House GOP spending cut proposal

[bluefrog]

Is this enough? Will Social Security, Medicare, and the Military survive the budget crisis?

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

 

[maxiep]

It's a good first step. The bigger issue is that the Republicans politically can't get too far ahead of the populace. I'm ready to have a discussion about raising the retirement age to something like average live expectancy minus five years, but the average citizen still hasn't come to terms with the reality that we can't afford our current Social Security/Medicare structure.

We'll have an honest discussion about raising the retirement age for Social Security and Medicare at a later date. I'm glad the Republicans are giving the lie to the Democrats meme of "the party of no".

 

[hasoos]

Not really those cuts are all one sided. If any budget cuts are truly going to be effective, they have to be cuts across the board, not just in social projects and subsidies. It looks to me like a typical going to cut shit democrats like list. Both sides are going to have to make effective cuts, across the board. Because if you don't get buy in from both sides, nothing will happen.

 

[bluefrog]

Here is the link to the bill:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-4308

I think maxiep hit the nail on the head. There are tons of people who scream "less government" and when they see it affect them personally they will not like it. When the have to pay more for food because the USDA Sugar Program was cut, cannot take the train because a route was cut or loose a job because beach erosion devastated a local economy, they will not be happy.

 

[maxiep]

Not really those cuts are all one sided. If any budget cuts are truly going to be effective, they have to be cuts across the board, not just in social projects and subsidies. It looks to me like a typical going to cut shit democrats like list. Both sides are going to have to make effective cuts, across the board. Because if you don't get buy in from both sides, nothing will happen.

The issue is that "shit democrats like" are generally part of the government, while "shit republicans like" are generally in the private sector. I'd be interested to see of those progams listed, which ones you believe are critical to the functioning of our government. I would argue that when a household borrows $0.40 of every $1.00, you need to cut back to the bare necessities. The Federal Government should be no different. If you disagree, I'd be interested to read your reasoning.

 

[jlprk]

That's not a serious attempt. That's an ideological wish list. No chance, with that approach.

 

[maxiep]

That's not a serious attempt. That's an ideological wish list. No chance, with that approach.

The time for trimming around the edges has passed. Real cuts have to be made.

 

[jlprk]

Correct. That list is just puttering around in Republican Fantasyland. Those are mostly things Republicans opposed from their start. Plus vague stuff like, cut travel by half. Cut printing by half. No details as to how.

Republicans, the Grand Old Deficit party, are responsible for destroying the fantastic success they inherited in 2001, when Democrats had licked the problem. This solution, to decimate only Democratic programs, will not fly. If the list is to be ideological, then what should be cut are the new programs since the enormous surpluses ended in early 2001, which are the Bush agenda.

 

[bluefrog]

Correct. That list is just puttering around in Republican Fantasyland. Those are mostly things Republicans opposed from their start. Plus vague stuff like, cut travel by half. Cut printing by half. No details as to how.

Republicans, the Grand Old Deficit party, are responsible for destroying the fantastic success they inherited in 2001, when Democrats had licked the problem. This solution, to decimate only Democratic programs, will not fly. If the list is to be ideological, then what should be cut are the new programs since the enormous surpluses ended in early 2001, which are the Bush agenda.

Are there any that you agree with? Here are some I like:

Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.

Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.

Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings.

 

[maxiep]

Correct. That list is just puttering around in Republican Fantasyland. Those are mostly things Republicans opposed from their start. Plus vague stuff like, cut travel by half. Cut printing by half. No details as to how.

Republicans, the Grand Old Deficit party, are responsible for destroying the fantastic success they inherited in 2001, when Democrats had licked the problem. This solution, to decimate only Democratic programs, will not fly. If the list is to be ideological, then what should be cut are the new programs since the enormous surpluses ended in early 2001, which are the Bush agenda.

Ah, I get the game now. First, say they're the party of no ideas. Then they're the party of no. Then criticize their ideas as never being specific enough.

As for me, I'd love to eliminate many of the programs enacted since 2001 (with the exception of some homeland security programs). The prescription giveaway to seniors was a travesty.

 

[jlprk]

TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years

The whole list is only $250 billion per year. Easier would be to simply stop making the single giant mistakes, like

1) Obama's cave-in to the Republicans last month, cutting revenues from the rich by $450 billion per year.

2) Or this one.

http://zfacts.com/p/447.html

 

[maxiep]

You'll get no argument from me that the accounting for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are dishonest. If we would have properly accounted for them, perhaps we wouldn't have felt like we could afford all the other goodies we gave ourselves.

War requires sacrifice, be it in terms of blood, comfort or treasure, and should be shared by everyone.

I do take issue with the numbers for ending the Bush tax cuts, because with higher taxes you receive less revenue. Think of taxation levels and revenue received like a production possibility curve.

 

[Sug]

The issue is that "shit democrats like" are generally part of the government, while "shit republicans like" are generally in the private sector. I'd be interested to see of those progams listed, which ones you believe are critical to the functioning of our government. I would argue that when a household borrows $0.40 of every $1.00, you need to cut back to the bare necessities. The Federal Government should be no different. If you disagree, I'd be interested to read your reasoning.

While being funded by the government through tax breaks, subsidies, and government loans that get defaulted.

