Obama Rejects Latest Republican budget
Looks like he has decided to shut the government down: Obama rejects latest Republican budget.
Looks like he has decided to shut the government down: Obama rejects latest Republican budget.
Looks like he has decided to shut the government down: Obama rejects latest Republican budget.
From the British science journal Nature: NASA human space-flight programme lost in transition.
Progress! The House Republicans propose $6.2 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years.
The House Republicans last night introduced a one-week stopgap continuing resolution with $12 billion in spending cuts.
The Republican response to the various Democratic claims that a budget deal is imminent: There is no deal, and $33 billion in cuts is “not enough.”
Will the EPA lose control of greenhouse gas rules?
The article above, written for the journal Science, is clearly on the side of the EPA. Nonetheless, it does outline well the political dynamics of this regulatory battle between the EPA and Congress.
It’s a start, though it really isn’t enough: the Republican 2012 budget will call for $4 trillion-plus in cuts over the next decade.
Ryan said Obama’s call for freezing nondefense discretionary spending actually locks in spending at high levels. Under the forthcoming GOP plan, Ryan said spending would return to 2008 levels and thus cut an additional $400 billion over 10 years. [emphasis mine]
Note that no one was starving and children weren’t dying for lack of federal spending in 2008.
The squealing is now getting idiotic: The administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development claimed on Wednesday that GOP budget cuts for the 2011 budget “would lead to 70,000 kids dying.”
“These Aren’t Serious People.” Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit today puts the whole budget mess in clear perspective. As usual, the charts are what make his point so clearly.
Now CNN reports a deal in Congress calling for $73 billion in cuts for this year.
Once again, though these amounts are minuscule, I like the political trend, which is blowing increasingly in the direction of cuts, and cuts only.
Are they blinking finally? Harry Reid (D-Nevada) suggested yesterday that the Democrats might be willing to compromise in budget talks.
Congressmen rack up unpaid parking tickets.
As Glenn Reynolds would say, laws are for the “little people.”
Senate Democrats and the White House offer $20B more in cuts.
This is further evidence that the political winds favor trimming the government. However, to find out how serious the Democrats are we’d need to find out some details about their specific proposed cuts.
More on the space war over NASA from Jeff Foust of The Space Review. Also read this Aviation Week article.
Overall, it is still a mess, with much of the money allocated to NASA a complete waste that will not get us into space.
He has a point: Fred Barnes argues that the Republican incremental approach to cutting the budget makes sense politically. Key quote:
The end zone is far away, however, and impatience won’t get Republicans there. Impatience is not a strategy. It may lead to a government shutdown with unknown results. To enact the sweeping cuts they desire, Republicans must hold the House and capture the Senate and White House in the 2012 election. Then they’ll control Washington. Now they don’t.
Frenzy in Washington grows over nation’s debt.
I like the headline alone, because it suggests the political tide might finally be turning in the direction of actually cutting down the size of federal spending. And the article itself reinforces that sense.
Budget negotiations — and the possibility of a shutdown — are coming to a head.
The NASA space war mess.
Congress is now looking to flatline or cut NASA budget (or not enact new ones) while also playing its own game of telling NASA to do things it simply does not have the budget to do. A new slow motion train wreck is in the making.
Another example of the great disconnect: Just when you think they finally get it.
My idiotic congressman: Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) today called the $100 billion in cuts to the $3.7 trillion federal budget “A meat-axe approach.”
Way to go, Steny! Show us all how you can’t add or subtract. Somehow, to your childish brain, cutting less than three percent of a budget that was doubled (increased by 100 percent) in the years you and your party were in charge in Congress is “reckless.”
What a fool.
The program-formerly-called-Constellation moves forward: Lockheed Martin yesterday unveiled the Orion spacecraft and the test center to be used to prepare it for space.
Though this press announcement was actually intended to encourage Congress to continue funding, it also illustrated how this portion at least of Constellation had made significant progress before it was undercut by both Obama and Congress.
This is a good sign: The Senate vote on restricting the power of the EPA has been postponed by Harry Reid as he struggles to get Democrat votes.
The budget wars: Winning the future three weeks at a time. To me, this says it all:
The Obama White House on Tuesday endorsed the Republican House-passed federal spending extension bill and urged the Democratic-controlled Senate to pass it and avoid a federal government shutdown Friday.
The newest budget continuing resolution and the continuing funding of Obamacare. Key quote:
But Speaker John Boehner, interviewed by The Washington Times, couldn’t even coherently explain why House leaders didn’t remove Obamacare spending just as they did with the 123 other programs.
Continue budget problems at NASA: Two climate missions each face a one year schedule slip.
The squealing continues: Senators defend NPR funding. I like this quote in the comments:
What part of being broke do they not understand?
The squeals keep coming: Tiny cuts, big complaints.
A tea party victory: Republican Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) has reversed course and now supports the House Republican spending cuts.
There was a hearing in Congress today on climate science, though it apparently changed nothing: the Republican leadership in the committee is going to proceed with legislation to try to roll back the EPA regulations relating to carbon dioxide imposed by the Obama administration.
The most interesting detail I gleaned from the above article however was this quote, written by the Science journalist himself, Eli Kintisch:
The hearing barely touched on the underlying issue, namely, is it appropriate for Congress to involve itself so deeply into the working of a regulatory agency? Are there precedents? And what are the legal and governance implications of curtailing an agency’s authority in this way?
What a strange thing to write. If I remember correctly, we are a democracy, and the people we elect to Congress are given the ultimate responsibility and authority to legislate. There are no “legal or governance implications.” If they want to rein in a regulatory agency, that is their absolute Constitutional right. That Kintisch and his editors at Science don’t seem to understand this basic fact about American governance is most astonishing.
What a clown! Congressman Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) has suddenly discovered the federal government is broke.
“Now [that] we’re at $14 trillion in debt, I think the answer is – responsibly – we’re not going to get there [a balanced budget] in ten years, but we have to be on a very considered path to get there, certainly, within the next decade and a half or two decades,
Trouble is, Steny, that debt was mostly created when you were in charge in Congress.