Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

Meet the New Dems, Same as the Old Dems

When President Obama signed the Budget Control Act into law, Americans were promised that it would slow Congress’s appetite for spending. CBO estimated that the new spending caps would reduce appropriations by about $825 billion. In FY 2012, the cap was set at $1,043 billion, a modest reduction of $7 billion from total regular appropriations last year. When Congress completed the appropriations process this past week, the beleaguered U.S. taxpayer should have had every assurance that Congress would abide by the spirit of the Act and stay under the cap.

Alas, Senate Democrats preferred the letter of that law and exploited the rules to end up spending more than was spent last year. Shockingly enough, President Obama signed without blinking.

The House of Representatives passed the last spending measure in three parts: H.R 2055, the Omnibus; H.R. 3672, which included program-integrity measures and disaster funding; and H. Con. Res. 94, a modest across-the-board reduction to offset the spending contained in H.R. 3672.

The Senate passed only two of the three measures. Care to guess which two?

Predictably, Senate Democrats supported the spending measures and not the reduction. Despite having over $1 trillion in appropriations, the thought of reducing spending by less than $9 billion was evidently too much pain to bear.

How? The “disaster trick.” The Budget Control Act allows for spending caps to be adjusted for disasters, up to a certain amount. For FY 2012, that amount was $11.3 billion. Between the end-of-year measure and disaster spending enacted earlier in the year, Congress has appropriated just shy of the full allowance, which allowed Congress to spend above the cap. H.R. 3672 contained $8.6 billion for disaster and program-integrity spending.

H. Con. Res 94, the third piece to the puzzle, provided $8.6 billion in savings to offset the disaster and program-integrity spending that breached the cap. If Senate Democrats had passed this measure, total appropriations (not including the war) would amount to $1,045 billion in FY 2012, reflecting about $2 billion above the cap in previously enacted disaster spending. Still, this amount would be about $5 billion below last year’s levels — a modest but meaningful decline.

Unfortunately, Senate Democrats (except Ben Nelson) couldn’t bring themselves to support this modest acknowledgment of reality and killed the measure. It seems that despite the advertising, the spending disaster — pun fully intended — continues.

You don’t have to believe me. For more detailed analyses, see the excellent pieces by the House and Senate Budget Committees.

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   4

EXPAND  

Bart
   12/21/11 17:58

Why is this post about Senate Democrats?

Because the last Congress failed to do its job, no money was appropriated (other than for programs that don't require annual appropriations) for FY 2011 past around February 2011. If you recall, that's why we had a big fight shortly after this new Congress took office about the "Government running out of money."

So every dime spent by the Government past around February 2011 has been spent at the specific instance and request of the Republican House of Representatives. Nothing gets to President Obama unless it's been passed by both Houses.

The House had plenary authority to reduce the amount of spending (even taking into account programs that don't require annual appropriations) to a sum so low that we would have had NO budget deficit this year. Not just a "lower" deficit - no deficit.

House Republicans can't make the Senate agree to a bill (like H. Con. Res. 94 - which by the way, as a concurrent resolution, isn't even a law) that they want, but they can refuse to appropriate more money than they want to spend and force the Senate simply to negotiate priorities - i.e., on what the money will be spent.

But House Republicans didn't want to.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 SC
   12/21/11 19:57

So why weren't the offsets baked inth HR3672? Because they preferred a rhetorical victory to a fight.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
SQ
   12/21/11 21:01

They all need to go. Every last one of them. The new congress needs to change the rules and cut everything and balance the budget. First to go: Congressional pensions and health care: past and present. Then pass term limits.

I am so sick of this. Is anyone else?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
FlightPlan
   12/21/11 21:33

This is a failure of the Republicans in the House. They crafted the bills in this manner so that they could surreptitiously enable increased spending. The blame for this debacle falls squarely on the shoulders of EVERY member who voted for these laws and they must be held accountable.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact