GOP budget plan: Cut everything in sight

House Speaker John Boehner: Shedding a tear for who? (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

House Republicans called for cuts in hundreds of programs across the face of government Friday night in a $61 billion savings package toughened at the last minute at the demand of tea party-backed conservatives.

From education to job training, the environment and nutrition, few domestic programs were left untouched — and some were eliminated — in the measure, which is expected to reach the floor for a vote next week.

Among the programs targeted for elimination are Americorps and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

In contrast, spending on defense and veterans’ programs were protected.

The measure marks an initial down payment by newly empowered Republicans on their promise to rein in federal deficits and reduce the size of government.

In a statement, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., called the measure “a historic effort to get our fiscal house in order and restore certainty to the economy. .This legislation will mark the largest spending cut in modern history and will help restore confidence so that people can get back to work.”

Democrats harshly criticized the bill within moments of its formal unveiling, signaling the onset of weeks of partisan struggle over spending priorities.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi issued a statement calling the bill irresponsible, adding that it would “target critical education programs like Head Start, halt innovation and disease research, end construction projects to rebuild America and take cops off the beat.”

But first-term Republican conservatives claimed victory after forcing their own leadership to expand the measure after rejecting an earlier draft as too timid.

“$100 billion is $100 billion is $100 billion,” said Rep. Tim Scott R-S.C., referring to amount the revised package would cut from President Barack Obama‘s budget request of a year ago.

That was the amount contained in the Republican “Pledge to America” in last fall’s campaign, and when party leaders initially suggested a smaller package of cuts this week, many of the 87-member freshman class who have links to the tea party rebelled.

In fact, even some Republicans acknowledged privately the legislation will cut about $61 billion from current spending on domestic spending.

Some of the largest cuts would be borne by WIC, which provides nutritional support for women and infants, cut by $747 million, and training and employment grants to the states, ticketed for a $1.4 billion reduction.

In addition, Republicans proposed a 43 percent cut in border security fencing and a 53 percent reduction in an account used to fund cleanup of the Great Lakes.

The measure also asserts Republican priorities in several contentious areas.

It prohibits the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from terminating plans for a nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada — a direct challenge to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Reid dissented quickly, issuing a statement that said, “Any attempt to restart the Yucca Mountain project will not happen on my watch as Senate majority leader.”

The Environmental Protection Agency would be banned from regulating greenhouse gases, linked to global warming, from fixed sources such as factories. The District of Columbia could not use federal funds to run a needle-exchange program for drug users.

While a 48-hour revolt by tea party-backed conservatives roiled the party this week, its conclusion could mean an easier path to passage for the spending cut bill when it reaches the House floor.

“The leadership responded to the concerns of those who are far to the right of the middle,” said Scott.

The cuts will become part of a spending bill that is needed to keep the government in operation through the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year. The current funding authority expires on March 4.

Passage in the Republican-controlled House would send the bill to the Senate, where Democrats control a majority and are certain to support more generous funding levels.

Barring a compromise before March 4, the two houses will be under pressure to agree on a short-term bill to keep the federal government operating without interruptions.

Even that could prove difficult, though, and Democrats assert that Republicans will resort to a government shutdown to get their way.

“It is time for the House Republicans to stop with the games and finally rule out a government shutdown once and for all,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “Stop being coy about it and take it off the table.”

Congressional Republicans were damaged politically in 1995 when a protracted dispute over funding with President Bill Clinton led to a government shutdown.

____

Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2011

Enhanced by Zemanta

28 Responses to "GOP budget plan: Cut everything in sight"

  1. b mcclellan  February 12, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    Dear unfortunate US taxpayer;
    your washing machine is stuck on spin whilst the bats ere loose in yon belfry.

    Our President promised change, such a dreaded vow.
    Sure glad he agrees it’s always domestic cuts that are needed now wrested dangling, as if on string in lieu of batty war appropriations.
    Whence do weepy x wimpy doth aqua size info, no wait, it’s tears of a clown ?
    My apologies to Smoky Robinson.

    Good crook, bad , oh heck with it.
    Why PBS, NPR ,EPA, BBC, MIC, dang, there’s the key.
    We have early warning left the building?

    Where is that confounded Alarm ?

  2. woody188  February 12, 2011 at 11:04 pm

    The Environmental Protection Agency would be banned from regulating greenhouse gases, linked to global warming, from fixed sources such as factories.