 

[jlprk]

You'll get no argument from me that the accounting for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are dishonest. If we would have properly accounted for them

Direct costs
As of February 2010, around $704 billion has been spent based on estimates of current expenditure rates

Indirect and delayed costs
According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion dollars by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because combat is being financed with borrowed money.

Long-term health care costs
A recent study indicated that the long term health care costs for wounded Iraq war veterans could range from $350 billion to $700 billion

Military equipment lost
...The military states that the yearly refurbishment cost has increased by a factor of ten compared to that of the pre-war state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

 

[maxiep]

While being funded by the government through tax breaks, subsidies, and government loans that get defaulted.

Crony capitalism is on both parties. I'd be happy to get rid of it. Ask yourself, however, to which party Wall Street gave more money?

 

[maxiep]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

Are we in disagreement?

Speaking of military costs, I'm in favor of abolishing the VA hospital system: our veterans deserve better.

 

[maxiep]

Here's another $150B

http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/20/rep-kevin-brady-150-billion-in-budget-slashes-a-start/

A billion here, a billion there and pretty soon we're talking about real money.

 

[andalusian]

Interesting that out of 20-30 billion/year agricultural subsidies - they only targeted less than 20m/year with sugar/mohair... Especially the corn-subsidies, especially those tied to ethanol production which are just a scam that puts more energy in order to produce less energy... (Cord related subsidies are 7 - 10 billion a year alone...

I actually do not think most of these are bad to cut, the only exceptions imho might be the energy issues - cutting applied research for energy projects (and energy star) smells like big-oil posturing to me and support for technological infrastructure - which is where government should actually spend some money... - of course, if they show me that the energy project cuts are actually ethanol related... I will take that back..

 

[Denny Crane]

First of all, $250B here and $250B there and soon we're talking about real money. Is it enough? No. Is it a good start? Yes.

Second, we were running a surplus when the wars started and we'd still be running a surplus if we kept spending increases on everything else to the rate of inflation. To add in the interest on the cost of the wars and call it $2.4T over 16 years is absurd and intellectually bankrupt. We're not borrowing a dime for the wars, we're borrowing $1.5T on everything but the wars; see how that game is played?

After you pay for all the things that are required (entitlements and interest), and you cut everything else, we'd still be running a deficit.

 

[maxiep]

Interesting that out of 20-30 billion/year agricultural subsidies - they only targeted less than 20m/year with sugar/mohair... Especially the corn-subsidies, especially those tied to ethanol production which are just a scam that puts more energy in order to produce less energy... (Cord related subsidies are 7 - 10 billion a year alone...

I actually do not think most of these are bad to cut, the only exceptions imho might be the energy issues - cutting applied research for energy projects (and energy star) smells like big-oil posturing to me and support for technological infrastructure - which is where government should actually spend some money... - of course, if they show me that the energy project cuts are actually ethanol related... I will take that back..

100% in agreement about ethanol subsidies. Of course Iowa is one of the first primaries, so they're protected.

I love the idea of family farms, but at some point there's only so much you can pay to preserve them. Another subsidy that drives me batty is the basically free water that flows into California's Central Valley to raise cows and grow rice while farms in Wisconsin and Louisiana lay fallow.

 

[BrianFromWA]

(attempting to ask a question that won't be labeled "partisan" and ignored)...

Are there provisions for reclaiming "stimulus" dollars that haven't been spent? Or have those savings been accounted for already? I mean, even a fraction of 800B is some pretty decent change, especially if you're talking about reducing mohair subsidies for 1M.

The list reminds me a bit of "Dave", where a grizzled Frank Langella tells the President "And if you can find a way to cut THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS from the federal budget, then you can keep your lousy shelters. And don't ever send for me again." Enter Charles Grodin and some fancy accounting.

 

[BrianFromWA]

BTW, I know some make the mistake of lumping TARP and stimulus bill together as government spending...TARP, which was originally authorized with the backing of the Bush administration, was authorized to spend 700B on the program. The total cost (without all the repayments yet) is down to 25B and could go lower (maybe make a "profit"?!?).
http://cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=11980&zzz=41404

 

[BrianFromWA]

Is this enough? Will Social Security, Medicare, and the Military survive the budget crisis?

To answer this part regardless of what bill gets passed or not, the military (aside from war spending, which I don't get a view of) has since FY10 (October 09) had a lot of cutbacks and had to "give money back" from operational funding. It will always survive -- it's law that there will be a standing Army, Navy and Marine Corps. But it will require cutbacks in mission as well, which will require some tough decisions by the political masters.

As far as the question above about "travel costs in half", it's actually pretty easy. I don't know what it's like at your job, but in the government all travel has to be authorized (since you're not allowed to pay your way). If there's no money in the budget line, you don't get to go.

 

[MARIS61]

Here is the link to the bill:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-4308

I think maxiep hit the nail on the head. There are tons of people who scream "less government" and when they see it affect them personally they will not like it. When the have to pay more for food because the USDA Sugar Program was cut, cannot take the train because a route was cut or loose a job because beach erosion devastated a local economy, they will not be happy.

Which is why the Reps picked those to cut, rather than cut enormous business subsidies, weapons stockpiles, stop waging wars, raise taxes on the obscenely rich, or anything else that would actually reduce the size of government.

This list is an attack on civilization.

 

[andalusian]

Mohair subsidies are civilization?

 

[Ed O]

This list is an attack on civilization.

Hahaha.

Hahahahaha.

Ed O.