Who won in the budget showdown?

The Republicans, according to this analysis, got the better of the budget negotiations:

HR1 was originally to seek spending cuts of $32 billion until Tea Party conservatives insisted on more than $ 60 billion. House Speaker John Boehner won more cuts than he originally sought and got the Senate to agree to votes to defund the health care reform law and groups like the nation’s largest abortion provider Planned Parenthood – once votes Senate Majority leader Harry Reid said he’d never allow to come to the floor.Back on February 3, Reid called $32 billion in cuts “extreme” and “draconian.”

At a news conference New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., agreed, “I happen to think some of their cuts are extreme and go overboard. But every week they keep upping the ante and proposing extreme cuts.”

Over the next decade the cuts are expected to save hundreds of billions of dollars.

The deal mandates a host of studies and audits of Obama administration policies. It also blocks additional funds for the IRS sought by the Obama administration and bans federal funding of abortion in Washington, D.C.

The history of offers on this bill goes something like this. Democrats first offered no cuts, then $4 billion, then $6.5 billion, then $33 billion, then settled at $38.5 billion.

Boehner made numerous adjustments to his offer in recent days too, but started at $32 billion, then with a Tea Party push went to $62 billion, then dropped to $40 billion, then $38.5 billion.

Democrats claimed they met Republicans halfway after the $10 billion in cuts that already passed this year were approved. They settled late Friday night at three and a half times more.

Boehner came in $8.5 billion higher than the halfway point between his high offer of $61 billion in cuts and the Democrats opening bid of zero cuts.

via Who Won the Shutdown Showdown? It Wasn’t Even Close – FoxNews.com.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • SKPeterson

    I get the feeling that the Dems are going to paint themselves into a hole with their rhetoric. By already dragging out words like “draconian” and “extreme” they’ll have very little to offer when real budget cuts come down the pike. Instead they will get pilloried in ads making fun of Reid and Schumer and their “horror” at a few paltry billion in cuts. Pretty soon I expect to see Schumer making the rounds giving his best Sicilian “Incontheevable!”.

  • SKPeterson

    I get the feeling that the Dems are going to paint themselves into a hole with their rhetoric. By already dragging out words like “draconian” and “extreme” they’ll have very little to offer when real budget cuts come down the pike. Instead they will get pilloried in ads making fun of Reid and Schumer and their “horror” at a few paltry billion in cuts. Pretty soon I expect to see Schumer making the rounds giving his best Sicilian “Incontheevable!”.

  • Rose

    One quarter of American women have had an abortion.
    Soon that will be one-third. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
    I wonder how this growing voting block votes.
    Why is it impolite to ask “Have you had an abortion?”

  • Rose

    One quarter of American women have had an abortion.
    Soon that will be one-third. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
    I wonder how this growing voting block votes.
    Why is it impolite to ask “Have you had an abortion?”

  • http://reformingmichigan.wordpress.com Jeremy Lee

    Planned Parenthood.

  • http://reformingmichigan.wordpress.com Jeremy Lee

    Planned Parenthood.

  • Carl Vehse

    As CNSNews reports, on Twitter and in a press release Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has stated:

    “Make no mistake: I oppose this negotiated deal. It does not: Cut enough spending, stop funding Planned Parenthood, or defund Obamacare.”

    “The deal that was reached tonight is a disappointment for me and for millions of Americans who expected $100 billion in cuts, who wanted to make sure their tax dollars stopped flowing to the nation’s largest abortion provider, and who wanted us to defund ObamaCare. Instead, we’ve been asked to settle for $39 billion in cuts, even as we continue to fund Planned Parenthood and the implementation of ObamaCare. Sadly, we’re missing the mandate given us by voters last November, and for that reason I voted against the Continuing Resolution.”

    The short-term measure was approved 348-70 in the early Saturday morning vote. Twenty-eight Republicans voted against it, including Bachmann.

  • Carl Vehse

    As CNSNews reports, on Twitter and in a press release Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has stated:

    “Make no mistake: I oppose this negotiated deal. It does not: Cut enough spending, stop funding Planned Parenthood, or defund Obamacare.”

    “The deal that was reached tonight is a disappointment for me and for millions of Americans who expected $100 billion in cuts, who wanted to make sure their tax dollars stopped flowing to the nation’s largest abortion provider, and who wanted us to defund ObamaCare. Instead, we’ve been asked to settle for $39 billion in cuts, even as we continue to fund Planned Parenthood and the implementation of ObamaCare. Sadly, we’re missing the mandate given us by voters last November, and for that reason I voted against the Continuing Resolution.”

    The short-term measure was approved 348-70 in the early Saturday morning vote. Twenty-eight Republicans voted against it, including Bachmann.

