-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
On the main site today, Tracy Mehan weighs the relative significance of the spending fight for the next six months and the Ryan budget’s fight over spending for the next ten years. Paul Ryan touches on this himself in his WSJ piece:
Congress is currently embroiled in a funding fight over how much to spend on less than one-fifth of the federal budget for the next six months. Whether we cut $33 billion or $61 billion-that is, whether we shave 2% or 4% off of this year’s deficit-is important. It’s a sign that the election did in fact change the debate in Washington from how much we should spend to how much spending we should cut.
It seems House Republicans are already moving toward a continuing resolution that would fund the military through September and the rest of the government for one week, buying time for more negotiations. Will the Ryan budget make a difference in how Republicans approach the debate over the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year? I can tell you that I’ve spoken to a number of House Republican freshmen over the last couple weeks. None said they would press for fewer spending cuts based on a good 2012 budget and several said they were done voting for short-term continuing resolutions. But we’ll see.
UPDATE: The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza asks if Republicans can cut a budget deal with themselves. He points to a Pew poll showing that 56 percent of conservative Republicans and 68 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaners who identify with the Tea Party favor a principled government shutdown if adequate spending cuts cannot be agreed upon. John Boehner, who was chairman of the House Republican Conference in 1995-96, is clearly hoping to avoid a shutdown.
View all comments (7) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/04/05/will-the-2012-budget-impact-20
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Zbigniew Mazurak | 4.5.11 @ 9:07AM
One needs to reduce both discretionary and nondiscretionary spending, but from the Internet and the media, it seems that about 90% of the public is missing the big elephant in the room.
As Paul Ryan and his colleague Eric Cantor have acknowledged, and as Sen. Rand Paul has tacitly acknowledged, you ABSOLUTELY cannot erase this $1.65 trillion per year budget deficit completely if the economy doesn't rebound and federal revenue doesn't begin to grow. Period. You can't do that.
Recognizing that, Congressman Ryan has proposed a cut of annual federal spending by $620 bn, but he has also proposed tax reforms, because he acknowledges that you cannot balance the budget if the economy doesn't rebound. Except that he's not betting his deficit reduction plan on that and he's not promising extremely optimistic numbers - unlike Sen. Rand Paul, who has bet his Balanced Budget Plan on $1.15 trillion per year of additional federal revenue and only $500 bn per year of spending cuts.
Habu| 4.5.11 @ 9:44AM
It should be a very intersting 2012, as if 2008-2010 hasn't been.
PattyMor| 4.5.11 @ 10:13AM
The 2011 budget battle is a game of political "chicken". The Demons still think its 1995, so what does that tell you about their way of thinking. They are stuck in the past and think their political position is a winning strategy.
But 2011 is not 1995. We are $14 T in debt and we have Fox News, the Internet, plus talk radio and the Tea Party. So Demons, are you feeling lucky? Go ahead and make my day.
So let's settle for $50 B and call it winning. We can get whatever we want over the debt celing. Like no tickey; no playey; no debt celing lift, hence no ridiculous spending. Get it?
Oldefarte| 4.5.11 @ 11:39AM
The current budget battle should be secondary to the 2012 one, and if R's can get $35billion and thereafter begin the more important battle for say $4-5 trillion over 10 years for 2012's, then that should represent game, set and match!!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 4.5.11 @ 11:42AM
PS: The D's are going to resurrect REVENUE/TAX INCREASES as their counter, which are always counterproductive. If government spending/expenses fall appreciably, more available capital will begin to flow to private equity concerns, which will grow the economy, which in turn will increase governmental tax revenues/receipts [also game, set and match]!!!!!!!!
Mimi| 4.5.11 @ 5:33PM
Heard on Rush today....To solve our fiscal problem with a increase in taxes it would take..88% and he says we have a choice...Take the Ryan plan or pay 88% of what you make..PLUS...people will STOP working!!!
Clint| 4.5.11 @ 10:42PM
" Senator (Rand) Paul may not be alone is pushing the half trillion in spending cuts. While he hasn't co-sponsored Senator Paul's bill, Senator Tom Coburn is at least considering Paul's spending cut proposals. From National Review:
“I could give you $350 billion worth of cuts tomorrow that nobody would miss,” Coburn says. “All we’d have to do is get another $150 billion through efficiency.” Paul’s bold number, he adds, is a step toward making across-the-board cuts a reality.
“The people who hear that number, and go ‘Oh, no, no, no,’ they don’t actually know what’s going on in the government,” Coburn says. “People say ‘no,’ but it’s an uninformed ‘no.’”