United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: House GOP Lists $2.5 Trillion in Spending Cuts
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.usnews.com/news/washingt ... s-25-trillion-in-spending-cuts
Published: Jan 20, 2011
Author: Paul Bedard
Post Date: 2011-01-20 14:51:59 by Capitalist Eric
Keywords: None
Views: 44238
Comments: 72
Moving aggressively to make good on election promises to slash the federal budget, the House GOP today unveiled an eye-popping plan to eliminate $2.5 trillion in spending over the next 10 years. Gone would be Amtrak subsidies, fat checks to the Legal Services Corporation and National Endowment for the Arts, and some $900 million to run President Obama's healthcare reform program. [See a gallery of political caricatures.] What's more, the "Spending Reduction Act of 2011" proposed by members of the conservative Republican Study Committee, chaired by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, would reduce current spending for non-defense, non-homeland security and non-veterans programs to 2008 levels, eliminate federal control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, cut the federal workforce by 15 percent through attrition, and cut some $80 billion by blocking implementation of Obamacare. Some of the proposed reductions will surely draw Democratic attack, such as cutting the Ready to Learn TV Program, repeal of the Davis-Bacon Act, the elimination of the Energy Star Program, and cutting subsidies to the Woodrow Wilson Center. [See editorial cartoons about the GOP.] Here is the overview provided by the Republican Study Committee: Discretionary Spending Limit, FY 2012-2021: Eliminate automatic increases for inflation from CBO baseline projections for future discretionary appropriations. Further, impose discretionary spending limits through 2021 at 2006 levels on the non-defense portion of the discretionary budget. $2.29 trillion savings over ten years. Federal Workforce Reforms: Eliminate automatic pay increases for civilian federal workers for five years. Additionally, cut the civilian workforce by a total of 15 percent through attrition. Allow the hiring of only one new worker for every two workers who leave federal employment until the reduction target has been met. (Savings included in above discretionary savings figure). "Stimulus" Repeal: Eliminate all remaining "stimulus" funding. $45 billion total savings. Eliminate federal control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. $30 billion total savings. Repeal the Medicaid FMAP increase in the "State Bailout" (Senate amendments to S. 1586). $16.1 billion total savings. More than 100 specific program eliminations and spending reductions listed below: $330 billion savings over ten years (included in above discretionary savings figure). Here is the full list of cuts: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings. Save America's Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings. International Fund for Ireland. $17 million annual savings. Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings. National Endowment for the Arts. $167.5 million annual savings. National Endowment for the Humanities. $167.5 million annual savings. Hope VI Program. $250 million annual savings. Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings. Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually. U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings. Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings. Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings. John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings. Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings. Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings. Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings. Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings. Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings. Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings. Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings. Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings. Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings. New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings. Exchange Programs for Alaska, Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts. $9 million annual savings. Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings. Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings. Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings. Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings. Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings. Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings. FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings. Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings. Economic Assistance to Egypt. $250 million annually. U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings. General Assistance to District of Columbia. $210 million annual savings. Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings. Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years. No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings. End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services. Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually. IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years. Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings. Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees. $1.2 billion savings over ten years. Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings. Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress. Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings. Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings. Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings. USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings. Subsidy to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings. Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings. Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings. Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings. HUD Ph.D. Program. Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act. TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years
FY 2011 CR Amendment: Replace the spending levels in the FY 2011 continuing resolution (CR) with non-defense, non-homeland security, non-veterans spending at FY 2008 levels. The legislation will further prohibit any FY 2011 funding from being used to carry out any provision of the Democrat government takeover of health care, or to defend the health care law against any lawsuit challenging any provision of the act. $80 billion savings.
Additional Program Eliminations/Spending Reforms
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 37.
#8. To: Capitalist Eric (#0)
(Edited)
The federal government will spend more than $40 trillion on the next 10 years, so this "eye popping" plan only amounts to 6% of that they'll spend. The British government just cut spending by 29%. Sure, it's better than nothing, but it's not good enough. Ronald Reagan wanted to eliminate the Department of Eduction. Bush doubled it. Why aren't they talking about that? Jimmy Carter's Department of Energy failed to solve our dependence on foreign oil. Why aren't they talking about that? What does the Department of Commerce do anyway? How about the Department of Labor? Why are we paying for this? Why are we forking over billions of dollars to wealthy corporate agribusinesses with things like sugar price supports and mohair subsidies? The government started subsiding mohair because it was used in military uniforms. That hasn't been true in several decades. Why is the subsidy still there? WHY??? Let's not forget the critically needed subsidy for raising Alpackas. The world would certainly come to an end without this. In addition, the structural deficits cannot be eliminated, the budget cannot be balanced, and the national debt cannot be paid down unless they also reform Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and their numerous military adventures abroad. Again, better than nothing, but it won't fix our problems.
it's less than that, if you dig into the specifics they only proposed $330 billion in cuts over 10 years. And if they manage to repeal the ACA, they'll add $230 billion to the deficit in that same time, meaning at the end of 10 years, they will have reduced a $1.2 trillion deficit by $10 billion a year. Wake me when the GOP takes deficit reduction seriously.