  • Kirk

    @5:

    “LA-LA-LA!”

  • Kirk

    @5:

    “LA-LA-LA!”

  • Carl Vehse

    Now Sen. Rand Paul wrote in a letter to Senate and House colleagues:

    Despite descriptions of cuts, the 2011 Congress will spend more than it did in 2010 and with a larger annual deficit. It is the third year in a row with a record deficit. Only in Washington can a budget that spends more than it did the year before, with a larger deficit, be portrayed as ‘cutting.”

    According to Paul, the negotiated cut was only $6 billion more than the House GOP had proposed earlier this year.

    I didn’t come to Washington to settle for $6 billion less in spending than if I had not been here. I suspect most of my freshmen House friends didn’t either. That’s barely half a day’s spending at our current pace.

    The Senate will consider the budget package after the House votes on it Wednesday or Thursday. Sen. Paul said he would vote a “resounding no.”

  • Carl Vehse

    Now Sen. Rand Paul wrote in a letter to Senate and House colleagues:

    Despite descriptions of cuts, the 2011 Congress will spend more than it did in 2010 and with a larger annual deficit. It is the third year in a row with a record deficit. Only in Washington can a budget that spends more than it did the year before, with a larger deficit, be portrayed as ‘cutting.”

    According to Paul, the negotiated cut was only $6 billion more than the House GOP had proposed earlier this year.

    I didn’t come to Washington to settle for $6 billion less in spending than if I had not been here. I suspect most of my freshmen House friends didn’t either. That’s barely half a day’s spending at our current pace.

    The Senate will consider the budget package after the House votes on it Wednesday or Thursday. Sen. Paul said he would vote a “resounding no.”

  • Porcell

    Carl, Rand Paul and Michelle Bachmann are grandstanding on this issue. Both of them have succeeded in placing themselves on the fringe of the real debate. Neither has come close to a hard-headed realistic budget proposal similar to that of Paul Ryan.

  • Porcell

    Carl, Rand Paul and Michelle Bachmann are grandstanding on this issue. Both of them have succeeded in placing themselves on the fringe of the real debate. Neither has come close to a hard-headed realistic budget proposal similar to that of Paul Ryan.

  • SKPeterson

    K @ 8 – the Reps DO have a lot to atone for, but they are hardly alone. Much of the rot set in under Bush I and the Dem Congress, but the roots of the present crisis actually goes back to Woodrow Wilson shooting American democracy in both knees about 1913 with the income tax and Federal Reserve. Then Hoover came along and kicked the downed beast in the teeth and gut, followed by FDR who administered a messy coup d’grace. Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon put lipstick and fine clothes on the corpse. We’ve been able to forestall the inevitable for close to 80 years, but eventually the bill comes due.

  • SKPeterson

    K @ 8 – the Reps DO have a lot to atone for, but they are hardly alone. Much of the rot set in under Bush I and the Dem Congress, but the roots of the present crisis actually goes back to Woodrow Wilson shooting American democracy in both knees about 1913 with the income tax and Federal Reserve. Then Hoover came along and kicked the downed beast in the teeth and gut, followed by FDR who administered a messy coup d’grace. Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon put lipstick and fine clothes on the corpse. We’ve been able to forestall the inevitable for close to 80 years, but eventually the bill comes due.

  • Joe

    K – history shows us that changing (i.e. raising) the tax rates does not actually generate additional revenue. Despite having all kinds of different tax rates over the last 50 years, revenue has held pretty close to steady:

    http://reason.com/blog/2011/04/08/why-arent-the-rich-paying-50-p

  • Joe

    K – history shows us that changing (i.e. raising) the tax rates does not actually generate additional revenue. Despite having all kinds of different tax rates over the last 50 years, revenue has held pretty close to steady:

    http://reason.com/blog/2011/04/08/why-arent-the-rich-paying-50-p

  • DonS

    The Republicans won this round, for several reasons. First, they forced an agreement that actually imposes real cuts in spending, not merely “cuts” in wished-for additional spending. When the Democrats tried to fall back on the old canard that they had already made $40 billion in “cuts” because they didn’t impose $40 billion in new spending that Obama originally wanted in this fiscal year, Republicans called “bull”. And rightly so. Second, and perhaps most importantly, they got many of their own number, especially old time Republican appropriators who were not really convinced of the more libertarian smaller government ideals that we need if we are going to somehow extract ourselves from the fiscal disaster we have created, to get on board. That is crucial for the more important next rounds of extracting serious fiscal concessions in exchange for a raised debt limit and legislating a 2012 budget.

    As for taxation, we always hear that “raising revenue must be part of the solution”. Then, ultimately, it ends up being the entire solution as no spending cuts are made, and our budget continues to increase out of control.