    It’s been proven CO2 levels lag an increase in temperature, they do not lead it. So yeah, it’s linked, just not the way the media and Al Gore have said it is. Thanks AP for being a useful tool of the New World Order.

    • logtroll  February 13, 2011 at 10:06 am

      “It’s been proven CO2 levels lag an increase in temperature, they do not lead it.”

      That’s interesting. Can you provide a documentation link, please?

      • Almandine  February 13, 2011 at 11:21 am

        why don’t you just google it?

        • logtroll  February 13, 2011 at 11:46 am

          I did google it and what I found provided just the opposite conclusion of what you posted. You should read entire articles, not just a few phrases.

          The data presented indicate that past warming trends showed a lag in the first 800 years or so of millenia-long trends, but that CO2 levels rose dramatically after that and probably accelerated warming in the following many thousands of years.

          The ice cores that supplied the data were probably not influenced by CO2 contributions to the atmosphere of the magnitude of what we humans are doing, since no one was doing it way back then.

          Now I know why you wouldn’t provide a link.

          • griff  February 13, 2011 at 12:24 pm

            Ice Core Data

            Notice the graph, and the ten thousand year scale. Temperature variations preceded the CO2 variations.

            Warming causes the CO2 increase.

          • Almandine  February 13, 2011 at 1:27 pm

            I didn’t post the first comment either…

            • Logtroll  February 13, 2011 at 2:02 pm

              My bad, Al, the screen on my phone ain’t much to look at.

              Griff, no argument on the data, but the scientists interpreted it differently than woody did. In the geologic past warming seems to have triggered CO2 increases, which accelerated warming.

              By pumping incredible amounts of stored carbon from it’s sequester deep underground, we are bypassing step one, going directly to jail without passing GO. That is what the dumb ass scientists say, though God may have slipped O’Reilly and Beck a different view. It’s your choice on who to believe and good luck with that, given the conspiracy virus that’s going around.

              • woody188  February 13, 2011 at 2:57 pm

                Water vapor is a stronger “greenhouse gas” than CO2. Shall we outlaw vaporizers, or just tax their usage as a dangerous emitter?

                • griff  February 13, 2011 at 3:20 pm

                  Another thing the graph reveals is that, contrary to all the fearmongering about our impending doom, this latest warming trend is not the warmest in history, depsite we humans adding more CO2 to the atmosphere.

              • griff  February 13, 2011 at 3:16 pm

                But eventually there was a correction, and temperatures (and CO2 levels) dropped. And this was all in Pre-SUV history.

                Another thing the graph reveals is that “climate change” appears to be cyclical, and there are far too many variables to assign blame to a trace gas that is such a very small percentage of the overall makeup of the atmosphere.

                Even the leaked emails reveal that the scientists were totally ignoring the sun in their modeling, but were forced (privately) to ackowledge that the sun (and the moon too) are important drivers in climate.

                I guess it all depends on whether or not you want to be taxed and rationed for the natural variations of Mother Nature so Al Gore can make billions off of carbon trading.

                • Carl Nemo  February 13, 2011 at 5:18 pm

                  Question to Griff, Woody or logtroll. Isn’t “carbon trading” pretty much a dead scheme in the U.S? The intention of the Kyoto accord was to launch such, but it’s already a dismal flop in the Eurozone. You don’t seem to hear much about it anymore.

                  Carl Nemo **==

                  • griff  February 13, 2011 at 8:51 pm

                    The Chicago Carbon Exchange shut down last fall. Some might remember that our very own Barry Soetoro was instrumental in setting that up as well.

                    Revisit my April 15, 2009 blog.

                    • Carl Nemo  February 13, 2011 at 9:55 pm

                      Thanks Griff for the blog link. That was an information packed blogpost for sure. : )

                      Seemingly then “carbon trading” is DOA which is ” a good thing” as Martha Stewart might say. : ))

                      Carl Nemo **==

  3. eve  February 13, 2011 at 12:35 pm

    I bet Eric Cantor doesn’t want to cut aid to Israel does he?

    If we’re paying other countries in the Middle Eastern region to “play nice” with Israel, shouldn’t that be added on top of the 3 billion we pay Israel every year?