Utter nonsense. The only way anyone could come to that conclusion is by ignoring all of the accounting tricks: The program starts with 10 years of taxes paying for only 6 years of benefits. The program double counts the alleged $500 billion in savings from Medicare, none of which will actually be realized because of political pressure. The program leaves out the $250 billion "doc fix" which has to happen to keep Medicaid from completely collapsing.
The program double counts the alleged $500 billion in savings from Medicare, none of which will actually be realized because of political pressure. The program leaves out the $250 billion "doc fix" which has to happen to keep Medicaid from completely collapsing. You should know better than to simply repeat Eric Cantor's baseless claims. The 10/6 claim is bunk:http://politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/jan/15/eric-cantor/cantor-says-health-care- reform-collects-1o-years-t/ The CBO noted: The Doc fix has nothing to do with the ACA, it has been approved every year long before the ACA was enacted. Again, I expect more from you then to simply parrot GOP talking points.
How long are you going to try and peddle this utter bullshit of Of Kenyancare reducing the deficit: -- One of the Democrats’ major talking points has been that Obamacare reduces the deficit – and therefore repeal raises it – by $230 billion. Why, the Congressional Budget Office says exactly that. Very true. And very convincing. Until you realize where that number comes from. Explains CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf in his “preliminary analysis of H.R. 283; (the Republican health-care repeal): “CBO anticipates that enacting H.R. 2 would probably yield, for the 2012-2021 period, a reduction in revenues in the neighborhood of $770 billion and a reduction in outlays in the vicinity of $540 billion.” As National Affairs editor Yuval Levin pointed out when mining this remarkable nugget, this is a hell of a way to do deficit reduction: a radical increase in spending, topped by an even more radical increase in taxes. Of course, the very numbers that yield this $230 billion “deficit reduction” are phony to begin with. The CBO is required to accept every assumption, promise (of future spending cuts, for example) and chronological gimmick that Congress gives it. All the CBO then does is perform the calculation and spit out the result. In fact, the whole Obamacare bill was gamed to produce a favorable CBO number. Most glaringly, the entitlement it creates – government-subsidized health insurance for 32 million Americans – doesn’t kick in until 2014. That was deliberately designed so any projection for this decade would cover only six years of expenditures – while that same 10-year projection would capture 10 years of revenue. With 10 years of money inflow vs. six years of outflow, the result is a positive – i.e., deficit-reducing – number. Surprise. If you think that’s audacious, consider this: Obamacare does not create just one new entitlement (health insurance for everyone); it actually creates a second – long-term care insurance. With an aging population, and with long-term care becoming extraordinarily expensive, this promises to be the biggest budget buster in the history of the welfare state. And yet, in the CBO calculation, this new entitlement to long-term care reduces the deficit over the next 10 years. By $70 billion, no less. How is this possible? By collecting premiums now, and paying out no benefits for the first 10 years. Presto: a (temporary) surplus. As former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin and scholars Joseph Antos and James Capretta note, “Only in Washington could the creation of a reckless entitlement program be used as ‘offset’ to grease the way for another entitlement.” I would note additionally that only in Washington could such a neat little swindle be titled the “CLASS Act” (for the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act).
Still peddling GOP talking points? http://factcheck.org/2011/01/a-budget-busting-law/
If you think that’s audacious, consider this: Obamacare does not create just one new entitlement (health insurance for everyone); it actually creates a second – long-term care insurance. With an aging population, and with long-term care becoming extraordinarily expensive, this promises to be the biggest budget buster in the history of the welfare state. And yet, in the CBO calculation, this new entitlement to long-term care reduces the deficit over the next 10 years. By $70 billion, no less. How is this possible? By collecting premiums now, and paying out no benefits for the first 10 years. Presto: a (temporary) surplus. As former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin and scholars Joseph Antos and James Capretta note, “Only in Washington could the creation of a reckless entitlement program be used as ‘offset’ to grease the way for another entitlement.” I would note additionally that only in Washington could such a neat little swindle be titled the “CLASS Act” (for the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act). Those are the facts.
