« 4/17: NM Interfaith Power and Light Hosts Serenade for Mother Earth | Main | Susana Martinez Vetoes Rep. Maestas' Bill Strengthening Sex Offender Registration Law »
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Latest on Federal Budget "Negotiations"
It's hard to know what to call the goings-on in Washington about the FY 2011 budget. They're not exactly "negotiations" because Rep. John Boehner and his GOP allies have so far refused to compromise on anything at all. All the give in what should be a two-sided give-and-take process has been on the side of President Obama and Democrats.
Pundits keep saying that Boehner wants to make a deal but can't because of irrational pressure on him coming from the tea party contingent, some of whom have gone on the record as wanting a government shutdown no matter what. "Shut 'er down," has become a right-wing mantra in the last few days -- regardless of the negative impacts such action would create. This is zealotry, pure and simple, on the part of the extremists who increasingly seem to be in charge of the entire Republican party.
After a late-night meeting yesterday with Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner, the President said that while no final deal had been reached, both sides had narrowed the differences between their positions. However, we still haven't heard about any concession the GOP is willing to make to seal a deal.
GOP Offers Another Unreasonable Continuing Resolution
The federal government will close at midnight on Friday unless the two sides agree on a budget, or another continuing resolution is passed to keep things going on a temporary basis. That second alternative seems highly unlikely as of this morning, when President Obama rejected the latest attempt by House Republicans to pass one. The GOP, via H.R. 1363, offered to fund the Defense Department for the remainder of the fiscal year and the rest of the government for one more week -- at a price of $12 billion in additional cuts to domestic spending. Although the measure would no doubt pass the House, the GOP knows it would never pass the Senate.
Regardless, President Obama vowed today that he'd veto H.R. 1363 because he sees it as a distraction from the current negotiations. The message: Enough is enough. It’s time for Republicans to stop playing political games with a government shutdown. Families and taxpayers across our country will pay the price -- in jobs lost and vital services denied. Here's the Obama administration's statement on that score issued by the Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget:
The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 1363, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes. As the President stated on April 5, 2011, if negotiations are making significant progress, the Administration would support a short-term, clean Continuing Resolution to allow for enactment of a final bill.
For the past several weeks, the Administration has worked diligently and in good faith to find common ground on the shared goal of cutting spending. After giving the Congress more time by signing short-term extensions into law, the President believes that we need to put politics aside and work out our differences for a bill that covers the rest of the fiscal year. This bill is a distraction from the real work that would bring us closer to a reasonable compromise for funding the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011 and avert a disruptive Federal Government shutdown that would put the Nation’s economic recovery in jeopardy. The Administration will continue to work with the Congress to arrive at a compromise that will fund the Government for the remainder of the fiscal year in a way that does not undermine future growth and job creation and that averts a costly Government shutdown. It is critical that the Congress send a final bill to the President’s desk that provides certainty to our men and women in military uniform, their families, small businesses, homeowners, taxpayers, and all Americans. H.R. 1363 simply delays that critical final outcome.
If presented with this bill, the President will veto it.
According to the New York Times, House Democrats asked instead for passage of a one-week extension free of any further spending cuts or policy restrictions. Although the President said he'd agree to that, Republicans again said no way. “We don’t accept the status quo,” said Representative Eric Cantor, the majority leader. The Republican stance: My way or the highway, and to hell with what a government shutdown would cause or cost.
GOP Keeps Moving the Goalposts
One of the main obstacles to an agreement is that the Republicans keep moving the goalposts on what would be acceptable to them. As noted in The Progress Report, Senate Dems and the White House agreed to a compromise last week that would cut $33 billion from current spending levels. Even though the original GOP cut request was only $32 billion, the compromise was rejected when tea party extremists and conservative Republicans raised hell about the proposal. Instead, GOP leaders suddently insisted they would need a cut of at least $61 billion.