    So, here’s the real scoop. Historic federal government revenue hovers at about 17-18% of GDP. On the other hand, spending has increased to excessive levels of about 25% of GDP, from historic levels of 18-20%. Thus, revenue is not the primary concern. It’s spending, pure and simple. Do we need a new tax system? Certainly. Our current income tax system is hopelessly complicated, as politicians drunk with power continually impose their idea of social engineering with a plethora of seemingly random tax deductions and credits for various activities, favoring certain people and businesses at the expense of others. Also, it is an incredible invasion of citizens’ privacy rights. So, we should move toward a consumption based system. However, in the short term, we should broaden the tax base by eliminating all deductions and credits, and lowering rates, across the board. Eliminating the complexity and tax compliance costs of our current system, and ensuring that all citizens pay their fair share of taxes, would probably allow tax collections to rise somewhat relative to GDP without unduly harming the private economy.

    But cutting spending, and especially entitlements, is critical.

  • DonS

    The Republicans won this round, for several reasons. First, they forced an agreement that actually imposes real cuts in spending, not merely “cuts” in wished-for additional spending. When the Democrats tried to fall back on the old canard that they had already made $40 billion in “cuts” because they didn’t impose $40 billion in new spending that Obama originally wanted in this fiscal year, Republicans called “bull”. And rightly so. Second, and perhaps most importantly, they got many of their own number, especially old time Republican appropriators who were not really convinced of the more libertarian smaller government ideals that we need if we are going to somehow extract ourselves from the fiscal disaster we have created, to get on board. That is crucial for the more important next rounds of extracting serious fiscal concessions in exchange for a raised debt limit and legislating a 2012 budget.

    As for taxation, we always hear that “raising revenue must be part of the solution”. Then, ultimately, it ends up being the entire solution as no spending cuts are made, and our budget continues to increase out of control.

    So, here’s the real scoop. Historic federal government revenue hovers at about 17-18% of GDP. On the other hand, spending has increased to excessive levels of about 25% of GDP, from historic levels of 18-20%. Thus, revenue is not the primary concern. It’s spending, pure and simple. Do we need a new tax system? Certainly. Our current income tax system is hopelessly complicated, as politicians drunk with power continually impose their idea of social engineering with a plethora of seemingly random tax deductions and credits for various activities, favoring certain people and businesses at the expense of others. Also, it is an incredible invasion of citizens’ privacy rights. So, we should move toward a consumption based system. However, in the short term, we should broaden the tax base by eliminating all deductions and credits, and lowering rates, across the board. Eliminating the complexity and tax compliance costs of our current system, and ensuring that all citizens pay their fair share of taxes, would probably allow tax collections to rise somewhat relative to GDP without unduly harming the private economy.

    But cutting spending, and especially entitlements, is critical.

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    Food for thought.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=285429

    The government has never once put itself in check during my lifetime, and I have no reason to believe it will in the future.
    Apparently Bill Gross, the head of PIMCO, the world’s largest bond fund, has decided to short all US debt, including Treasuries. He is betting that the US will not avert a financial disaster. This will end badly.

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    Food for thought.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=285429

    The government has never once put itself in check during my lifetime, and I have no reason to believe it will in the future.
    Apparently Bill Gross, the head of PIMCO, the world’s largest bond fund, has decided to short all US debt, including Treasuries. He is betting that the US will not avert a financial disaster. This will end badly.

  • http://chaz-lehmann.livejournal.com Rev. Charles Lehmann

    Who won in the budget showdown?

    The lenders.

  • http://chaz-lehmann.livejournal.com Rev. Charles Lehmann

    Who won in the budget showdown?

    The lenders.

  • Carl Vehse

    From Budget tricks helped Obama save programs from cuts
    :

    The historic $38 billion in budget cuts resulting from at-times hostile bargaining between Congress and the Obama White House were accomplished in large part by pruning money left over from previous years, using accounting sleight of hand and going after programs President Barack Obama had targeted anyway.

    The article also notes that as these details come out more GOP members are now objecting to the “budget deal” the leaders of both parties made last weekend.

  • Carl Vehse

    From Budget tricks helped Obama save programs from cuts
    :

    The historic $38 billion in budget cuts resulting from at-times hostile bargaining between Congress and the Obama White House were accomplished in large part by pruning money left over from previous years, using accounting sleight of hand and going after programs President Barack Obama had targeted anyway.

    The article also notes that as these details come out more GOP members are now objecting to the “budget deal” the leaders of both parties made last weekend.

  • Pingback: Who won in the budget showdown? | goverment-shutdown.com

  • Pingback: Who won in the budget showdown? | goverment-shutdown.com


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X