Boy, are the baggies gonna be mad when they hear about this…
Sooo… um … about those Really Big, Historic Budget Cuts …
Not only are they not real cuts, in the sense that they actually reduce significant amounts of money to current projects rather than using accounting slight of hand to produce the appearance of cuts, they aren’t even the
$100 billion $61 billion $38.5 billion $28 billion Boehner, Canter and Company promised the tea party base.
Not even close.
From the National Journal (if you’re a tea party member, you might want to sit down, or have a drink.)
A Congressional Budget Office analysis of the fiscal 2011 spending deal that Congress will vote on Thursday concludes that it would cut spending this year by less than one-one hundredth of what both Republicans or Democrats have claimed.
A comparison prepared by the CBO shows that the omnibus spending bill, advertised as containing some $38.5 billion in cuts, will only reduce federal outlays by $352 million below 2010 spending rates. The nonpartisan budget agency also projects that total outlays are actually some $3.3 billion more than in 2010, if emergency spending is included in the total.
The astonishing result, according to CBO, is the result of several factors: increases in spending included in the deal, especially at the Defense Department; decisions to draw over half of the savings from recissions, cuts to reserve funds, and mandatory-spending programs; and writing off cuts from funding that might never have been spent.
You know, stuff like really cool sounding grants that hadn’t taken any applications yet, or funding for studying the communicable diseases people can get from zoo animals. That kind of stuff. A bit more:
National Journal previously reported that after removing rescissions, cuts to reserve funds, and reductions in mandatory-spending programs, discretionary spending would be reduced only by $14.7 billion. CBO’s analysis, which takes into account the likelihood that certain authorized funding will never be spent, suggests that the actual cuts will be even smaller.
With some conservatives already opposing the deal for not going far enough to meet the GOP campaign pledges to cut $100 billion, the news could complicate House Republicans’ efforts to pass the bill. The minimal effect on current government spending, however, could improve macroeconomic forecasts that predicted lower economic growth if government spending was drastically reduced.
“This bill will cut $315 billion in Washington spending over ten years, $78 billion compared with the President’s request this year alone,” Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-OH, said. “Democratic spin and arcane budget jargon doesn’t change that.”
Um … okay.
So… they almost shut the government down over a budget cut of less than 1 percent…
Here’s Boehner’s mea-culpa, spoken on the eve of the actual vote Thursday:
“I’ll get there,” the speaker told POLITICO. And given the level of Democratic support, Rep. Rob Andrews (D-N.J.) felt bold enough to predict: “I don’t see any chance that this fails unless the bottom falls out with the House Republicans.”
But that’s exactly the nightmare for Boehner, and much as he dismissed any notion of doing the vote count himself, the speaker took time Tuesday to meet with and fortify those lawmakers charged with doing the whipping for the GOP.
The leadership is betting heavily on loyalty to Boehner and a desire to move on to larger budget battles to hold together the rank and file. “This fight is over, move on to the next one,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.). But Obama’s speech at The George Washington University fed into a new round of partisan sniping, and Republicans were privately baffled that the president gave no heads-up to Boehner when the two men were negotiating the final deal last week on 2011 spending.
Late Wednesday, the Republican Study Committee was preparing its own critique of the deal and, citing the CBO outlay projections, freshman critic Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) dismissed the bill as a “Dollar Store” deal.
I do like the “dollar store” thing. Well played.
Here’s the Twitter reaction from Judson Philips, lord of the Tea Party Nation:
Ok, so now that we’re pissing off the baggies, here’s this:
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which distributes funding to broadcasters but does not create content, will receive the vast majority of the appropriations that it requested for 2011.
The Washington Post and the Associated Press differed by a few million dollars in their reporting of the actual funding number, but suffice to say the organization has emerged relatively unscathed from budget cuts. That’s remarkable considering that the House voted in March to cut funding to NPR.NPR receives some money from CPB, though most of its money comes from local affiliates across the nation.
The CPB will endure a slight reduction in funding. “Everybody gets a .2 percent cut,” said Bruce Ramer, CPB board chairman.
The Post’s Paul Farhi also reported that the CPB will have no restrictions on how it can use its funding, which was what the House bill aimed to do.
The CPB requested $430 million for fiscal 2011, a $10 million bump from 2010. The group has asked for $445 million in fiscal 2012.
Quit that flying around and laughing, Grover!
Nobody likes an ungracious winner…