The Budget Control Act takes an important step in the right direction by cutting $1.2 trillion in government spending over the next decade. Critically, it does this without resorting to Senator Reid’s gimmicks and without imposing the president’s preferred tax increases on American families and the struggling economy.
This bill is far from perfect. We still have a long way to go toward getting the key drivers of our debt — especially federal health-care spending — under control. But considering that House Republicans control only one-half of one-third of the federal government, I support this reasonable, responsible effort to cut government spending, avoid a default, and help create a better environment for job creation.
In addition to securing a down payment of $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, the Budget Control Act tasks a congressional committee with cutting $1.8 trillion more. Such a committee would not be necessary if the Senate would do its job and address our nation’s biggest fiscal challenges, as the House has done. Unfortunately, the Senate has failed to pass any budget for 818 days, while the president has failed to put forward a serious, credible plan to get the debt under control.
Democrats and Republicans in the House and the Senate have rejected the president’s effort to chase ever-higher spending with job-destroying tax hikes. Now is the time to secure a bipartisan step forward in the effort to put Washington’s fiscal house in order. The Budget Control Act achieves this goal. But much hard work still lies ahead.
— Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wisc.) is chairman of the House Budget Committee.
Does the Budget Control Act reduce the debt over the next 10 years? If not, please try again. Reducing the rate at which we accumulate debt is a failure.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf Boehner's plan is a step forward, then it's the one where you step on the garden rake and it comes up and hits you in the kisser.
We need to do tremendously better that this miserable excuse for a budget cutting plan.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, we do. And the way to get a better plan is to control the Senate and the White House after Nov 2012...which is something that will not happen if you hang Boehner out to dry today.
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Revolt against Boehner today will all but assure Obama of re-election. We have to play the long game. The war won't be won in the summer of 2011. We have made tremendous progress: The massive expansion of spending under Obama has been halted. The entire debate in Washington is over how much to cut. The Democrats are wilting.
And just to ensure that we take this victory and flush it down the toilet, conservatives are going to revolt against Boehner?
Idiocy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSorry pal, but I've been hearing about the supposed wisdom of the long game since the fifties. And I'm still not buying it.
But don't let all this nasty opposition talk fret you none. If the Republicans do tear themselves asunder and the Democrats take over the House again - do you really think the results will be much different than this Boehner/Reid plan?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, it will be worse.
Democrats will go down with the ship.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd I take it, you think our ship isn't going down right now?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course the results will be different, notice Obamacare? That happened b/c of a Dem super-majority after the GOP got creamed.
You completely fail to notice that this compromise is not like others in the past because there are no tax increases in it. Seriously, we're winning the fight against the Dems, don't be a fool and lose it all in the last inning.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet's consider your position. Do you recall back in December when the Democrats still had their super-majority? And at that time, did they allow the Bush tax cuts to expire? (No, they did not.)
And why was that? It wasn't because of the stalwart leadership coming from Congressional Republicans. It's because enough conservative average Americans had become fighting mad about fiscal irresponsibilty.
But if you pass this abominable Boehner plan, you'll greatly dampen down the spirits of those same vital Americans.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI trust this man. Do it GOP.
I want this to be brought up again and again before November 2012. The Democrats, as Debbie Wasserman-Shultz has declared, own this economy. One dose of chemotherapy does not cure a cancer, but it is a start.
If Rep. Ryan approves, I am in.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTrust in principles, not in men. Principles don't have to worry about maintaining committee chairmanships.
Boehner's plan is an abomination. That's what Ryan would tell you privately, if he could.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTrust but verify.
This budget plan is an epic FAIL.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt will be amended to pass the House.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou're wasting your talents in this blog's comments section, Professor Xavier.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHey, Buster, if this is an insult I didn't get it (I had to look it up). Don't make me stop this car.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh. I thought he was referring to me. After all, Xavier University is in Cincinnati.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGood point.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI am sure. However, the best outcome is to quickly amend and vote to send it to the Senate.
It is a start. It will give the GOP more power in future months as the points are made of what a mess Obama and the Democrat majority have made. The message will be clear all the way to November 2012...which is the main reason I want to keep firing bills at the Senate.
I do trust in principles and admire the Tea Party for that. However, I do now, and I will in November 2012 after the primary, expect them to help unite and not divide the party. (Keeping in mind, please, that I no longer contribute to the GOP but to individuals).
Rep. Ryan and Rep. West are not folding, they are repositioning and flanking for future battles.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAmen re "messaging."
Hubris in politics appears to be unavoidable. Obama thought he had a mandate for stimulus, Obamacare, etc., when the only mandate he had was to be "Not Bush" - voters were expecting him to be the moderate centrist they thought he told them he was.
Losing the House in 2010 was the voter's rebuke.
Winning the House gave Republicans a mandate to be "Not Obama/Pelosi/Reid" - they went way too far, way too fast & voters didn't like it. That didn't give us permission to head just as fast, just as furiously in the opposite direction.
We have to understand something very basic - no one wants their benefits cut, no one wants their taxes raised & no one wants to believe either one is absolutely necessary. Winning the fight requires convincing a majority we're doing what's NECESSARY.
So you start with steps in the right direction & then you build on them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou trust him because he voted for TARP, all war funding and Medicare Part D, a program that has been called the most irresponsible legislation since the Great Society?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo, I trust him because he is the only person in Congress who seems to understand the mess this country is in.
At the time of the vote, unless I am completely mistaken, war funding made sense. Medicare Part D also seemed ok (at the time). It makes more sense to me than funding ACORN or Planned Parenthood. Sure, it and all entitlements need to be cut. I don't want to be paying for viagra. Fraud is rampant in all of these entitlements. However, heart medications with part D (and a co-pay, I think) keep many out of hospitals or on Medicaid in nursing homes. Many cardiac meds are cheap, and, unless I am mistaken, President Bush was doing this as preventative medicine for CHF, etc. Diuretics are also cheap for this disease.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse