The House GOP has unveiled a new plan to lessen the effect of the sequester, but it only covers items that they have handpicked. In their bill, instead of an across the board defense sequester, the military will be permitted to choose which programs get reduced funding and which programs continue to operate at 2011 levels. The GOP backed bill also returns monies for federal prisons, the FBI, border patrol and weather satellites to pre-sequester levels--and it adds $2B to the embassy security budget. These changes reduce the savings to under $1T--a figure that Republicans have been touting as a "must reach" number for months.
Democrats, including Barbara Mikulski, (D-Maryland), Appropriations Committee chairwoman, countered that programs that pay for housing, education and health care also need special thinking. In an interview with CNN, Ms Mikulski said she would also like to see some relief for the transportation budget where work on our infrastructure generates jobs across the country.
Republicans responded to Ms. Mikultski's interview by warning Democrats that moving to change the sequester "beyond non-controversial items" could delay swift passage of any government funding bill.
what eye thynk: When did Republicans become solely and uniquely qualified to identify which budget items earn "non-controversial" status? Was that on the ballot last year and I missed it? Or was this ability somehow divinely granted--in which case when does John Boehner get fitted for his mitre?
The GOP's agree-with-us-or-we-will-bring-the-country-to-its-knees threat is as childish as it is counter-productive. And their latest salvo flies in the face of what they said just a few days ago when Republican leaders were claiming that they would not carry the sequester fight over into the coming budget debate. On Friday, Republicans were saying they welcomed "fiscal peace" and looked forward to a more "orderly budget process".
Note that at the same time some Republicans were making we-promise-to-play-nice sounds, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) was quoted as saying "I will absolutely not agree to increase taxes" and Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) was saying that he planned to present a plan that would balance the federal budget in ten years without raising taxes but would move the sequester cuts away from defense and into other programs whose budget reductions would be permanently locked.
In the Senate, Patty Murray (D-Washington) said she will offer a plan that will undo some cuts, introduce some new spending reductions and increase some taxes.
So basically, Republicans are saying that only they will decide who gets sequester relief, that the budget will not include any new revenue and Democrats should just shut up and listen to their dictates because if they dare to raise any objections, Republicans will delay the passage of any budget at all--again. I don't know about you, but this doesn't sound like fiscal peace to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment