As the Supreme Court began hearings that will determine the fate of ObamaCare, Republican Congressman Paul Ryan minced no words in his latest critique of the Obama Administration’s disregard for the Constitution.

Last year, we were proud to be one of the first websites to publicly promote the Republican Study Committee’s Cut, Cap and Balance (CCB) plan.  What started out as an idea hatched by a few principled conservatives grew into a unifying rallying cry for the entire conservative movement.  Sadly, GOP leadership jettisoned the universally-heralded CCB plan in favor of the Budget [Out of] Control Act, which gave Obama another $2.1 trillion in debt authority, while cutting nothing significantly except for defense.

Now, thanks to the indefatigable work of Reps. Jim Jordan, Scott Garrett, Mick Mulvaney, Tom McClintock, and Tim Huelskamp, CCB is back in the form of the annual RSC budget – and it’s here to stay.  The RSC budget – Cut, Cap, and Balance – immediately cuts discretionary spending in FY 2013 by $112 billion from last year’s spending levels, caps future spending at 18-18.7% of GDP, and balances the budget in just 5 years!  Overall, the RSC budget will cut $7.6 trillion relative to Obama’s budget and even $2.3 trillion more than the Ryan budget.

The amazing thing is that the balanced budget is achieved without accounting for the reforms to the biggest drivers of the deficits; Social Security and Medicare.  The budget proposal includes Paul Ryan’s Medicare premium support plan, and even adds Social Security reform (unlike the Ryan budget).  However, those changes don’t begin until after the 10-year budget frame.  As such, none of the savings are included in the budget.

While it is clear that those two leviathans must be reformed in order to maintain a balanced budget in the long-run, this budget illustrates something unique in budget land.  It is the first proposal that shows how to balance the budget in 5 years, even without reforming SS and Medicare immediately.  This does not diminish the importance of reforming those programs; rather it shows how much dead wood is lodged into the rest of the budget – an observation that is often overlooked.

Here is a detailed breakdown of the budget proposal:

Discretionary Spending: This budget sets the FY 2013 discretionary spending cap at $931 billion,roughly equal to 2008 levels.  That’s hardly too much to ask for.  It takes the $1.028 trillion level established in the Ryan budget and bakes in the $97 billion of impending sequester cuts (slated to begin on January 2) into the budget from the beginning of the year.  Specifically, it parries away the cuts from defense spending and directs it to the harmful, wasteful, and unconstitutional government programs and agencies.  The list of programs that will be terminated includes the National Labor Relations Board, Trade Adjustment Assistance, the Presidential Campaign Fund, the Legal Services Corporation, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the Universal Service Fund, the Economic Development Agency, and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Here is the key point: All discretionary spending is frozen at the $931 billion level until the budget balances in FY 2017.  From FY 2018-2022, growth of discretionary spending is capped to inflation.  Moreover, in order to keep total discretionary spending at this level, while simultaneously providing for our national security needs, the sub-category of defense spending is allowed to rise gradually (the same levels as the Ryan budget), as non-defense discretionary spending actually declines every year until FY 2018.  Overall, the RSC budget saves about $750 billion more in discretionary spending than the Ryan budget.

Medicaid and Welfare: The paramount entitlement reform of the budget is Medicaid reform.  The proposal incorporates the recently-introduced State Health Flexibility Act (H.R. 4160), which combines Medicaid and SCHIP into one block grant to the states, allowing them to do with it whatever they deem prudent.  Unlike the Ryan plan, this proposal would freeze the block grant at FY 2012 levels (in nominal dollars) for ten years. Overall, the RSC budget saves $760 billion more than the Ryan budget from Medicaid/CHIP proposal and over $2 trillion from the current baseline.

For other mandatory programs, the budget incorporates the RSC’s Welfare Reform Act of 2011 (H.R. 1167).  Once unemployment dips below 6.5%, this bill would freeze all spending on the 77 means-tested programs at 2007 levels (pre-recession welfare payments), rising only with inflation.  It would also place some budget constraints on these “mandatory” programs, and subject the Food Stamp program to the same work requirements that were placed on TANF under the 1996 welfare reform bill.  Total savings from welfare reform will be $260 billion over 10 years.