So repeal Obamacare, and then you are left with: What's the GOP's solution?
"Deficits don't matter" - VP Dick Cheney (R)
Remember the Paul Ryan roadmap that would bring the budget into balance by 2080 by raising taxes on most Americans? The GOP hasn't mentioned a word about it since they took over the house.
I remember when the budget was in balance and there was a budget surplus. Republicans whined that government was collecting too much tax from the people - never mind the debt.
I've stated the facts before, and I will state them again. #1.) In the post WWII period, federal tax revenues averaged 18% of GDP and federal spending averaged 20% of GDP. (This is why we've run up a debt.) #2.) During the last year of the Clinton administration, federal tax revenues were about 19% of GDP and federal spending was about 19% of GDP. The budget was in balance. #3.) Today, federal tax revenues are 17.6% of GDP and federal spending is a whopping 24% of GDP (heading to 28%). Federal spending is 34% higher than usual and federal tax revenues are 2% lower than usual. WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. PERIOD.
Not when Bush took office and knocked the budget out of balance.
Bush was an idiot. Obama is worse.
Only in your propaganda driven imagination.
#38. To: lucysmom (#37)
(Edited)
I am a total numbers guy. I look at the numbers and draw my conclusions based on the evidence. You on the other hand, are the dumbest person I've ever encountered in my life. I will bet that you have a ton of friends who are just like you. This is the problem.
Can you imagine the vitriol that would be all over the right wing wing nut blog spectrum of President Obama kissed a Saudi with the same enthusiasm as was the case with his predecessor? Kissing Saudi men is OK if a conservative man does it.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latesthe House GOP today unveiled an eye-popping plan to eliminate $2.5 trillion in spending over the next 10 years
#9. To: jwpegler (#8)
The federal government will spend more than $40 trillion on the next 10 years, so this "eye popping" plan only amounts to 6% of that they'll spend.
#10. To: go65 (#9)
ACA
#11. To: jwpegler (#10)
The program starts with 10 years of taxes paying for only 6 years of benefits.
Despite the fact that it’s true that some of the taxes kick in on average a bit earlier, by the end of the 10-year period the health reform bill still produces a modest reduction of the deficit, according to the CBO estimate," he said, "and in the subsequent 10-year period the reduction of the deficit gets even larger."
#13. To: go65 (#11)
#15. To: no gnu taxes (#13)
As for the GOP’s claim that "the bill would add over $700 billion in red ink over the next decade," we judge it to be mostly bogus.
It rests largely on a claim that hundreds of billions of dollars in projected Medicare savings are being "double-counted." But CBO is simply not doing that.
The GOP’s $700 billion figure also includes more than $200 billion for a permanent "doctor fix" to prevent a cut in Medicare payments to doctors. But that is not even a part of the new law, and many Republicans endorse the "doctor fix" anyway.
The GOP claims the law will cost $115 billion to administer, but that isn’t true. CBO actually puts those costs at roughly $10 billion to $20 billion over the next 10 years.
#17. To: go65 (#15)
In fact, the whole Obamacare bill was gamed to produce a favorable CBO number. Most glaringly, the entitlement it creates – government-subsidized health insurance for 32 million Americans – doesn’t kick in until 2014. That was deliberately designed so any projection for this decade would cover only six years of expenditures – while that same 10-year projection would capture 10 years of revenue. With 10 years of money inflow vs. six years of outflow, the result is a positive – i.e., deficit-reducing – number. Surprise.
#18. To: no gnu taxes (#17)
Those are the facts.
#19. To: go65 (#18)
What's the GOP's solution?
#21. To: Godwinson (#19)
"Deficits don't matter" - VP Dick Cheney (R)
#30. To: go65 (#21)
Remember the Paul Ryan roadmap that would bring the budget into balance by 2080 by raising taxes on most Americans?
#32. To: lucysmom, go65, capitalist eric (#30)
(Edited)
I remember when the budget was in balance and there was a budget surplus. Republicans whined that government was collecting too much tax from the people - never mind the debt.
#34. To: jwpegler (#32)
WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. PERIOD.
#36. To: lucysmom (#34)
Not when Bush took office and knocked the budget out of balance.
#37. To: jwpegler (#36)
Bush was an idiot. Obama is worse.
Replies to Comment # 37. Only in your propaganda driven imagination.
#42. To: lucysmom (#37)
End Trace Mode for Comment # 37.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]