  4. bogofree  February 13, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    Why do we pay “vigorish” to foreign countries? Why even have troops in Europe and Asia? We have eleven aircraft carriers. Get that number lower since all they are is an extension of our “big stick” foreign policy. Don’t need that many. One has more fire power than most countries and that does not even include the nuclear arsenal aboard.

    • Carl Nemo  February 13, 2011 at 5:39 pm

      Why bogofree…? It’s because we have terminally corrupt crimpols in D.C. who once ensconced consider the U.S. Treasury to be their personal “piggybank”.

      In addition to greasing the palms of Israel, Mubarak in Egypt, Musharraf in Pakistan and a host of other strongmen worldwide, they get kickbacks deposited in their secret offshore accounts for accommodating such international graft. No Congressman especially those that sit on the specific committees for such funding do so without getting their “bite” from the transaction.

      If FinCen did it’s job they’d have a probaby several hundred or more of them in leg shackles being marched off to U.S. Marshal’s Service vans for indictment. Unfortunately ‘justice’ is compromised in these times end times for the Republic. ‘Justice’ is only for the unwashed masses like you, I and millions of other tax slaves good buddy, it’s simply for the interest of the “stronger” and most corrupt in high places … / : |

      http://www.fincen.gov/

      Carl Nemo **==

  5. Carl Nemo  February 13, 2011 at 2:23 pm

    Climate change is more influenced by the “thermohaline circulation” of ocean currents. We have surface currents and mighty subsea, slower one’s that act like a conveyor belt on a worldwide basis. The recent warming caused by mankind’s technology, resulting in polar cap melt especially the Greenland glacier will cause massive amounts of fresh water to eventually slow the Gulf Stream to a standstill due to dilution of the heavier cold freshwater sinking to the bottom causing Europe to plunge into a cold as found in northern Canada and Siberia. So nested within the current warming cycle is the seed for the next “ice age”. In addition cold water can absorb greater amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. The thermohaline circulation cycle takes about 1600 years to complete a round and is the major buffer for CO2 absorption within ocean water. The optimum absorptive temperature for CO2 in sea water is 68 F/20C. If the water rises above the optimum it has lesser ability to hold this gas in solution. These massive deep current flows of water dwarf those found near the ocean’s surface.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation

    The wild and wooly weather we’re currently experiencing is a function of greater atmospheric moisture being present due to cap and glacial melt. There’s also many smaller nestings of both hot an warm periods within the greater climatalogical cycles such as the “Medieval Warm Period” that lasted from about 950-1250 A.D. and the “Little Ice Age” to follow from 1300 to the mid 1800′s in Europe that seem to have a 400 year period with 200 year maxima and minima excursions. Within our current warming trend is the ‘seed’ for the next colder one and vice versa.

    At this time we are enjoying a period of warmth between major glaciations; ie., “Ice Ages”. Plate tectonics, the movement of continents upon the earth’s mantle also change the shape of these aforementioned currents and therefore the cycles of the ice ages themselves. If the continents are clumped as in an ancient Gondwanaland configuration there are no ice ages per se except as a function of solar output. Continents have been arranged in the past where there were minimal currents and the earth became either very warm or cold as a function of solar output and the outgassing from surface and subsea volcanoes. At this time the outgassing of methane found in the frozen regions of Siberia and Canada are causing concern because methane is one thousand times more effective in terms of trapping long wave, heat related radiation causing the “greenhouse effect than even CO2.

    What is disconcerting is that if the “thermohaline circulation” is reversed in our lifetimes as mentioned concerning the Gulf Stream we could find ourselves plunged into endless winters and a new mini ice age would be upon us within ten years or less. So we best enjoy the heat while its here. Cold is unfriendly, to brutal for crop production and the planet desperately needs food, so warmer is better regardless of coastal flooding. : )

    I suggest readers research “The Medieval Warm Period” and the most recent period known as “The Little Ice Age”. These are minor nestings within the greater glacial to interglacial warm periods on earth. We are still in an interglacial era, but for how much longer is the question? We should fear the cold, more than the heat in terms its impact on crops and the world food supply.

    ***

    Carl Nemo **==

  6. logtroll  February 13, 2011 at 8:34 pm

    Cap’n,

    I appreciate your move to shift to a more interesting and productive conversation. I don’t follow the cap and trade dialogue much, though I do lean toward any mechanism that would incentivize alternatives to our fossil fuel addiction. There are more reasons than climate change to want to ditch Big Oil and Big Coal.

