« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

What’s the Point of the Ryan Budget?

This week the House and Senate will focus on spending measures for two different years, but they are both intertwined.  The Senate will vote on the House-passed CR to fund the government for the rest of the current fiscal year, while the House will introduce the “Ryan” budget resolution for FY 2014.

With much anticipation and gusto, Paul Ryan will release his budget this week – one that is expected to balance in 10 years.  In order to do so, it will presumably zero out funding for Obamacare.  Conservatives on an off the hill will offer profuse accolades for Ryan and his budget.  And rightfully so.  This budget, while imperfect (it uses Obama’s tax hikes to balance), will represent a paradigm shift from the current fiscal trajectory into Greece on steroids.  Conservatives will pour over the budget and express glee over each item as if it were some Christmas wish list.

Unfortunately, there is one disturbing point that will be overlooked through the hullabaloo over the budget resolution – we’ve been here before.  And if the past is a good indication of the future, conservatives will be disappointed.

In 2011, Paul Ryan introduced a pretty good budget for FY 2012.  We were told at the time to hold back on the FY 2011 CR because “wait until the Ryan budget, and we’ll defund Obamacare and cut trillions.”  Well, we waited for the Ryan budget, and Republicans never had any intention of standing behind it.  They eventually passed Harry Reid’s omnibus bill, which increased spending and obviously left Obamacare intact.

It’s really very simple, folks.  You can unilaterally craft a budget that balances in 10 years, 5 years, or one year.  It is irrelevant unless you plan to use the debt ceiling or budget deadline as leverage to force through a major element of that budget.

Oh, but we can’t “govern” from the House, can we?  Tell that to the Gingrich-era House, which fought a moderate Senate and a Democrat president to enact welfare reform and spending cuts.  Clinton knew that Republicans meant business and were willing to engage in brinkmanship.  And no, Republicans did not lose the ’96 elections because of the government shutdown.  I think a man named Bob Dole had something to do with that (they also picked up two seats in the Senate).

Back in 1995, we only had $4.5 trillion in debt, the dependency state was a fraction of its current size, and Obamacare did not exist.  Anyone who is serious about saving this country must be willing to fight at least as hard as the Republicans did in the ‘90s.  Perforce, if Republicans continue to telegraph the message to Democrats that they are terrified of engaging in brinkmanship, the Ryan budget is not worth the paper it is printed on.

Which brings us back to the CR for the current year pending before the Senate this week.  If Republicans in the Senate refuse to filibuster the CR in order to fight Obamacare once and for all, what is the point of passing a budget for the new year?  Give me one good reason why they will suddenly find their moxie during the September CR?  And don’t even start talking about the debt ceiling, when Republicans will run for the hills in order to avoid the contrived threat of default.

Ted Cruz has introduced an amendment to defund Obamacare.  Many Senators, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have expressed their support for the defund effort.  However, there is a big difference between supporting an amendment and committing to filibuster the CR if it fails to contain that amendment.  It’s time Republicans engage in a fight over Obamacare – an entitlement program that is actually unpopular with the voters.

They should object to any unanimous consent agreement to proceed with debate on the CR until there is a vote on Obamacare.  There are a number of red state Democrats in cycle who need to stand before their constituents and directly affirm their support for this malevolent beast of a program.  They should lead filibusters into the night attacking every aspect of the program, much like Rand Paul did with domestic drone use last week.

If Republicans ultimately allow this CR to pass without defunding Obamacare, all the hype over the Ryan budget this week will be irrelevant.  There will be no balanced budgets without first derailing implementation of the biggest budget-buster in American history.

COMMENTS

  • kentucky

    Without agreeing nor disagreeing, I think the point of the Ryan Budget is to pass something through the House largely in line with Republican principles that Republicans can point to as their preferred way forward. The House leadership would rather keep the Republican toehold in the House intact than adopt a high-risk high-reward strategy that may be the only way they lose control of the House. Obama has big plans for 2015-2016, and his entire strategy for the next two years is to lay the foundation for taking over the House. Then he can have cap-and-trade, gun control, corporate-crony giveaways, and who knows what else.

  • votemout2012

    Republicans are willing to give him just about anything he wants now why wait until 2015?

  • littlehouse18

    If they don’t stand for something they *will* likely lose the House. We keep losing elections when we “play it safe.” They certainly won’t get the support of liberals and now they are alienating their base. Do we really want to see Rove sputtering again in 2014?

  • kentucky

    I don’t think you’re going to see cap-and-trade, a gun ban, or a new “stimulus” package come through the House. And Obama pretty much accepted that he has lost the tax and spending fight when he agreed that he would have to allow a CR that maintains Budget Control Act levels of spending.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    We actually can’t govern from the House, especially given a president whose values are so foreign that he would have no problem with an indefinite government shutdown. So we really can’t play chicken either. Therefore, the budget proposal will only be relevant as a tool in 2014 and 2016. More later…

  • votemout2012

    Has this president ever been known to back down on anything. These republicans are currently being set up by this president when they meet with him for these dinners and lunches. Not to long from now Obama will come out and say he tried to work with republicans but they are impossible and now he will get his executive order pen and do the job they won’t do.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Which party are you in again?

  • chrisvicar

    Paul Ryan is making a mistake by proposing a budget at this point. The liberals will use it against him when he runs again in 2016.

  • votemout2012

    I agree that Republicans will lose the house in 2014. Their base will stay home. Rep McCarthy out on Sunday shows saying Boehner willing to pass bills even without support of the congressmen in his own party. I say republican party just about worthless at this point.

  • Hafeed

    Just as was the case a year ago, Paul Ryan picked two rates, 10% and 25%, and left the details to Dave Camp and the House Ways & Means Committee on which exemptions would be eliminated. I don’t remember anything coming from that. What happened, and do we have any hope that wouldn’t happen again?

  • Brian Andersen

    Ah yes, the “the liberals will use it against him” line.

    Please see Erick’s post “fight club vs. weenie brigade”.

    Shall we all cower in fear in some corner until 2016?

    I don’t believe the problem is our content, nor our ability to propose good ideas. We need to market our good ideas directly to the kitchen table voters. We cannot fear liberals — WE have to do better telling our story.