Posted on 02/11/2011 2:56:23 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A big obstacle for House Republicans eager to slash the federal budget deficit may be that Republicans nationally tend to shy away from spending cuts in many major government programs.
Budget cutting is a top priority for the GOP, with 70 percent of Republicans in a new survey by the Pew Research Center saying the federal government should focus on reducing the deficit, not new economic stimulus. And in many cases, more Republicans now support cuts than did so two years ago.
But across 18 areas of federal spending, a majority of Republicans support decreasing spending in just one: aid to the world's needy. In one other area, unemployment assistance, 50 percent of Republicans polled said they would decrease spending (far higher than the 11 percent who said they would increase it), but in all others the number saying funds should be cut is under the 50 percent mark.
When it comes to three big ticket items - Social Security, Medicare and defense spending - more Republicans want increases than decreases in federal outlays.
Support for budget cuts is, unsurprisingly, lower still among Democrats and independents.
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...
Even with these marginal “cuts” the budget is going to go up. It’s all a sham, the GOP is too timid to actually do anything. I think the GOP leaders are trying to find ways to not cut anything.
The mere mention of any polling data sends all 3-term or more Republicans scampering around, yelling at assistants to find out what these “cohonez” things are and where we can get them.
In that case then just let them spend us in to total ruin. Just be ready to survive in the upcoming insanity. Maybe there is no hope. It can and is happening here. Just a matter of how long we have. I feel like I am in the movie Where Austrailia is the last country left after a Nuclear War.
In that case then just let them spend us in to total ruin. Just be ready to survive in the upcoming insanity. Maybe there is no hope. It can and is happening here. Just a matter of how long we have. I feel like I am in the movie Where Austrailia is the last country left after a Nuclear War.
In that case then just let them spend us in to total ruin. Just be ready to survive in the upcoming insanity. Maybe there is no hope. It can and is happening here. Just a matter of how long we have. I feel like I am in the movie Where Austrailia is the last country left after a Nuclear War.
Jon Cohen is the gatekeeper of liberal bias slanting of polling data published by the WaPo organization....
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/how_do_you_know_what_a_poll_nu.php
Jon Cohen does that sort of screening for polling and survey data that journalists at the Washington Post wish to cite.
The Post maintains a short black list of pollsters—which Cohen would not disclose—who, by Cohen’s judgment, operate with serious methodological deficiencies, or have committed “serial misanalysis,” on the scale that their data is banned from publication. Other blue-chip organizations’ polls are trusted enough to be allowed into print without additional vetting. For pollsters in between, Cohen maintains a checklist on the paper’s intranet that helps reporters determine poll quality, and he is often called upon to decide whether data meets the paper’s standards.
“All the methodological concerns aside, at the end of the day, like any business, there are honest and dishonest brokers, and it takes a bit of time to figure it out,” says Cohen.
The Washington Post’s unit—in some ways modeled after Langer’s ABC shop, where Cohen used to work—also designs and commissions the paper’s own polling, where, since the paper can control every decision and step, even more exacting standards are imposed than those the Post applies to third party research.
I have no problem with timid Republicans shirking responsibility for making broad and substantial cuts, as long as they make those cuts.
Their tactic should be simple. Make a plan of massive, tremendous cuts. Then present the whole, huge, laundry list to the US senate, and say, “What is the bare minimum of these you demand be restored, for which you will vote for the budget?”
You see, the Republican’s ace in the hole is to threaten the Democrats.
“Unless you agree to lose most now, and preserve a few, when the Republicans take the senate in the next elections, and likely the presidency, the WHOLE list goes.”
So, for the first time, the Democrats will have a chance to be bi-partisan, instead of just demanding bi-partisanship from the Republicans. OR ELSE.
I would have a national referendum on which things should be cut... from a list of like 30 or so.
Then simply get everyone to promise to abide by the decision of the American people.
Completely defunding Obamacare would at least stall the rate of increase.
This is why I advocate Budget transfers over cuts, Republicans nationally as with he general public nationally are going to have a hard time getting theses things under control.
A better way to go about solving the problem is to simply transfer theses programs in their entirety to the States and let the States one by one get rid of(or keep) them.
The reason is rather simply: While the majority of Americans might object to abolishing or seriously reducing Big Government welfare programs like Social Security or medicare, the stronger majority of Republicans in places like Oklahoma(for example) could probably get away with it.
How is that helpful to non-Oklahoman?
Simple once Oklahoma (again for example) does get away with it, the competitive pressures from Oklahoma will help drive other states to get rid of theses destructive programs, while also easing the fear against getting rid of em.(people will see that they don’t need theses programs in Oklahoma and how distributive they really are.)
Simply put republicans need to attack the big “welfare” programs by sending them lock stock and barrel to the States to be broken down, and destroyed on a state by state basis, and therefore eliminate the dependency fear.
*sigh*
I hope people are fine with national bankruptcy
I doubt they will pass that in the end
Reagan wasn’t able to cut a dime in 8 years so I doubt a few freshmen GOP reps will either.
I am afraid you are right. There are too many George Bush Republicans in Congress. Right now they are afraid to oppose Conservatives who are energized and who have made possible their return to power. But they really wants as big a government as possible. If Pelosi had been willing to give concessions, through them a few bones, they would have gone the same way as the Blue Dogs.
Reagan didn’t have either House after January 1983. Besides, he cut a deal: a major defense building in return for let the Democrats have their domestic spending.
January 1987.
You are right of course. But he never had the House.
Yep... even conservatives love Big Government - as long as the money is spent on THEIR pork!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.