Posted on 04/13/2011 9:43:00 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
House Republicans will fall approximately $20 billion short of their commitment to hold non-defense, discretionary spending for fiscal year 2011 to 2008 levels.
According to House Appropriations Committee sources, the fiscal 2011 budget deal reached by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and President Obama last Friday will push non-defense discretionary spending $20 billion higher than the 2008 level House Republicans had promised voters.
In their 2010 Pledge to America, House Republicans promised that “with common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops, we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels.”
However, with the enactment of the fiscal 2011 budget deal, that goal will be missed by about $20 billion, the committee source told CNSNews.com. The final 2011 spending levels have not yet been released.
The Republican pledge excluded federal entitlements – which make up half of the total federal budget – as well as spending on the Defense Department and veterans programs, leaving a relatively small portion of the federal budget to be restored to 2008 levels.
In 2008, this portion of the budget accounted for approximately $522.4 billion. That means that for 2011, non-defense discretionary spending will be approximately $542 billion -- $20 billion higher than the 2008 level.
The committee source noted that while Republicans may not have achieved the level of cuts they pledged for fiscal 2011, their fiscal 2012 budget would more than make up for it.
That 2012 budget, written by Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), would hold all discretionary spending – including defense – to $1.019 trillion. If that spending level is maintained throughout the budgeting process, it would reduce discretionary spending to 2006 levels, easily keeping Republicans within the range established in their pledge.
We’re still gonna’ raise taxes on the Democrats though, right?
Is there any difference in the republican party and tits on a boar hog.
“Falling Short” should be the Republican party motto.
It’s just what they *do*. Falling short *defines* them. It’s what they *stand for*. And they’re damn proud of it, apparently, because they don’t ever do anything to change it.
That would be Revenue Enhancement not Taxes! New buzz word coming from Obozo today!
“Is there any difference in the republican party and tits on a boar hog.”
A clear majority of both rows of tits on a boar hog are members of the same party.
The U.S. Senate, being strongly controlled by the Democrats, constrains the Republicans ability to realize their ambitions and purposes.
However, I’ve been told that no money can be spent by the Exec. Branch without approval of the House of Representatives. If this is true, the House Pubbies should be in a controlling position goinig forward. Obama currently has at his disposal way too much (borrowed) money previously appropriated and approved by a Democrat controlled House.
Tea Party candidates got elected. But the same people are in charge.
Yes, that controlling portion is why the democrats lite party has collapsed from the dead duck until now and they will continue to collapse. Have no intention of voting for the bastards anymore.
What was at stake in this last fight was negotiating power.
The Dem Senate gave far more up than the House in this fight, despite Reid's screams about how corrupt the Tea Party is.
This bodes well for the next fight. Will we get ALL we want as the purists demand? NO. But we will likely get a good chunk of it and FAR more than the Dems. We're on the right track. Let's keep it going.
Looking at the 2010 pie chart I noticed that this “non-defense discretionary spending” was 19% of the budget.
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.