AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.
Click here to visit the new home of Politics Daily!
It's crunch time. With deficit hawks hovering, President Obama will offer his 2012 budget Monday, a spending package likely to include enough cuts to offend liberals, but not enough to mollify conservatives.
But that's just an opener. House Republicans, facing an early March deadline to finish business on the current budget, are also feeling the heat -- both from tea party activists and from penny pinchers among the broader membership. A proposal unveiled Wednesday to trim as little as $35 billion or as much as $74 billion -- depending on whose baseline you use -- was met with scorn by determined budget-cutters in the new Republican majority.
Looking for a fiscal trifecta? A debate on raising the nation's debt ceiling is on the horizon.
Back at the drawing board with the current 2011 budget, Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers tried to head off a rebellion in the ranks by searching for $100 billion in spending reductions -- the amount promised by Republicans to the tea party movement, which is anti-government spending at its core.
"Our intent is to make deep but manageable cuts in nearly every area of government, leaving no stone unturned and allowing no agency or program to be held sacred," Rogers (R-Ky.) told the Washington Post. "I have instructed my committee to include those deeper cuts, and we are continuing to work to complete this critical legislation."
He has until March 4. That's when the latest in a series of stopgap spending plans expire for a budget that should have been enacted last Oct. 1.
Obama's upcoming budget is prospective -- that is, it is proposed for the 2012 fiscal year, beginning next Oct. 1. "This budget asks Washington to live within its means, while at the same time investing in the future," he said in a Saturday preview. Even programs that "I care deeply about," will not be spared, he said
The president is expected to follow through Monday on a promise in his State of the Union speech to impose a five-year freeze on discretionary domestic spending that doesn't involve national security. Keeping that spending flat would take a $400 billion bite out of the deficit over the next decade, Obama's budget director, Jack Lew, estimates. But the president is considering only a small slice of the budget pie, leaving defense spending and entitlements off the table.
Lew is talking about annual deficits -- not the cumulative national debt which stands at just over over $14 trillion, according to the latest from the Treasury Department. The debt limit, extended a year ago, is $14.29 trillion, a ceiling that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner says will be reached sometime between early April and late May.
And that's the real crunch. In the past, Congress has always raised the borrowing limit for both Democratic and Republican administrations. The alternatives -- trouble in refinancing the debt, partial government shutdowns, or in a worst case scenario, default -- could shake the fragile economy.
But Republicans, now in the majority in the House, insist they will demand concessions on spending from Obama this time in exchange for going along with another extension. In an analysis in the New York Times Friday, reporter Jackie Calmes wrote that White House aides feel well positioned for the imminent debt limit debate. Republicans have disagreements among themselves and surveys suggest deep reductions in popular programs benefiting middle class families are unpopular with the public. Besides, the thinking goes, the Republicans in power in the House of Representatives know they have a shared responsibility for governing the country.
"There's always a little political theater around this," Geithner told the Times. The White House wants a clean bill -- that is, one that raises the debt limit with no riders attached. If the House adds conditions, the Senate, still run by Democrats could try to rip them out.
But in a game of chicken -- as the government starts to run out of money -- Republicans may use Obama's past words against him, the Times said. In 2006, with the GOP in charge at the White House and on Capitol Hill, then-Sen. Barack Obama voted against the Bush administration's request to raise the debt limit. The bill passed on a party line vote. Obama said: "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure... Leadership means that the buck stops here."
Folo Tom Diemer on Twitter http://twitter.com/tomdiemer
PYRRHIC VICTORIES; plain and simple. LOQUACIOUS RHETORIC; at best! 545 elected and appointed officials are telling 300 million people what to do, 99.9% of what they tell us is totally wrong and backwards. These same people disavow any responsibility and knowledge for their mistakes at our Country's expense and our expense to the tune of trillions of dollars, sell us out to China and Japan Countries that are polar opposites of what we stand for and believe and we sit back nievely; believing the lies and their failure to do their jobs and elect them over and over again. INSANITY is doing the smae thing over and over and expecting differnet results. We The People had better wake up and soon to our reality, fire these idiots, downsize government by at leats 50%, stop all, yest all the out of control spending like earmarks and pork, get our priorities staright, take back this Great Country.
