Peace Comes to House GOP? Leadership Agrees to $100 Billion Cuts Now.

NRO The Corner ^ | 02-09-11 | Kathryn Jean Lopez

[Lazlo in PA]

House Conservatives Persuade Leaders to Slash Spending Further

House Republican leaders have agreed to a key conservative demand that they make good on their campaign pledge to reduce fiscal 2011 spending to $100 billion less than President Barack Obama’s budget request, GOP aides said Wednesday.

According to a GOP leadership aide, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and other leaders are working with Republican appropriators, the Republican Study Committee and other conservatives on a “unified” strategy to reduce spending beyond the $74 billion in cuts they had already planned. The cuts, which would only apply to non-defense discretionary spending, would come as part of a continuing resolution to fund the government between March and the end of the fiscal year.

[Lazlo in PA]

For your consideration.

[Major Matt Mason]

$100 billion is a decent start, but only a a start. They have to do more.

[D Rider]

The GOP lost me again. Does anyone have the names of the RINO’s that agreed to this?

[MontaniSemperLiberi]

I think right now they are still grappling with the fact that they set their own target and it’s easy to criticize them for not hitting it. Most of us though will be able to explain to our friends and neighbors that $100billion with a $1,500billion deficit is meaningless.

By next September, when the budget is supposed to be passed, they’ll have to confront the fact that they are voting FOR a deficit. IOW, the target under discussion will change from -100billion to $0 = Spending - Revenue.

They are way, way behind the curve and completely unprepared for it, I think.

[Fraxinus]

I think right now they are still grappling with the fact that they set their own target and it’s easy to criticize them for not hitting it.

I agree with you here, they made a promise and are finding themselves dismayed that they are expected to honor it.

They are way, way behind the curve and completely unprepared for it, I think.

Here is where I disagree with you, $35 billion was what could be cut without taking on either "entitlements" or programs with entrenched and powerful lobbies. To get to a balanced budget will require cuts in programs that have large and vocal lobbies.

Part 2 of a balanced budget is comprehensive tax reform. This will raise some payers taxes, reduce others and if done right reduce compliance costs for everyone. The will be howls coming from many (most?) of those who pay little to nothing due to exclusions and exemption in the current tax code.

[NTHockey]

DEFUND, DEFUND, DEFUND!

Dept of Energy - dead
Dept of Education - dead
HHS - dead
EPA - dead
TSA - dead
NPR - dead
Foreign Aid - dead
UN - dead
New spending - dead
Increases since 2006 - dead
DeathCare - dead

Now, we can get serious about reducing the debt.

[Leisler]

Fedgov is going to borrow near 2 trillion to fund it’s spending. So, now make that 1.9 trillion more in debt.( Not including state, county, local pile on debts )

[Jim Noble]

$100 billion is a decent start

$100 billion is a joke.

They need to get to $1.5 trillion by next year. $750 billion would be a start.

$100 billion is not only an insult, it's a confession of incompetence.

[privatedrive]

Yipee! Now we are going to throw TWO deck chairs off the Titanic. That’ll keep it from sinking...