Other reforms include:

• Requiring current federal workers to contribute more to their pensions and health benefits, while limiting the rate of growth of federal pensions to the “Chained-CPI.”
• Cutting agriculture subsidies by abolishing the Direct Payment farm subsidy, the Foreign Market Development Program, and the Market Access Program.
• Privatizing Freddie and Fannie
• Eliminating all mandatory spending for Pell Grants, subjecting 100% of price tag to the annual budget process.

Taxes:  In addition to balancing the budget in 5 years, the RSC plan would also enact pro-growth tax reform, “The Jobs Through Growth Act,” aiming for the same revenue baseline as the Ryan budget.  It would offer an optional transition to a new, flatter system that contains just two rates: 15% (first $50,000 taxable income for single filers, $100,000 for joint filers) and 25% (taxable income above that).  In order to ensure that there is no increased burden on middle-income families with several children; couples would get a $25,000 standard deduction and an additional $12,500 deduction for each dependent.  After this generous pro-family deduction, all other credits and deductions are eliminated, thereby putting an end to market distortions through the tax system.

The bill further calls for abolishing the death tax and AMT.  The corporate tax would be lowered to 25% and transformed to a territorial system.  Capital Gains taxes would be capped at 15% and indexed for inflation, so only the amount of gains beyond the level of inflation would be taxed.  Some other tax proposals offer slightly bolder plans for the capgains and corporate taxes, but the beauty of this plan is that it facilitates a balanced budget, even working with the inaccurate static scoring of the CBO.

In conclusion, this budget offers the broad contours for any serious plan to balance the budget, and more importantly, shrink the size of government.  On Thursday, the Cut, Cap, and Balance budget will be proposed as a floor amendment (H. Con. Res. 113) to the Ryan budget.  This will be one of those votes that shows who is willing to substantiate their commitments to spending cuts and limited government with real action.  It will also grant those who voted to kill CCB last year a second chance to right the ship.

Long live Cut Cap and Balance!

Last year, we were proud to be one of the first websites to publicly promote the Republican Study Committee’s Cut, Cap and Balance (CCB) plan.  What started out as an idea hatched by a few principled conservatives grew into a unifying rallying cry for the entire conservative movement.  Sadly, GOP leadership jettisoned the universally-heralded CCB plan in favor of the Budget [Out of] Control Act, which gave Obama another $2.1 trillion in debt authority, while cutting nothing significantly except for defense.

Now, thanks to the indefatigable work of Reps. Jim Jordan, Scott Garrett, Mick Mulvaney, Tom McClintock, and Tim Huelskamp, CCB is back in the form of the annual RSC budget – and it’s here to stay.  The RSC budget – Cut, Cap, and Balance – immediately cuts discretionary spending in FY 2013 by $112 billion from last year’s spending levels, caps future spending at 18-18.7% of GDP, and balances the budget in just 5 years!  Overall, the RSC budget will cut $7.6 trillion relative to Obama’s budget and even $2.3 trillion more than the Ryan budget.

The amazing thing is that the balanced budget is achieved without accounting for the reforms to the biggest drivers of the deficits; Social Security and Medicare.  The budget proposal includes Paul Ryan’s Medicare premium support plan, and even adds Social Security reform (unlike the Ryan budget).  However, those changes don’t begin until after the 10-year budget frame.  As such, none of the savings are included in the budget.

While it is clear that those two leviathans must be reformed in order to maintain a balanced budget in the long-run, this budget illustrates something unique in budget land.  It is the first proposal that shows how to balance the budget in 5 years, even without reforming SS and Medicare immediately.  This does not diminish the importance of reforming those programs; rather it shows how much dead wood is lodged into the rest of the budget – an observation that is often overlooked.

Here is a detailed breakdown of the budget proposal:

Discretionary Spending: This budget sets the FY 2013 discretionary spending cap at $931 billion,roughly equal to 2008 levels.  That’s hardly too much to ask for.  It takes the $1.028 trillion level established in the Ryan budget and bakes in the $97 billion of impending sequester cuts (slated to begin on January 2) into the budget from the beginning of the year.  Specifically, it parries away the cuts from defense spending and directs it to the harmful, wasteful, and unconstitutional government programs and agencies.  The list of programs that will be terminated includes the National Labor Relations Board, Trade Adjustment Assistance, the Presidential Campaign Fund, the Legal Services Corporation, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the Universal Service Fund, the Economic Development Agency, and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Here is the key point: All discretionary spending is frozen at the $931 billion level until the budget balances in FY 2017.  From FY 2018-2022, growth of discretionary spending is capped to inflation.  Moreover, in order to keep total discretionary spending at this level, while simultaneously providing for our national security needs, the sub-category of defense spending is allowed to rise gradually (the same levels as the Ryan budget), as non-defense discretionary spending actually declines every year until FY 2018.  Overall, the RSC budget saves about $750 billion more in discretionary spending than the Ryan budget.