March 08 2011 at 6:52 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyA sad day for all American's who have to balance a checkbook, run a business and for the Mom's who take care of the home budget. The Debt Ceiling, what a joke and the sad thing about this spending in Washington, it's our money that is being wasted and the future of the American children. Maybe the history books will be kind to what America once was?
February 14 2011 at 2:12 PM Report abuse Permalink +1 rate up rate down Replyexigent77712:40 PM Feb 13, 2011
Clinton reduced the debt from Bush Sr of $399 billion to $18 billion; and middle class tax cuts and job growth. Dems policies work.
*************
Yes, Jimmy Carter did a great job on the economy didn't he? Double digit unemployment. double digit inflation. Double digit interest rates. Clinton was lucky. He as at the right place at the right time. He rode the crest of the dot com bubble.
Carter was handed a recession from Ford and Nixon, the world was in recession and OPEC was messing with us.
February 13 2011 at 3:46 PM Report abuse Permalink +2 rate up rate down ReplyAny politician who votes on a bill or package that cuts either Social Security or Medicare will not get my vote, regardless of political party!
February 13 2011 at 3:00 PM Report abuse Permalink +4 rate up rate down ReplyCasinos anyone???!!! there are tons of this federal funding loans, we need to review - all of them..
Business and Industry Loans
$857,000,000 total funding
Purpose of this program:
To assist public, private, or cooperative organizations (profit or nonprofit), Indian tribes or individuals in rural areas to obtain quality loans for the purpose of improving, developing or financing business, industry, and employment and improving the economic and environmental climate in rural communities including pollution abatement and control
I MEAN, REALLY? FOR REAL???!!!
Boll Weevil Eradication Loan Program
$100,000,000 total funding
Purpose of this program:
To assist producers and State governmental agencies to eradicate boll weevils from the United States
here's another waste of our federal funding:
Demonstration Projects for Indian Health
$6,430,000 total funding
Purpose of this program:
To promote improved health care among American Indians and Alaska Natives through research studies and demonstration projects, addressing such issues as Elder Care, Women's Health Care, and Children & Youth Initiative.
Isn't this the same program as OSHA? why is this program necessary?
$52,211,000 total funding
Consultation Agreements
Purpose of this program:
To fund consultative workplace safety and health services, targeting smaller employers with more hazardous operations.
How about we get back to two simple principals that my father, a man that never earned more than $15,000 a year in his life, taught me at at early age but seems incomprehensible to liberals/progressives/socialists or whatever their prefered name this week is.
If you did not earn it it's not yours.
If you can't pay for it you have no right to expect someone else to buy it for you.
Please look at past spending budgets, Under Clinton he increased the budget by 11 %. During the two terms of Bush f/y 2002 ending 2009. Bush's spending increased 104%. Bush also added 1816 new federal subsidies. This combined with the market crash has left the economy in dire straights. This is not the Obama's administrations doing. For Obama to undo all of the increased budget by President Bush , it will take more then two terms, and maybe a ten year plan. As long as don't get involved in anymore wars. It is the plan by the Republican party not to let the public know the results of last 12 years of Reaganism has been a total failure. To go back to that philosophy of little or no regulation would be a horrendous mistake for the economy.
February 13 2011 at 12:28 PM Report abuse Permalink -6 rate up rate down Replyit really at this point doesn't matter whom created what democrats/republicans, this fight always pros and cons for each side, but right now is the time to come together and just review what is out there and get rid of the Government programs that no longer make sense........
February 13 2011 at 12:46 PM Report abuse Permalink +4 rate up rate down ReplyFollow Politics Daily
POPULAR
News From Our Partners







Top News
More News
More on Aol
Local News
More Blog/Sites
Sites and Services
81 Comments