Wedge Issue Demands
Another major sticking point is that Repubs are insisting on using the budget situation to pump a variety of pet political causes that are tea party favorities, demanding that any funding bill include around 40 "policy riders," including provisions to prohibit funding for Planned Parenthood, the EPA's enforcement of climate change rules and implementation of the Affordable Care Act. As Obama said Tuesday, "What we can't be doing is using last year's budget process to have arguments about abortion, to have arguments about the Environmental Protection Agency, to try to use this budget negotiation as a vehicle for every ideological or political difference between the two parties."
Right-Wingers Excited About Shutdown
The Republicans clearly aren't listening. They want a shutdown if Democrats don't concede to virtually everything Republicans want. At a closed-door meeting of House Republicans late Monday night, the caucus reportedly gave Boehner "an ovation when he informed them that he was advising the House Administration Committee to begin preparing for a possible shutdown." What would that mean?
... it is clear that "a shutdown would have real effects on everyday Americans," as the President said last night, and federal agencies have already prepared contingency plans in case one occurs. Nearly all "non-essential" government functions -- those that don't directly protect life or property -- would be shutdown, furloughing some 800,000 federal workers (out of 2.1 million). "The cost of back pay for furloughed government workers would be $174 million for each day the government is closed," according to a Bloomberg Government analysis.
There's even reason to believe that the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq wouldn't get paid. While the Pentagon could pay one week's worth of work, "all uniformed military personnel would continue to work but would stop receiving paychecks" after that. Speaking to troops in Iraq today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said an interruption in pay would hurt military families, many of whom now live paycheck to paycheck. "I hope this thing doesn't happen."
Boehner and Reid will back back at the White House this afternoon for another meeting with President Obama. Expect more of the same obstructionism on the part of Boehner, who now seems to be functioning primarily as the messenger boy for tea party fanatics who want to make political points and don't care who gets damaged in the process.
April 7, 2011 at 11:53 AM in Democratic Party, Economy, Populism, Government, Obama Administration, Republican Party, Right Wing | Permalink
Comments
https://www.hulu.com/watch/230374/charlie-rose-a-look-at-the-ongoing-budget-debate-cory-booker-mayor-of-newark
up to the 23 mark
I am furious with Obama and Reid. They just keep moving the mark to the right. It's all about meeting the radicals "halfway" when halfway has already gone way, way too far against the well being of the working class. We are being thrust into a deep, deep economic depression.
Posted by: qofdisks | Apr 7, 2011 1:35:01 PM
What difference does it make what Obama and Reid do? The only way the nut cases on the right will OK something is if it meets every demand they have. Even then, they would probably not support it. Its obvious they want to close down the government because they hate all government.
Posted by: Sean | Apr 7, 2011 7:26:42 PM
and they would love to see obama get blamed. we are in such a desperate mess. And our message of raising taxes on the rich is not even in the dialog.
Posted by: Mary Ellen | Apr 7, 2011 9:04:04 PM
This is a result of some forty years of conservative special interests moving to buy more and more influence in the media until there is nearly nothing left of the principle of an "Enlightened Publick."
This has given rise to a cultural atmosphere in which boorishness and bullying have replaced responsible debate. Evangelical zeal in which people who shout the loudest that they are Righteous has replaced real reflection and serious consideration.
The real reason for the rise of the Tea Party is a sense that being loud and dismissing the concerns of anyone else is a valid response to increasingly complex circumstances.
Given the media environment, which thrives on turning everything into a car crash, the challenge is to insist on terms for the debate that are not strictly reactionary.
The long term truth is that the political system tends to ignore the larger, paradigmatic conditions that require a knowledge of history and a large view of what all is going on. Given the narrowing down, the public relations industry can succeed in keeping everyone's attention distracted with side issues.
I don't think one can take the Republican positions at face value, but rather as tactical communication that serves to manipulate the reactionary vote.
To the extent that everyone else gets tempted to react to this as if it were sincere, everything turns into a muddle.
My sense is that Republicans are utterly cynical and that the suburban swing voter who does not have time to analyze any of this really needs to become much more media savvy.
I think more attention needs to be paid to developing a way of communicating to the swing voter between elections that currently does not exist.
Posted by: Stuart Heady | Apr 8, 2011 9:16:01 AM