The Spending Fight (Republicans are winning)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | April 1, 2011 | Editorial

[St. Louis Conservative]

House Republican leaders and the White House are nearing a deal to finally close the books on the 2011 budget—six months into the fiscal year. The White House says it will accept spending cuts of $33 billion, compared to the $62 billion the House passed earlier this year. If House Speaker John Boehner can bring that number closer to $40 billion, so much the better.

We share the desire of new Members in Congress who want deeper reductions. But Republicans don't hold the Senate or the White House, and even cuts of this magnitude are bigger than anyone could have expected last December. Republicans and tea partiers should pocket the victory and move on to the bigger fights over the 2012 budget and debt ceiling.

The fact that Congress is cutting any spending from the $3.6 trillion budget is a big cultural shift in Washington and an important course correction. In 2008, domestic discretionary spending rose by roughly 8%. The budget for federal agencies then expanded another 24% over 2009 and 2010, not including the $270 billion of stimulus funds for these programs. By contrast, the $10 billion in cuts that Republicans have already won for fiscal 2011 will reduce spending by roughly 1%, and 3% if a $33 billion compromise becomes law.

This has accomplished two valuable goals. First, Republicans have succeeded in preventing the stimulus funding in 2009 and 2010 for discretionary programs from becoming a permanent part of the federal baseline of spending, which was a major goal of unions and liberal Democrats.

[LRoggy]

“..if the GOP can’t win this little skirmish, fresh off the HUGE 2010 win, then how can we expect them to win the BIG ones..”

By electing a conservative Senate, keeping the current House makeup and electing a conservative President.

The progressives have spent decades pocketing small, incremental gains at all levels of society. It’s time to do the same.

Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither is this mess.

[foreshadowed at waco]

I agree. The 2012 budget is key.

[Nonstatist]

A deal like this would prevent a government shutdown—at least for now—which could jeopardize the GOP's ability to win future budget fights that are more consequential. Next week, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan will release his fiscal 2012 budget, which we are told will contain more than $2 trillion in savings over the next decade. ....

. We hope freshmen Republicans don't mistake this early budget compromise for Armageddon and refuse to vote for it. That could weaken the final deal by forcing GOP leaders to move left to get Democratic votes. Republicans are winning the spending debate because they have methodically kept their focus on spending issues rather than on extraneous policy riders. ...

Sounds like a smart strategy.

[Mariner]

Pablum.

Has the WSJ been leading the enemy class?

[Mariner]

"We hope freshmen Republicans don't mistake this early budget compromise for Armageddon and refuse to vote for it. That could weaken the final deal by forcing GOP leaders to move left to get Democratic votes. Republicans are winning the spending debate because they have methodically kept their focus on spending issues rather than on extraneous policy riders. ..."

The GOP leadership will accomplish nothing besides a monumental split in the GOP Caucus.

I can see it now...75 republicans vote no and the GOP leadership picks up 40 dim votes.

Boner and Cantor are not fit to held the offices to which they've been elected.

[zeugma]

I’m sorry, but anything less than $200B is a joke, and $500B is still not low for what is needed. I can’t believe we’re even talking about $30-40 billion in comparison to a multi-trillion dollar spending spree.