    My comments above were directed solely at the misuse and abuse of scientific data to “prove” an ideological point. The fellers don’t seem to be inclined to budge much from their contrary wobbly spin, though.

  7. griff  February 13, 2011 at 11:22 pm

    Back on topic…

    Reality check

    • logtroll  February 14, 2011 at 12:05 am

      On topic? How so…?

      Don’t tax the filthy fekking rich, who have vacuumed up the wealth without forethought, but cut everything in sight. Very conservative, my dear Watson. Brainless, but conservative (whatever that means).

      • griff  February 14, 2011 at 9:01 am

        I see. So increasing taxes on the rich will solve all our problems. Cutting spending will too.

        I don’t buy either side’s “fixes” because, as usual, they represent overly simplistic partisan lines in the sand for the medicated masses to hoot and holler over. But in the end, they don’t address the causes.

        Class warfare…Brilliant!

    • Carl Nemo  February 14, 2011 at 12:16 am

      Great link Griff. It leaves one hushed when the destruction to our industrial base is countenanced along with the seeming hopelessness of our nation recovering from this relentless many year attack of globalization gone wild.

      This just didn’t happen, but is the direct result of a “conspiracy” in high places to force globalism down our collective throats at any price and that price will be high in the end once the U.S. is summarily reduced to an in our face “banana republic” with nationwide poverty rivaling that of Haiti while the smug, movers and shakers who live in their gated communities, mountain retreats or bunkers provided courtesy of their their tax slaves in the event of mass civil unrest. We’re witnessing the evil that both men and women can do in the quest for a buck, euro, or shekel more at our terminal expense.

      People are foolish to think that the newly entrenched pols from this recent election or any upcoming one’s are going to turn the USS America about. Waiting for help from our Congress is like watching paint dry.

      I know what’s necessary for summary change, but none dare speak of such on this forum if they value their immediate safety. It’s time for action when words fail. People need to start picketing their Congressional reps home state offices in mass nationwide, never relenting until summary legislation is put in place to stop the hemorrhaging of the few manufacturing functions that do remain while creating an environment for the production of the goods we use domestically our our soil again.

      If quality HDTV’s were produced here which we can cost less than one’s provided by these offshore entities due to hefty tariff’s it would create an environment for the domestic production of such as well as a host of other products. Does our criminally disposed, bought off leadership have interest in such a paradigm; of course not, but that’s what has to be changed in order to survive as a nation. They need to be forced to change or they no longer will have a job…period!

      The calculating crimpols that have facilitated this link described destruction are surely not going to change their course of action without some seaboot enforced motivaton to their rear ends.

      Maybe we should all think about ending so-called free-trade. Lincoln was deadset against it. Only the South was for free-trade.

      *****

      “I do not know much about the tariff, but I know this much, when we buy manufactured goods abroad, we get the goods and the foreigner gets the money. When we buy the manufactured goods at home, we get both the goods and the money.” … Abraham Lincoln

      *****

      Carl Nemo **==

      • griff  February 14, 2011 at 9:07 am

        The cell phone tells the story…1.2 billion sold, and not one produced here.

        • logtroll  February 14, 2011 at 10:18 am

          Yes, the benefits of capitalism. Cell phones are manufactured where the costs are cheapest.

          Pay cut, anyone? You will get one, probably along with your job cut. Capitalism demands it and it’s for your own good.

          (Pssst! That doesn’t apply to the richy rich, who would cry if the unemployed declared a class war).

          • griff  February 14, 2011 at 2:19 pm

            Capitalism? Cheap labor? African slaves were cheap labor too. We didn’t abolish slavery, we just legitimized it and offshored it, cloaked it in global corporatism. All in the name of cheap trinkets and gizmos.

  8. bogofree  February 14, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    China has now passed Japan as the #2 economy in the world. Next up is the USA. Let’s practice: “We’re #2! We’re #2!”

    • logtroll  February 14, 2011 at 8:35 pm

      Well, I for one, can’t wait. When they are richer than us, then the multinational corps may come back and hire us for low wages to make cheap sh!t to sell to them.

      Just a matter of patience, Grasshoppa. It’s like the tides, science can’t explain it. That’s why money says, “In God We Trust”.

Comments are closed.