Senate Democrats still not letting anyone see their budget

posted at 1:08 pm on May 20, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Welcome to the most transparent Senate evah.  Despite not having produced a normal budget for two years, the Harry Reid-led Senate Democrats will keep their current budget plan under wraps for a while longer. Apparently, Budget chair Kent Conrad is waiting to see whether the White House and House Republicans let him off the hook … again:

Senate Democrats decided Thursday not to release their spending plan to counter the budget blueprint approved last month by House Republicans, saying they will wait to see whether talks at the White House produce a compromise plan for reining in the national debt.

Democrats said they are close to agreement on a spending plan that would reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, with about half the savings coming from higher taxes. That would offer a sharp contrast to the GOP budget, which relies entirely on deep cuts in spending.

But rather than subject a proposal for higher taxes to Republican attack, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he would “defer” action “because of the high-level bipartisan leadership negotiations that are currently underway” involving lawmakers from both parties and Vice President Biden.

“If you go through a partisan markup, it hardens people’s positions and makes it more difficult to get a bipartisan agreement,” said Conrad, a member of theSenate’s Gang of Six, which has been trying to draft its own debt-reduction framework.

Not to pick nits here, but isn’t producing a budget the job of a Budget committee?  Not lately, of course.  The Senate could just as easily change its name to the Responsibility Shirking Committee and give voters a more accurate picture of their mission under Democratic leadership.

Excuse me … that should be the Responsibility Deferment Committee.

The Senate Budget Committee hasn’t produced a workable plan in 750 days, a point rammed home by Senator Jeff Sessions on the floor yesterday:

Republicans led by Budget ranking member Jeff Sessions (Ala.) have been lambasting Democrats for weeks over their failure to propose a budget for a second straight year. Sessions spoke on the Senate floor Thursday with a giant sign saying “750” — the number of days since the Senate last passed a budget.

He also ripped the Democrats after Conrad’s announcement Thursday.

Roll Call reports that Conrad and Democrats are “punting” on the budget.  They’ve been doing a lot of punting while in the majority.  If Harry Reid and Kent Conrad aren’t interested in leadership, perhaps they should just resign and let Republicans provide it instead.  At least they’d get the work done, as House Republicans demonstrated by passing the FY2011 budget in weeks when Democrats couldn’t do it in a full year with large majorities in both chambers.


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

They-are-scared

tx2654 on May 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Should we not allow the IRS to see our tax return? This clandestine secrecy and covert governing is going to backfire.

Like Obamascare was secretive and now the ones for it are hustling for waivers.

seven on May 20, 2011 at 1:11 PM

“… the Harry Reid-led Senate Democrats will keep their current budget plan under wraps for a while longer.”

They need to pass it…

… so we can see what’s in it.

Seven Percent Solution on May 20, 2011 at 1:13 PM

What’s the point of passing a budget if everything in it is just made up out of thin air?

lorien1973 on May 20, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Roll Call reports that Conrad and Democrats are “punting” on the budget. They’ve been doing a lot of punting while in the majority.

The party of Ray Guy.

nukemhill on May 20, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Senate Dems: “What are we all about??”

The Populace: “Re-election, Stupid!!”

DamnYankee on May 20, 2011 at 1:14 PM

If they want tax increases, they better give a new think! Cut the taxes and budget! These slugs will probably haul this out the evening they go on the next holiday so they don’t get all the heat from it.
L

letget on May 20, 2011 at 1:14 PM

The Dem’s buget is like “Vera” on “Cheers”, or “Maris” on “Fraiser.” We’ll never see it.

parteagirl on May 20, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Democrats said they are close to agreement on a spending plan that would reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade

hahahahahahahahahahaha……that’s a good one.

search4truth on May 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Democrats said they are close to agreement on a spending plan that would reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, with about half the savings coming from higher taxes.

1. $4 trillion over a decade means continued deficits over the entire period, which increases the debt instead of decreasing it.

2. $2 trillion in new taxes? Good luck.

Vashta.Nerada on May 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Because anything that happens budget wise will be unpopular to some/any group and all they care about is getting re-elected.

Much easier to not propose anything and demagogue a proposal by the other side.

spaninq on May 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Has this ever happened b4 in the history of this country?

Imagine the reporting if the GOP were refusing to send the prez a budget. Yet, I bet if you took a poll, you’d find maybe 10% of Americans know the Dems have failed to produce a budget two years in a row. Because the media isn’t reporting it.

It’s that slobbering love affair again.

jeanneb on May 20, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Perhaps Declaration of Independence signer James Wilson described the Senate best when he said: He was amazed that the Senate had been created at all. “For my part, my admiration can only be equaled by my astonishment in beholding so perfect a system formed from such heterogeneous* materials.”

* diverse in character or content

Tommy_G on May 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM

If, by some bizarre stretch of the imagination, this budget passed and was followed, we would have to borrow an additional $10 trillion over the next decade to finance it. There aren’t that many suckers on the planet.

Vashta.Nerada on May 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM

“We have to pass it to find out what’s in it.”

steebo77 on May 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM

May I suggest that the good folks who run this website put a huge count clock at the top of the page that counts the days passing since the last budget presented by the Senate Democrats for consideration? That would be very amusing.

In fact, all conservatives blog should do this. It will eventually have to make it out to the lame stream press because this could catch on and go viral.

karenhasfreedom on May 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

I want to not complain, as I prefer it when the Senate Democrats refrain from doing things.

myrenovations on May 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

half the savings from higher taxes….

can someone please explain to me how higher taxes produce “savings”?

AndrewsDad on May 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Sessions: “If you’re the Democrats, where is your budget?”