Medicaid and Welfare: The paramount entitlement reform of the budget is Medicaid reform.  The proposal incorporates the recently-introduced State Health Flexibility Act (H.R. 4160), which combines Medicaid and SCHIP into one block grant to the states, allowing them to do with it whatever they deem prudent.  Unlike the Ryan plan, this proposal would freeze the block grant at FY 2012 levels (in nominal dollars) for ten years. Overall, the RSC budget saves $760 billion more than the Ryan budget from Medicaid/CHIP proposal and over $2 trillion from the current baseline.

For other mandatory programs, the budget incorporates the RSC’s Welfare Reform Act of 2011 (H.R. 1167).  Once unemployment dips below 6.5%, this bill would freeze all spending on the 77 means-tested programs at 2007 levels (pre-recession welfare payments), rising only with inflation.  It would also place some budget constraints on these “mandatory” programs, and subject the Food Stamp program to the same work requirements that were placed on TANF under the 1996 welfare reform bill.  Total savings from welfare reform will be $260 billion over 10 years.

Other reforms include:

• Requiring current federal workers to contribute more to their pensions and health benefits, while limiting the rate of growth of federal pensions to the “Chained-CPI.”
• Cutting agriculture subsidies by abolishing the Direct Payment farm subsidy, the Foreign Market Development Program, and the Market Access Program.
• Privatizing Freddie and Fannie
• Eliminating all mandatory spending for Pell Grants, subjecting 100% of price tag to the annual budget process.

Taxes:  In addition to balancing the budget in 5 years, the RSC plan would also enact pro-growth tax reform, “The Jobs Through Growth Act,” aiming for the same revenue baseline as the Ryan budget.  It would offer an optional transition to a new, flatter system that contains just two rates: 15% (first $50,000 taxable income for single filers, $100,000 for joint filers) and 25% (taxable income above that).  In order to ensure that there is no increased burden on middle-income families with several children; couples would get a $25,000 standard deduction and an additional $12,500 deduction for each dependent.  After this generous pro-family deduction, all other credits and deductions are eliminated, thereby putting an end to market distortions through the tax system.

The bill further calls for abolishing the death tax and AMT.  The corporate tax would be lowered to 25% and transformed to a territorial system.  Capital Gains taxes would be capped at 15% and indexed for inflation, so only the amount of gains beyond the level of inflation would be taxed.  Some other tax proposals offer slightly bolder plans for the capgains and corporate taxes, but the beauty of this plan is that it facilitates a balanced budget, even working with the inaccurate static scoring of the CBO.

In conclusion, this budget offers the broad contours for any serious plan to balance the budget, and more importantly, shrink the size of government.  On Thursday, the Cut, Cap, and Balance budget will be proposed as a floor amendment (H. Con. Res. 113) to the Ryan budget.  This will be one of those votes that shows who is willing to substantiate their commitments to spending cuts and limited government with real action.  It will also grant those who voted to kill CCB last year a second chance to right the ship.

Long live Cut Cap and Balance!

Shall the federal government be allowed unfettered power over citizens?  That is the ultimate question for nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court this week.  The three days of Supreme Court oral arguments on ObamaCare may be the most important constitutional discussions of our lifetime.

This week in Washington is going to be dominated by a national discussion the constitutionality of ObamaCare, yet Congress plods on.  The House of Representatives is expected to take up a short term extension of a highway bill and the Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget plan for Fiscal Year 2013.  The Senate is expected to take votes on an energy tax bill and legislation dealing with the U.S. Postal Service.

This is a very important week for American freedom in the federal courts.  The Supremes will be engaging a debate on whether there is any limit to federal power residing in the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.  Will Americans be allowed to make very personal decisions about health care or will that power be handed to the federal government in perpetuity?  We shall engage in the national debate this week and the Supreme Court will hand down a decision later this year.

The House has five relatively non-controversial votes on the Suspension Calendar today.  The last Suspension vote scheduled is on H.R. 4239, a short term extension of a highway bill.  If this were to pass the Senate, then the House and Senate would engage in a fight on competing highway bills over the next few months.

