JOHN BOEHNER

In November, around the time the national debt passed $12 trillion and Democrats in Washington attempted to jam through a government takeover of health care that would borrow even more from our kids and grandkids, the Obama Administration assured the American people it would declare a “war on deficits” in 2010.

Yesterday, President Obama proposed another budget that spends too much, taxes too much, and borrows too much.  Some “war.”

Even liberal budget experts are saying the President’s spending blueprint is “totally insufficient” to rein in red ink.  It relies on “the symbolism” of a spending freeze, a deficit commission “without teeth,” and health care bills that would actually raise costs.  To top it all off, the President’s blueprint only requires the federal government to meet the budgeting standards of the world’s poorest countries.  While putting off tough spending choices, President Obama’s budget gives the green light to more government ‘stimulus’ spending and imposes a “host of tax increases” on working families and small businesses.  The American people are right to expect Washington to put real skin in the game and live within its means.  Only Republicans have offered a real plan for doing so.

NOVEMBER –  “OBAMA WILL … CALL FOR A WAR ON DEFICITS,” “IT IS FOREMOST ON HIS MIND”:

·         “Obama will use next January’s State of the Union address to call for a war on deficits.  President Barack Obama plans to announce in next year's State of the Union address that he wants to focus extensively on cutting the federal deficit in 2010 – and will downplay other new domestic spending…” (Politico, 11/13/09)

·         “A plan for reducing America’s long-term federal budget deficits will be ‘a key component’ of President Barack Obama’s annual State of the Union address in January, according to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel… ‘It is foremost on his mind and the mind of the economic team,’ Emanuel said of deficit reduction…” (Bloomberg, 11/17/09)

·         “Obama vows ‘serious’ bid to cut US deficit.  President Barack Obama on Sunday vowed to take ‘serious steps’ to cut the huge US budget deficit, which is complicating America's economic recovery hopes…” (AFP, 11/14/09)

TODAY – “TOTALLY INSUFFICIENT,” “WITHOUT TEETH,” “BETTING HEAVILY ON … SYMBOLISM”:

·         Even liberal budget experts say deficit reduction “totally insufficient,” “well short of what will be needed.” “Even liberal economists questioned whether Obama is doing enough. Urban Institute economist Isabel Sawhill called such measures ‘totally insufficient,’ saying it is ‘depressing’ to see the administration abandon even the goal of a balanced budget.” (San Francisco Chronicle, 2/2/10) “‘Obviously, it falls well short of what will be needed to get deficits under control,’ [Robert Greenstein, executive director of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities] said.” (The Washington Post, 2/2/10)

·         “Betting heavily on the symbolism of” a spending freeze filled with loopholes and already being undercut by Washington Democrats. “…[T] he White House is betting heavily on the symbolism of a three-year freeze on domestic discretionary spending accounts totaling about $447 billion annually.  The Departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Interior, Labor, and Housing and Urban Development will face cuts – albeit often quite small.  At the same time, six other Cabinet departments under the cap continue to grow… The carve out doesn’t sit well with many liberals, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).” (Politico, 2/1/10)

·         A deficit commission “without teeth.”  “President Barack Obama's proposed budget relies on a commission without teeth to help his administration wrestle the deficit… The commission has yet to be appointed and there's no sure path to having its recommendations considered by Congress.  The trouble is that the idea of establishing the commission by law failed last week when senators in both parties opposed it.” (Associated Press, 2/1/10)

·         Assuming savings from a government takeover of health care that would actually raise costs. “President Obama’s budget projects $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade – some of which comes from health care reform legislation.  … That means the administration is counting on $150 billion in deficit reduction from a health care reform bill that is – for now – stalled in Congress with no clear path forward.” (ABC News, 2/1/10) [NOTE: This becomes even more questionable given that experts at the Department of Health and Human Services’ Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have determined that both the House and Senate health care bills would increase costs.]

·         Only asking Washington to meet budget standards of the “world’s poorest countries.” “But the White House was cautious, setting a goal of attaining by 2015 ‘primary balance’ for the budget – equalizing revenues and spending, but excluding interest payments on the debt. The International Monetary Fund uses the primary-balance standard for the world's poorest countries trying to get their fiscal houses in order.” (The Wall Street Journal, 2/2/10) 

REPUBLICANS SUPPORT REAL SPENDING CAPS THAT ARE ENFORCED BY THE PRESIDENT:

Serious fiscal responsibility requires more than a few cuts here and there at the margins. Republicans have proposed adopting strict budget caps that limit federal spending on an annual basis and are enforceable by the President.  These caps were a critical plank in the fiscally-responsible budget alternative Republicans proposed last year, led by Budget Committee Ranking Republican Paul Ryan (R-WI), and they are notably absent from the President’s budget.  Without these caps, Washington will keep on growing and the federal budget deficit will continue to spiral out of control.