PDA

View Full Version : Details of GOP Budget Plan



cabernetluver
03-26-2009, 06:35 PM
It seems I was busy and wondered if anyone had seen the details of the House GOP budget.

I have looked and looked and looked and could not find anything.

Has anyone else?

I would love to get to know what is on the mind of the GOP leadership, in detail, but, I just can't seem to find anything to discuss

ari1013
03-26-2009, 06:52 PM
It seems I was busy and wondered if anyone had seen the details of the House GOP budget.

I have looked and looked and looked and could not find anything.

Has anyone else?

I would love to get to know what is on the mind of the GOP leadership, in detail, but, I just can't seem to find anything to discuss
You mean the spending freeze?

cabernetluver
03-26-2009, 07:00 PM
You mean the spending freeze?


Ah come on. A spending freeze can't be all the details that were promised today. That would be irresponsible. I mean, no one thinks that everything needs to be treated the same.

ari1013
03-26-2009, 07:10 PM
Ah come on. A spending freeze can't be all the details that were promised today. That would be irresponsible. I mean, no one thinks that everything needs to be treated the same.
I was joking. But seriously, all I saw was this, which says that they're refusing to release details aside from their plan to cut off the top two marginal tax rates:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/03/house_republicans_propose_alte.html?hpid=topnews

cabernetluver
03-26-2009, 07:23 PM
So this must be the Republican proposal because from your link (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/cap...l?hpid=topnews) I saw the following



Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the top Republican on the House Budget Committee, said "while we criticize, we propose."

I know how Cubs is always singing the praise of this fellow, so this must be the well thought out proposal.

ari1013
03-26-2009, 07:27 PM
Right. Bankrupt the nation by scaling back the tax system even more. It's genius!

PHX-SOXFAN
03-26-2009, 08:38 PM
I found this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/26/house-gop-releases-budget-blueprint/

it doesn't say much, but my favorite part was "The plan came in the form of a broad overview and was lacking many specifics"

cabernetluver
03-26-2009, 08:49 PM
I found this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/26/house-gop-releases-budget-blueprint/

it doesn't say much, but my favorite part was "The plan came in the form of a broad overview and was lacking many specifics"

Yep, as in the only numbers are the page numbers. No programs have budget amounts. Yeah. I would have to agree, No specifics.

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 12:20 AM
I know you don't like him db...

...but Gibbs nailed this one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zwa6jRapKY)

dbroncos78087
03-27-2009, 12:23 AM
I know you don't like him db...

...but Gibbs nailed this one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zwa6jRapKY)

That was good, i hope it was a good windmill.

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 12:33 AM
That was good, i hope it was a good windmill.

Actually, I think the windmill is the perfect symbolic representation of the current GOP (http://www.moonbattery.com/DonQuixoteWindmill.gif).

gcoll
03-27-2009, 12:33 AM
I'm not real familiar with budgetary issues, but is it normal for the minority party to offer a "competing" budget?

It seems odd. This all just seems for show. The Democrats use of "write your own!!" to dismiss any criticism, and it seems like the Republicans "Here's our budget!!" was just largely for show. Unless this is the norm....again. I'm not real familiar with this stuff.

It all seems very childish, from both sides.

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 12:36 AM
To tell you the truth, I don't know, but it seems like a perfectly reasonable point of argument from the Democratic side to say, "Well, if you don't like ours, then why don't you show us one you think is better?"

gcoll
03-27-2009, 12:46 AM
To tell you the truth, I don't know, but it seems like a perfectly reasonable point of argument from the Democratic side to say, "Well, if you don't like ours, then why don't you show us one you think is better?"

The Democratic budget is the one being passed. Shouldn't that be what the debate is focused on?

I don't like it as an argument, because it's a distraction, and it seems very childish. Instead of defending the merits of their budget proposal, they choose this bit of political theater in an attempt to mock the Republicans.

Do you really expect the Republicans to spend months on a budget that they know will never be passed? This is silly.

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 12:58 AM
The Democratic budget is the one being passed. Shouldn't that be what the debate is focused on?

I don't like it as an argument, because it's a distraction, and it seems very childish. Instead of defending the merits of their budget proposal, they choose this bit of political theater in an attempt to mock the Republicans.

Do you really expect the Republicans to spend months on a budget that they know will never be passed? This is silly.

Oh, please, it's the GOPers who are playing political theater. The Democrats have defended and continue to defend the validity of their budget plan. The failure to come up with specifics (in both their criticisms and their lack of alternatives) is coming from the Republicans, who haven't articulated much beyond "it's tax and spend!", "it's tax and spend!".

gcoll
03-27-2009, 01:06 AM
Eh **** it. I'll try to just make my point shorter.

Why would the Republicans writing their own budget give any more credence to the claim that we are spending too much money?

I think Democrats are just out of practice at being in the majority, and need something to attack because they haven't had to defend anything in 8 years. Remember the competing bill the Democrats offered to answer the "No Child Left Behind" act they attacked?