Reid: “Budget? We ain’t got no budget. We don’t need no budget! I don’t have to show you any stinkin’ budget!”

Fallon on May 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Hey, y’all must have missed the fact we aren’t governed by legislative derived law any more. EO is the new hotness….gun control by fiat, anyone?
http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=9614

a capella on May 20, 2011 at 1:32 PM

can someone please explain to me how higher taxes produce “savings”?

AndrewsDad on May 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

First, it is the government’s money.
Second, lower taxes means the government is spending more money on the rich.
Thus, higher taxes on the rich means less spending; ergo, savings!

WashJeff on May 20, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Democrats said they are close to agreement on a spending plan that would reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade

So instead of over 10 trillion in deficits it will only be over 6 trillion in deficits. You should all be send to jail for defrauding the American people of their wealth.

chemman on May 20, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Wait- I thought raising taxes for the rich was wildly popular all over the country? What’s the risk? Seems to me like running on what’s popular in today’s political atmosphere would be a no-brainer…

BKeyser on May 20, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Only in the demo’s fantasy world does legally stealing from American citizens equate to “savings”…

Ltlgeneral64 on May 20, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Thank you Nevada liberals for giving us this Harry Reid disaster. (/sarc) The behavior of the liberals/progressives/marxists/democrats is disgusting. No budget for 750 days. Come on. You are unfit for office!!!

ClanDerson on May 20, 2011 at 1:43 PM

can someone please explain to me how higher taxes produce “savings”?

AndrewsDad on May 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

JHC, that’s so easy:

1. Higher taxes
2. ?
3. Savings!

Dusty on May 20, 2011 at 1:47 PM

How do people get in to the Senate without ever maturing past middle school age teens?

percysunshine on May 20, 2011 at 1:48 PM

First, it is the government’s money.
Second, lower taxes means the government is spending more money on the rich.
Thus, higher taxes on the rich means less spending; ergo, savings!

WashJeff on May 20, 2011 at 1:33 PM

By Jove….He’s got it! You get an A for the day!

search4truth on May 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Hey Harry! Let’s see that BUDGET!!

Khun Joe on May 20, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Democrats said they are close to agreement on a spending plan that would reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, with about half the savings coming from higher taxes.

Nickle and Diming spending while taxing 50 cents on the dollar.

That’s not a budget.

Kini on May 20, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he would “defer” action “because of the high-level bipartisan leadership negotiations that are currently underway”

Because saying “I’m too chickensh!t to release the gargantuan piece of garbage and have the American people boil me in oil for it” would be impolitic.

CantCureStupid on May 20, 2011 at 1:53 PM

By Jove….He’s got it! You get an A for the day!

search4truth on May 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM

I went from being a “dumbA$$” on one thread to getting an “A” on this one in a single day. Woo-Hoo! I’m learnign quick.

WashJeff on May 20, 2011 at 1:56 PM

“Democrats said they are close to agreement on a spending plan that would reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade …”

I’m really tired of this rut we’ve been dragged into by talking about saving trillions, 4 in this case, of dollars over 10 years when it avoids talking about the fact that this still means we’ll be running trillion dollar deficits for those ten years.

Our deficits are still in the range of $1.5T. $4T in 10 years is $400B per year. Do the math. The Dems are out to destroy the country.

Anyone have the recipe for Haitian dirt cookies?

Dusty on May 20, 2011 at 2:07 PM

I went from being a “dumbA$$” on one thread to getting an “A” on this one in a single day. Woo-Hoo! I’m learnign quick.

WashJeff on May 20, 2011 at 1:56 PM

That averages to a B+….chuckle

percysunshine on May 20, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Leading from behind

jnelchef on May 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Hey, Harry, if Obama can produce a birth certificate, you should be able to produce a budget.

If you really believe not producing a budget will allow you to keep 21 seats, next election, you’re really living in a dream world.

bflat879 on May 20, 2011 at 2:38 PM

If the dems are saying that half of the “savings” come from new taxes, you can bet your mothers’ houses that close to three quarters will be from new taxes and the spending cuts will be budget gimmicks or just from defense.
If these characters were in private companies and pulled these shenanigans, these same democrats would be calling for tarring and feathering.

eaglewingz08 on May 20, 2011 at 3:11 PM

with about half the savings coming from higher taxes.

Do these morons ever listen to themselves? Nothing that comes out of their mouths makes an sense.

Squiggy on May 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM

The Democrats don’t have a plan. Other than ‘tax the rich’.

GarandFan on May 20, 2011 at 4:08 PM

We’ve seen it… SPEND IT ALL… and RAISE TAXES!
-

RalphyBoy on May 20, 2011 at 4:53 PM

The most transparent MUD ya never seen………..

RealMc on May 20, 2011 at 7:25 PM

The most transparent MUD ya never seen……..

RealMc on May 20, 2011 at 7:26 PM

is there an echo in here…….

RealMc on May 20, 2011 at 7:26 PM

Here we are AGAIN looking at budget story that makes useless claims of how much is being saved when compared to something that simply does not exist.

What we need to do is very simple. We need to force ALL pundits and politicians to talk in terms of HOW MUCH BORROWING does their plan entail? Telling people that this plan saves 4 trillion or 40 trillion without even ONCE stating how much DEFICIT SPENDING is being done is a totally useless exercise!

Freddy on May 20, 2011 at 7:32 PM

reduce borrowing by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, with about half the savings coming from higher taxes.

This is how they view our money. They will save money by raising our taxes. I’m going to save for my retirement by charging my boss more per hour to save for it. IDIOTS!

Herb on May 21, 2011 at 9:30 AM