The House and the Senate are intent on passing different versions of a highway bill.  The House leadership wants to pass a five-year $260 billion bill and the Senate has already passed a two-year $109 billion bill that was opposed by 22 Senate Republicans.  Conservatives don’t like either the House or Senate approach because they don’t give enough power to the states and they spend too much.  The generational theft of spending today and passing the bill on to America’s kids is immoral and should cease immediately.

On Tuesday the House will debate the “JOBS Act,” H.R. 3606, a bill to make it easier for small businesses to raise money and make stock offerings.  The House will also take up an Federal Communications Commission reform bill.  Then the House will spend two days on the Rep. Ryan budget.

The Ryan budget will commence a national debate on entitlement reform, spending and taxes.  Ryan’s spending plan for next year will slow the growth of government.  He calls it the “Pathway to Prosperity.”  Ryan’s approach includes entitlement reforms, pro-growth tax reform and some spending cuts.  The Ryan plan is in start contrast to the Obama budget that will tax, spend and borrow us into the poor house.  If President Obama’s budget were to be adopted by the Congress, America would creep toward the European style welfare state that has sucked the life out of so many European entrepreneurs.  Some conservatives worry that the Ryan plan is incremental change at a time when America needs a radical approach to cutting the size and scope of the federal government. 

The Senate will spend a week on Class Warfare and another bailout.  The Senate will consider S.2204, the so called “Repeal Big Oil Subsidy Act.”  This bill extends preferential tax treatment for electric cars, car plug in stations, biofuel plant property and other green lobbyist special interest tax provisions.  Taxes are hiked on oil, natural gas, drilling and wells in the name of class warfare against evil “Big Oil.”  Lefties in Congress want to hike taxes on oil and gas production so that they can force Americans into tiny expensive fuel efficient cars.  The Senate will also have a vote on a so called “Postal Reform” bill that is expected to be a magnet for another massive federal bailout.

The Supreme Court will start down the road of determining if a law shall stand that allows the federal government to force Catholic institutions to fund sin.  Furthermore, the Court will determine if the feds have the power to coerce states, by threatening to withhold Medicaid monies, in order to force them to comply with mandates coming from Uncle Sam.

This week freedom will be debated in the Supreme Court and conservatives hope that at least five justices take the side of freedom over the side of big government with no limits. No matter what nine justices say, the federal government would violate the natural rights of all Americans to be free from intrusive government, if the Supreme Court rubber stamps an intolerable act that forces Americans to buy government approved products.

Shall the federal government be allowed unfettered power over citizens?  That is the ultimate question for nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court this week.  The three days of Supreme Court oral arguments on ObamaCare may be the most important constitutional discussions of our lifetime.

This week in Washington is going to be dominated by a national discussion the constitutionality of ObamaCare, yet Congress plods on.  The House of Representatives is expected to take up a short term extension of a highway bill and the Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget plan for Fiscal Year 2013.  The Senate is expected to take votes on an energy tax bill and legislation dealing with the U.S. Postal Service.

This is a very important week for American freedom in the federal courts.  The Supremes will be engaging a debate on whether there is any limit to federal power residing in the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.  Will Americans be allowed to make very personal decisions about health care or will that power be handed to the federal government in perpetuity?  We shall engage in the national debate this week and the Supreme Court will hand down a decision later this year.

The House has five relatively non-controversial votes on the Suspension Calendar today.  The last Suspension vote scheduled is on H.R. 4239, a short term extension of a highway bill.  If this were to pass the Senate, then the House and Senate would engage in a fight on competing highway bills over the next few months.

The House and the Senate are intent on passing different versions of a highway bill.  The House leadership wants to pass a five-year $260 billion bill and the Senate has already passed a two-year $109 billion bill that was opposed by 22 Senate Republicans.  Conservatives don’t like either the House or Senate approach because they don’t give enough power to the states and they spend too much.  The generational theft of spending today and passing the bill on to America’s kids is immoral and should cease immediately.

On Tuesday the House will debate the “JOBS Act,” H.R. 3606, a bill to make it easier for small businesses to raise money and make stock offerings.  The House will also take up an Federal Communications Commission reform bill.  Then the House will spend two days on the Rep. Ryan budget.