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 01:42 AM
Well here's one thing about it. If what the GOPers were saying was the same thing that you're saying, which is that as the minority party they're under no obligation to present an alternative budget, but need instead to debate the majority's budget that's on the table, and they were out there making a strong case for that, I might give a little ground on that point.

But I haven't heard one Republican say anything along those lines. (And I do think that argument could be made in a politically tenable way so that it doesn't come across as "Well, we just don't want to make an alternate budget" - so I don't they they can claim "victimization of the political theater of the Democrats" here, really).

Instead, what they did was announce a big-*** press conference with all the bells and whistles and hoopla, and parade all their bigs out in front of the cameras, and make a big deal out of the alternative budget they were supposedly going to present. They stirred up the pot themselves. And then showed up essentially empty handed.

So you can disagree with me if you want that it's a reasonable request (and if not a full fledged budget, at least an outline with some substantial numbers of how money would be taxed and spent and allocated differently, even in broad strokes). But even if you do, and you think it's purely politics on the Dems' part, the GOP was under no obligation to play into that - if they truly felt they shouldn't - and say, "Well you want an alternative budget, we'll give you one!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQo_leRepjU)

So at best they're sucking at politics, and at worst they're sucking at politics and making budgets. Either way, to turn it around and pin their sucking on the Dems is pretty far off target imo.


I mean, "Through this morning, we didn't have a plan. Now it may be progress that our plan is being attacked." Is this guy kidding or what? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msxP45d38ls) I mean, to do what you said and refuse to put out a budget at all would be one thing, but to say you're putting something out and then dish out a whole lot of nothing... not even the most evil genius Democratic strategist could have gotten them do pull that number on themselves. This one's on them, man.

gcoll
03-27-2009, 02:19 AM
But I haven't heard one Republican say anything along those lines
No. Because they are also engaged in political theater, as you noted. And, they are being dumb as well. I don't think much of Boehner.

So at best they're sucking at politics, and at worst they're sucking at politics and making budgets. Either way, to turn it around and pin their sucking on the Dems is pretty far off target imo.
I never tried to do that.

I just said that they are part of the political theater. And that the "You think our budget sucks? Let's see you try and do better!!!" is dumb. Because attempting to prove the other guy's plan sucks, doesn't prove anything about yours.

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 03:02 AM
I never tried to do that.

IIRC, I'm pretty sure your original post made it sound a lot more like you were saying that - basically blaming the Democrats for getting the Republicans into this mess - than how it looks now that I go back and see that you've ninja edited that post. :rolleyes:

gcoll
03-27-2009, 03:52 AM
IIRC, I'm pretty sure your original post made it sound a lot more like you were saying that - basically blaming the Democrats for getting the Republicans into this mess - than how it looks now that I go back and see that you've ninja edited that post. :rolleyes:
I should really cut down on my ninja edits. When I read my posts back, they never quite sound right.

My thoughts on this entire story. It makes no ****ing sense whatsoever.

If someone can explain to me how it makes sense, I'm all ears. But a lot of Democrats are acting like they've delivered some kind of great argument, and it's just bull ****.

I won't edit this post.

DenButsu
03-27-2009, 04:20 AM
It so is not bull****. Obama for his part, and Democrats in Congress to a probably less effective extent, have in fact articulated quite clearly the contents of the budget (its main components, at least), what they're intended to do and why they think they'll be effective. For example, in his presser the other night, Obama explained that the reason for the inclusion of health care elements in the budget is that the number one factor that will increase the deficit in the future is health care costs, so in the big picture spending some money on fixing things now will ultimately save more money in the long run. There have been plenty of specific, detailed arguments put forth along these lines.

So then what happens is the Republicans basically come out and say, in very vague, general terms, "This budget sucks! There are too many taxes! And too much spending!"

And now what you're saying is that the Democrats need to do a better job of defending it against arguments like that - that are completely devoid of substantive details? And further, that asking them to provide a detailed example of what they think a better budget would look like is "childish"? I really don't see where you're coming from on this one... seems like it's mighty thin ice your argument is skating on here...

gcoll
03-27-2009, 05:38 AM
It so is not bull****
My "bull ****" was in reference to the "write your own budget GOP!" argument.


so in the big picture spending some money on fixing things now will ultimately save more money in the long run
"some money" = a 630 billion dollar "down payment" on health care, and plans to achieve universal health care?

I would call bull **** on that. I don't see how you can increase government's role in health care by that much, and end up spending less government money on health care.

Unless he manes to increase it 4X, and then shrink it back down to 2X what it currently is. But that would be bull ****.

So then what happens is the Republicans basically come out and say, in very vague, general terms, "This budget sucks! There are too many taxes! And too much spending!"
Actually they say that the CBO projected this budget to double the deficit in 5 years and triple it in 10 years...or something like that. I forget the projection.

They say that given our current level of debt, amassing that much more debt would be irresponsible.

And now what you're saying is that the Democrats need to do a better job of defending it against arguments like that
No. Like the one above.

And further, that asking them to provide a detailed example of what they think a better budget would look like is "childish"?
What is the purpose of asking for their budget proposal?

