernake is devaluing the Dollar to the point that other countries will stop using it. Once we are no longer the currency of trade, we are sunk – done – gameover.

Its the only thing keeping us above water.

Where are the GunWalker Indictments??? Arming the enemies of the state is treason.

The Dems need to be hammered. There have to be 100 issues that could be investigated. Maybe its time the TAXPAYERS went on strike.

orbitalair on March 29, 2011 at 8:36 AM

This is what needs to happen: We offer the administraton and dems a $200 billion dollar package of cuts to accept. If they do not, we do not give them anything else. The gov’t shuts down, which means parks and recreation close for the remainder of the year. We do not give the administration an inch. We let them shut it down for the entire year if necessarry. Come next year, offer them another $200 billion in cuts, and if they dont accept, do give them a budget, let it stay shut down indefinitely.
The longer the gov’t stays shutdown the close to getting our fiscal house in order we will be. This has to be the priority. just as dems were will to risk their careers to pass the Obamacare boondoggle, conservatives must stand behind principle and professional responsibility rather than saving their political necks. If they can not, we need to primary them, and get some folks in there who will.

paulsur on March 29, 2011 at 11:23 AM

I’m just ready to abandon the GOP and go third party. We won’t win right away, and maybe not in 2016, but eventually the Dems will destroy the country with inflation and out of control spending, the GOP will fall apart without the conservative base, the dollar will collapse, and people will begin to leak into our third party.

Then we will have a new conservative/libertarian party without any of the baggage of the current GOP and we can eliminate SS/Medicare/Medicade/the Federal Reserve/a half dozen or so departments in one swoop.

Nelsen on March 29, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Why do I think that 20 billion in a roundabout way will actually equal 0?

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 28, 2011 at 9:45 PM

Possibly you think this because this year’s deficit is around $8 billion per day!!

$20 billion in “cuts” is less than a “spit in the ocean”…especially if proposed by Democrats, who always use their wildly expanded spending projections as a base.

landlines on March 29, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Reject this deal and propose another CR with $2 billion per week in cuts. If the Dems vote against it then they can take the heat for a shutdown. If they cave, then $2 billion per week in each CR amounts to twice as much as this lame deal.

Caiwyn on March 28, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Not a bad idea…$20 billion in cuts at $2 billion per week = 10 weeks, which takes us to June 17, and lots of Congress-critters eager to hit the beaches for the summer will be forced to debate budget issues again in Hot Harry Reid’s sweat-scented Capitol dome.

Then again, there might be some poetic justice in voting a one-week CR with $20 billion in cuts, and letting the government shut down on April 15, while millions of taxpayers are mailing their forms…

Steve Z on March 29, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Dems’ new offer to GOP: How about $20 billion more in cuts for the rest of the year?

TEA Party’s new offer to Dems and GOP: How about $1700 billion in cuts for the rest of the year? After all, that’s what we need to cut!

dominigan on March 29, 2011 at 1:09 PM

How about exactly one more 3 week continuing resolution. Then if the government stops at the end of April people will have only a very few days to panic before their Social Security checks come through. At the same time an ad campaign stressing “passing the debt to your grandchildren” should appear prominently. Call the Democrats’ bluff on a favorable time table.

{^_^}

herself on March 29, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Serious tactical question: Is this worth doing?

Naw, the Republicans should just sell out and demand more spending. Maybe you can get them to send allahpundit a nice stipend for running what used to be a conservative blog into the ground!

Freddy on March 30, 2011 at 7:52 PM