The Ryan budget will commence a national debate on entitlement reform, spending and taxes.  Ryan’s spending plan for next year will slow the growth of government.  He calls it the “Pathway to Prosperity.”  Ryan’s approach includes entitlement reforms, pro-growth tax reform and some spending cuts.  The Ryan plan is in start contrast to the Obama budget that will tax, spend and borrow us into the poor house.  If President Obama’s budget were to be adopted by the Congress, America would creep toward the European style welfare state that has sucked the life out of so many European entrepreneurs.  Some conservatives worry that the Ryan plan is incremental change at a time when America needs a radical approach to cutting the size and scope of the federal government. 

The Senate will spend a week on Class Warfare and another bailout.  The Senate will consider S.2204, the so called “Repeal Big Oil Subsidy Act.”  This bill extends preferential tax treatment for electric cars, car plug in stations, biofuel plant property and other green lobbyist special interest tax provisions.  Taxes are hiked on oil, natural gas, drilling and wells in the name of class warfare against evil “Big Oil.”  Lefties in Congress want to hike taxes on oil and gas production so that they can force Americans into tiny expensive fuel efficient cars.  The Senate will also have a vote on a so called “Postal Reform” bill that is expected to be a magnet for another massive federal bailout.

The Supreme Court will start down the road of determining if a law shall stand that allows the federal government to force Catholic institutions to fund sin.  Furthermore, the Court will determine if the feds have the power to coerce states, by threatening to withhold Medicaid monies, in order to force them to comply with mandates coming from Uncle Sam.

This week freedom will be debated in the Supreme Court and conservatives hope that at least five justices take the side of freedom over the side of big government with no limits. No matter what nine justices say, the federal government would violate the natural rights of all Americans to be free from intrusive government, if the Supreme Court rubber stamps an intolerable act that forces Americans to buy government approved products.

“A budget is values,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former head of the Congressional Budget Office and an adviser to John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “When you put together a budget, you display where you’re going to put the nation’s resources and what you care about.”

(HT:Washingtonexaminer)

Something went wrong with the universe after the Puerto Rican GOP Primary. Mitt Romney not only made an accidental relevant statement, he made an intelligent and acutely cutting statement. He pointed out that nobody with a time horizon much beyond November 2012 could cast an intelligent vote for the Democrats. His actual quote was “I don’t see how anyone who is a young person could vote for a Democrat, I’m going to be honest with you.”

I’m no fan of Mitt Romney, but when he said that, he explained what we need to be shouting from the rooftops about the American Left. They have no values, they have no vision, and they offer no future. Well, they do offer a future; it’s just not a particularly bright or promising one. The chart below gives you the details. Maintaining Barack Obama’s current budgetary practices will spend our great nation into its grave and they know it.

The Current Path Is A Highway To Hell

Why do I believe they will spend us into perdition? Well as Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have told us recently; past performance is a powerful indicator of future results. CBS News explains how things have gone under the first 3 and 1/3 years of Barack Obama’s Presidency.

The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency. The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

Barack Obama Wastes More in 3 Years Than GWB Did In 8. Yells "It's All Bush's Fault!!"

It would be grossly unfair to blame just Barack Obama for this deficit. It would be meaner than going on Fox News calling the poor man a Moslem! Barack Obama had plenty of help with the deficit. Despite the unequivocal language of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Congressional leadership of the Democratic Party had the following things to say about the impending 2012 budget process.

“We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year,” Reid told reporters last month, arguing that legislation setting limits on spending is sufficient. “The fact is, you don’t need a budget,” agreed fellow Democrat and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer a few weeks ago. “We can adopt appropriations bills. We can adopt authorization policies without a budget. We already have an agreed-upon cap on spending.”

The more accurate statement of fact would be that Barack Obama, Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid do not want there to be a budget. A budget restricts your choices to something less than “all of the above”, “more than I can possibly afford” or “whatever the [barnyard epithet] gets me elected next time.” It’s always saying the magical word “No” that requires a set of nuts and a set of values.

This explains why no budget has made it to Barack Obama’s desk for 1,056 days. It explains why the US Senate has not passed one since 2009. It explains why House Minority Whip Hoyer does not want one to go up for a vote this year either.

Yet like Sisyphus, Republican Paul Ryan will try to bring Congress back into compliance with its own Federal Law. He will yet again attempt to pass his budget and cut $5.3 Tr from future domestic spending. The Democrats will predictably rerun their infamous advertisement showing him pushing Grandma Wheelchair off of a cliff. But Ryan has looked into the Abyss that is Southern Europe, and he’s seen Illinois, Rhode Island, California…(and quite possibly the other 54 states as well).