ETA: (not a ninja edit just adding on): Keep in mind Gibbs' response to the "outline" of the budget the Republicans presented. Keep in mind how long it takes to write an actual budget.

ari1013
03-27-2009, 10:32 AM
I'm not real familiar with budgetary issues, but is it normal for the minority party to offer a "competing" budget?

It seems odd. This all just seems for show. The Democrats use of "write your own!!" to dismiss any criticism, and it seems like the Republicans "Here's our budget!!" was just largely for show. Unless this is the norm....again. I'm not real familiar with this stuff.

It all seems very childish, from both sides.
Of course not. The Dems baited the Republicans and so the Republicans basically came up with a bunch of empty pages that they're calling their proposal. Not a dollar number in it.

ari1013
03-31-2009, 08:48 PM
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/housegopplan20090327.pdf

And there you have it. The GOP plan costs $300B MORE than the Obama budget plan.

Yay fiscal responsibility!

cabernetluver
03-31-2009, 09:00 PM
Ari, is that piece of trash for real? You have got to be kidding me.

dbroncos78087
03-31-2009, 09:02 PM
You are forgetting that if you scream fiscally conservative loud enough it becomes true.

gcoll
03-31-2009, 09:07 PM
Well..I suppose you would expect the Republicans to cut more in taxes, wouldn't you?

ari1013
03-31-2009, 09:14 PM
Ari, is that piece of trash for real? You have got to be kidding me.
Well here's the official "plan" http://www.gop.gov/solutions/budget/road-to-recovery-final

So yes, that is 100% real. They want to put us more into debt by giving $150B back to the top 1% while taxing the hell out of the bottom 60% of the population.

ari1013
03-31-2009, 09:15 PM
Well..I suppose you would expect the Republicans to cut more in taxes, wouldn't you?
From what they've been fussing about I would have expected a balanced budget, not more deficit spending.

dbroncos78087
03-31-2009, 09:19 PM
I like all the circles and lines.

behindmydesk
03-31-2009, 09:23 PM
From what they've been fussing about I would have expected a balanced budget, not more deficit spending.

we have been railing more about inefficient spending. We don't view tax cuts and trickle down as inefficient. I'd like to see a non partial group somehow to see the GDP result a decade down from this and Obama's Budget. But it'd be all speculation.

gcoll
03-31-2009, 09:26 PM
From what they've been fussing about I would have expected a balanced budget, not more deficit spending.
It's not deficit spending, it's investment.

For some reason I don't think they consider a decrease in taxes as an increase in spending. So in their minds they cut spending, which is more fiscally responsible even though they cost the government more in taxes. But nobody is gonna cut taxes, or propose a balanced budget during a recession....so where does that leave us?

In the exact same place we've always been. This has all been a distraction. I'm disappointed the Republicans even cobbled together a plan. It has no chance of getting passed, and all it did was open themselves up for ridicule.

ari1013
03-31-2009, 09:33 PM
It's not deficit spending, it's investment.

For some reason I don't think they consider a decrease in taxes as an increase in spending. So in their minds they cut spending, which is more fiscally responsible even though they cost the government more in taxes. But nobody is gonna cut taxes, or propose a balanced budget during a recession....so where does that leave us?

In the exact same place we've always been. This has all been a distraction. I'm disappointed the Republicans even cobbled together a plan. It has no chance of getting passed, and all it did was open themselves up for ridicule.
Any type of stimulus: spending or tax cuts is basically a short term investment.

But it's also net spending.

I agree with you completely on the distraction bit. The Dems are taking advantage of the fact that the House GOP is basically becoming inbred as of late.

ari1013
03-31-2009, 09:37 PM
we have been railing more about inefficient spending. We don't view tax cuts and trickle down as inefficient. I'd like to see a non partial group somehow to see the GDP result a decade down from this and Obama's Budget. But it'd be all speculation.
I'm sure you guys don't. But the majority of Americans realize that tax cuts alone aren't going to dig us out of this hole. Short run tax cuts can provide a quick boost. Long run tax cuts are good if we have a surplus because we don't need to spend as much as we have been.

But you know as well as I do that with or without these tax cuts the economy is on track to recover by the end of the year. So where does that leave us? In the end we're just going to be in a bigger hole than before.

And please don't talk about the Laffer Curve. The Reagan and Bush II Admins proved that we're on the left side of the Laffer curve already, so tax cuts will reduce revenues ceteris paribus.

gcoll
03-31-2009, 09:48 PM
Any type of stimulus: spending or tax cuts is basically a short term investment.

But it's also net spending.

I agree with you completely on the distraction bit. The Dems are taking advantage of the fact that the House GOP is basically becoming inbred as of late.

I think the Republicans feared the "You offer no solutions!!" claim during the midterms. I think their only goal was to have a packet to waive around and say "We have ideas, we swear".

ari1013
03-31-2009, 10:02 PM
I think the Republicans feared the "You offer no solutions!!" claim during the midterms. I think their only goal was to have a packet to waive around and say "We have ideas, we swear".
And clearly they didn't get the memo that this is far worse. They could have brushed off the "no solutions" by saying the economy was due to climb out anyway. But this is just a joke. It reeks of ineptitude.