GOP offers $32B budget cut
The pigs are winning! A GOP budget proposal offered today only proposes $32 billion in budget cuts for this year, rather than the $100 billion they promised during the campaign.
The pigs are winning! A GOP budget proposal offered today only proposes $32 billion in budget cuts for this year, rather than the $100 billion they promised during the campaign.
Government stupidity in action: FEMA considered then canceled (thank goodness) a proposal to spend more than a billion dollars on Meals-Ready-to-Eat on the very slim chance that the New Madrid fault in the midwest might produce a major earthquake sometime in the three years.
Unfortunately, they still haven’t canceled plans to buy 7 million emergency blankets and 550 million gallons of water in individual 1-liter plastic bottles.
And you still think NASA (or any other federal program) is going to get a lot of money? The Congressional Budget office (CBO) admitted today that Social Security is now officially broke. Key quote:
The CBO’s revenue/expenditure estimates now place the program in permanent deficit. There had been some hope that payroll taxes would recover sufficiently post-recession to put the program back into the black (the theoretical black) for at least a few more years, putting off the day of reckoning for an election cycle or more. No more: The new CBO estimates put Social Security in the red for as far as the eye can see. [emphasis mine]
More progress: Republicans in Congress say there will be no bailout for the states.
It’s just a start: GOP set to roll out $2.5 trillion in cuts over next 10 years.
Here come the squeals! GOP spending cuts would affect millions of people.
Oh my! “Millions!” The world is going to end! Soon it will be gabillions, then squajillions, and finally megabajillionmillionbillions!
What Congress should cut. And they find $3 trillion in only 14 paragraphs. Key quote:
None of this will be easy. Many will likely demagogue any reduction in the rate of growth of spending as a devastating “cut.” But the politics of spending has changed, and there is an expectation among fiscally conservative voters—Republicans, independents, tea partiers and even Democrats—that the government tighten its belt, just as American families have been forced to do. Some in the Republican establishment have already started complaining that this is too politically difficult. These naysayers misread today’s political climate. Should they succeed in blocking change, tea party voters will hold them just as accountable as big-spending Democrats.
And NASA thinks it can compete with SpaceX or Orbital Sciences? The agency is asking for billions more to build the Orion capsule.
The squealing is getting louder: NPR has launched an offensive against the congressman who wants to cut its funding.
I wish Congress understood this: Almost three quarters of the public opposes raising the country’s debt limit.
The money is not there, and Treasury Secretary Geithner agrees. On January 6 he wrote a letter to Congress, stating that the US will go into default if the debt ceiling is not raised.
Some squeals from the right: Don’t cut defense.
As much as I think it necessary to aggressively fight the wars we are in, I have no doubt that the budget of the Defense Department could be trimmed by significant amounts, without harming our capabilities in the slightest.
More progress: Two House bills have been introduced to eliminate funding for NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Stand by for loud squealing.
More progress: The House plans to vote Thursday on a five percent cut in office salaries and expenses.
Good news, if we can believe them: The Republican leadership in Congress vows to cut spending and roll back ObamaCare.
Numbers to scare you: The just ended 111th Congress added more debt than the first hundred Congresses combined.
Oink! “Nonprofit groups, for-profit businesses, the University of Hawaii, and state and local governments” in Hawaii are faced with a loss of funding due to the end of earmarks in Congress.
What is most interesting about this article isn’t just that it gives a great deal of space to those who oppose earmarks and spending (something you don’t see that often in an AP article), but that the comments are almost universally in favor of eliminating earmarks as well as cutting the federal government. A truly hopeful sign.
Oink! Scientists rail against senator who belittled research.
Alabama town’s failed pension is a warning.