For his efforts to at least mitigate the problems of our profligacy Ryan will be castigated, stone-walled and ultimately defeated in 2012. This is when whomever we nominate needs to do more of what Mitt Romney did in his Chicago speech. When the Democrats hide from the future they arrogantly and self-righteously bluster that they represent, the Republicans need to call them on it. Those deficit charts need to be stapled to every Democratic Congressional Candidate’s forehead. This is the only way we can force our Congress to actual pass a budget. This budget is the only way to make our government actually make a choice.

“A budget is values,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former head of the Congressional Budget Office and an adviser to John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “When you put together a budget, you display where you’re going to put the nation’s resources and what you care about.”

(HT:Washingtonexaminer)

Something went wrong with the universe after the Puerto Rican GOP Primary. Mitt Romney not only made an accidental relevant statement, he made an intelligent and acutely cutting statement. He pointed out that nobody with a time horizon much beyond November 2012 could cast an intelligent vote for the Democrats. His actual quote was “I don’t see how anyone who is a young person could vote for a Democrat, I’m going to be honest with you.”

I’m no fan of Mitt Romney, but when he said that, he explained what we need to be shouting from the rooftops about the American Left. They have no values, they have no vision, and they offer no future. Well, they do offer a future; it’s just not a particularly bright or promising one. The chart below gives you the details. Maintaining Barack Obama’s current budgetary practices will spend our great nation into its grave and they know it.

The Current Path Is A Highway To Hell

Why do I believe they will spend us into perdition? Well as Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have told us recently; past performance is a powerful indicator of future results. CBS News explains how things have gone under the first 3 and 1/3 years of Barack Obama’s Presidency.

The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency. The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

Barack Obama Wastes More in 3 Years Than GWB Did In 8. Yells "It's All Bush's Fault!!"

It would be grossly unfair to blame just Barack Obama for this deficit. It would be meaner than going on Fox News calling the poor man a Moslem! Barack Obama had plenty of help with the deficit. Despite the unequivocal language of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Congressional leadership of the Democratic Party had the following things to say about the impending 2012 budget process.

“We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year,” Reid told reporters last month, arguing that legislation setting limits on spending is sufficient. “The fact is, you don’t need a budget,” agreed fellow Democrat and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer a few weeks ago. “We can adopt appropriations bills. We can adopt authorization policies without a budget. We already have an agreed-upon cap on spending.”

The more accurate statement of fact would be that Barack Obama, Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid do not want there to be a budget. A budget restricts your choices to something less than “all of the above”, “more than I can possibly afford” or “whatever the [barnyard epithet] gets me elected next time.” It’s always saying the magical word “No” that requires a set of nuts and a set of values.

This explains why no budget has made it to Barack Obama’s desk for 1,056 days. It explains why the US Senate has not passed one since 2009. It explains why House Minority Whip Hoyer does not want one to go up for a vote this year either.

Yet like Sisyphus, Republican Paul Ryan will try to bring Congress back into compliance with its own Federal Law. He will yet again attempt to pass his budget and cut $5.3 Tr from future domestic spending. The Democrats will predictably rerun their infamous advertisement showing him pushing Grandma Wheelchair off of a cliff. But Ryan has looked into the Abyss that is Southern Europe, and he’s seen Illinois, Rhode Island, California…(and quite possibly the other 54 states as well).

For his efforts to at least mitigate the problems of our profligacy Ryan will be castigated, stone-walled and ultimately defeated in 2012. This is when whomever we nominate needs to do more of what Mitt Romney did in his Chicago speech. When the Democrats hide from the future they arrogantly and self-righteously bluster that they represent, the Republicans need to call them on it. Those deficit charts need to be stapled to every Democratic Congressional Candidate’s forehead. This is the only way we can force our Congress to actual pass a budget. This budget is the only way to make our government actually make a choice.

Paul Ryan is set to release the details of the House Republican budget resolution tomorrow.  While liberals, conservatives, tea partiers, etc. will have plenty to say about the content of the budget, we must all acknowledge that Ryan has worked assiduously to formulate a coherent blueprint for a responsible budget.  The same cannot be said for his counterpart in the Senate.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad has not produced a budget of any sort in almost 1100 days!  Yet, he has the temerity to call Ryan’s budget a “breach of faith.”  CQ reports:

Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad and Appropriations Chairman Daniel K. Inouye, acting ahead of a House Republican action to lower discretionary spending below the level agreed to last year, on Monday urged GOP leaders to stick to the level set in a pact with the White House.

