The Sin of Profligacy Redux

Going back over some territory I analyzed in depth last fall, it has now been demonstrated quite quickly how right I was.

Any thought that the Democrats couldn’t be worse than the Republicans on spending is now officially buried:

Majority Democrats passed an important test Thursday with approval of a $2.9 trillion budget plan that promises big spending increases for party priorities such as education and health care. The budget blueprint sets a course to produce a small surplus in five years by assuming that many of President Bush’s tax cuts would expire.

Of course, if spending is held in check we would get get a surplus anyway under the assumptions the budget uses on economic growth.

The House passed the measure by a 214-209 vote without a single Republican voting for it. The Senate quickly followed on a 52-40 vote; moderate Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine joined with Democrats.

The measure moves to bolster domestic programs whose budgets Bush has curbed and lets expire tax cuts that have benefited upper-bracket taxpayers.

Curbed? Exactly what does that mean? Reduced? Grow more slowly? Are they taking this quote from Harry Reid seriously:

“The budget rejects the misplaced priorities of the Bush administration, which wants to hand out tax breaks worth $150,000 a year to those making more than a million dollars, while making deep cuts in education and Social Security benefits,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Uh, Bush has cut education spending? He has vastly expanded education spending. Cut Social Security? Bush has proposed cutting Social Security benefits? When?

Of course, despite Bush and the Republicans embarrassing increases in spending, it isn’t enough for the Democrats who will actually increase our deficits over the next two years:

But deficits under the Democratic plan would be higher over the next two years than the $150 billion to $200 billion the Congressional Budget Office predicts for the current year.

How do they get the surplus?

Republicans criticized the Democratic plan for the spending increases and for assuming numerous tax cuts passed in Bush’s first term will expire.

They noted it projects a surplus of $41 billion in 2012 by assuming that more than $200 billion worth of tax cuts over 2011-12 — on income, stock dividends and capital gains, among others — expire as scheduled at the end of 2010.

Of course they promise to begin using “pay as you go” rules again:

Under those rules, no tax cut or benefit increase in programs such as Medicare, children’s health care or farm subsidies can occur if it adds to the budget deficit.

There are ways around the rule, however. It may be waived when Democrats this year renew a health insurance program for children of the working poor or try to forestall a hidden tax increase that hits the middle class.

Useless. How serious are they about pork and spending?

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) threatened to deny any further spending projects to a Republican who challenged him over an earmark, his antagonist has charged — a potential violation of House rules.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) had challenged money that Murtha inserted into an intelligence bill last week.

[...]

“I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone, and you will not get any earmarks now and forever,” Murtha told Rogers on the House floor, according to the draft transcript given Politico.

“This is not the way we do things here — and is that supposed to make me afraid of you?” Rogers replied.

“That’s the way I do it,” Murtha said.

He is telling the truth there. Of course the idea they would behave in any way better should be buried along with any illusions about spending restraint.
From the Republican Policy Committee:

  • FY 2008 spending: $2.96 trillion
  • Tax Increases: assumes $736 billion more in taxes over five years compared to the extension of current tax law.
  • Budget Enforcement: includes budget points of order that are designed to reduce the deficit through tax increases rather than spending restraint. 60 votes required to cut taxes, but only a simple majority is needed to raise taxes.
  • Discretionary Spending: provides $954 billion (after cap adjustments) in discretionary budget authority for FY 2008, which is $21 billion above the President’s request.
  • Mandatory Spending: includes $389.6 billion for Medicare in 2008, an increase of $24 billion (+6.6 percent) over 2007. The average annual increase in Medicare spending during the five-year budget window is 5.3 percent.
Sphere: Related Content

Your Ad Here

One Response to “The Sin of Profligacy Redux”

  1. on 18 May 2007 at 7:38 pm James E. Fish

    When it comes to spending, Republican’s are only skin poppers. Democrats are hard core. They shoot up in the vein. They only got one vein left, the eye. You got to be crazy to shoot up in the eye. There not crazy, Europe shoots up in both eyes, that’s crazy.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Get rewarded at leading casinos.

online casino real money usa