In a letter to House Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio and Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, they said if the House GOP adopts lower spending levels it would delay action on this year’s appropriations bills and represent “a breach of faith that will make it more difficult to negotiate future agreements.”

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis., plans to unveil a budget on Tuesday with a fiscal 2013 discretionary spending limit of $1.028 trillion, $19 billion less than the $1.047 trillion limit in the debt limit law (PL 112-25).

There are two glaring points that are overlooked in this puerile letter.  First, the Budget Control Act did not dictate a set level of spending; it established a cap.  In other words, we cannot breach the $1.047 trillion spending level, but there is nothing stopping us from the imperative to spend less.  Conrad makes it seem like it’s a cardinal sin to underspend the caps.  Only in Washington can someone advance such logic with so much conviction.

Moreover, Conrad is wrong about $1.047 being the bottom line figure, even under the BCA.  We all know that on January 1, 2013, three months after the start of the fiscal year, there will be an automatic sequester of $97 billion in spending.  Consequently, the ultimate spending cap for FY 2013 will actually be $950 billion.  It is more responsible to get out ahead of the sequester and steer the $97 billion to targeted expenditures rather than sit idly while the sequester cuts a disproportionate amount from the military, and does so indiscriminately.

Then again, Conrad doesn’t know too much about prudent budgeting because he doesn’t believe in budgets.  Instead of doing the hard work of creating a budget, Conrad plans to slightly embellish the BCA and deem it a budget resolution.  That’s a “breach in trust” of those who elected him to formulate a budget.

On the other hand, it’s hard to blame Conrad for his timidity.  If you don’t propose a plan to tackle such politically benign issues as…. entitlements, the tax code, welfare, and farm subsidies, nobody can criticize it.

Cross-posted from The Madison Project

Paul Ryan is set to release the details of the House Republican budget resolution tomorrow.  While liberals, conservatives, tea partiers, etc. will have plenty to say about the content of the budget, we must all acknowledge that Ryan has worked assiduously to formulate a coherent blueprint for a responsible budget.  The same cannot be said for his counterpart in the Senate.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad has not produced a budget of any sort in almost 1100 days!  Yet, he has the temerity to call Ryan’s budget a “breach of faith.”  CQ reports:

Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad and Appropriations Chairman Daniel K. Inouye, acting ahead of a House Republican action to lower discretionary spending below the level agreed to last year, on Monday urged GOP leaders to stick to the level set in a pact with the White House.

In a letter to House Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio and Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, they said if the House GOP adopts lower spending levels it would delay action on this year’s appropriations bills and represent “a breach of faith that will make it more difficult to negotiate future agreements.”

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis., plans to unveil a budget on Tuesday with a fiscal 2013 discretionary spending limit of $1.028 trillion, $19 billion less than the $1.047 trillion limit in the debt limit law (PL 112-25).

There are two glaring points that are overlooked in this puerile letter.  First, the Budget Control Act did not dictate a set level of spending; it established a cap.  In other words, we cannot breach the $1.047 trillion spending level, but there is nothing stopping us from the imperative to spend less.  Conrad makes it seem like it’s a cardinal sin to underspend the caps.  Only in Washington can someone advance such logic with so much conviction.

Moreover, Conrad is wrong about $1.047 being the bottom line figure, even under the BCA.  We all know that on January 1, 2013, three months after the start of the fiscal year, there will be an automatic sequester of $97 billion in spending.  Consequently, the ultimate spending cap for FY 2013 will actually be $950 billion.  It is more responsible to get out ahead of the sequester and steer the $97 billion to targeted expenditures rather than sit idly while the sequester cuts a disproportionate amount from the military, and does so indiscriminately.

Then again, Conrad doesn’t know too much about prudent budgeting because he doesn’t believe in budgets.  Instead of doing the hard work of creating a budget, Conrad plans to slightly embellish the BCA and deem it a budget resolution.  That’s a “breach in trust” of those who elected him to formulate a budget.

On the other hand, it’s hard to blame Conrad for his timidity.  If you don’t propose a plan to tackle such politically benign issues as…. entitlements, the tax code, welfare, and farm subsidies, nobody can criticize it.

Cross-posted from The Madison Project