« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

A Tale of Budget Cowardice…and Courage

“The U.S. House has never— NEVER —failed to pass a budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974. Until today. ”

So the Democrats have finally admitted they will not produce a budget plan this year. This is the ultimate in political cowardice. To understand how cowardly, one must understand what a budget plan really is.

In short, a budget is an outline, a roadmap, a guide for future spending and revenues. It does not actually spend anything or take any money in itself. It’s just a blueprint.

Think of how you do your family budget. You may budget to spend $100 a week on food, $40 a week on gas, and $20 a week on entertainment. Big categories. You don’t have to budget for Cheerios versus eggs, or regular versus super unleaded, or movie night versus mini-golf. Those detailed decisions come later, as you go along in life. But the family budget sets the parameters for big categories of future spending.

The same is true for a budget resolution in Washington. It sets the parameters for big categories of spending—say, “transportation” or “international affairs.” The details of which dollars go where come later in the appropriations bills, tax bills, or direct spending bills.

In other words, a budget resolution is the most basic fiscal legislation that Washington can produce.

And get this: it’s not even binding! A budget resolution does not go to the President for signature and thus does not have the force of law.

So let’s recap: the Democrats have just admitted that they are not able to pass the most basic, almost simplistic fiscal outline that’s not even binding anyway.

Why? Because the Democrats are cowards.

They can’t put on paper what they know to be true—that their intended policies are to continue to spend at record paces, take in far less revenue than they spend, and thus blow the deficit and debt up to levels that even the most imaginary schoolchild cannot envision (the same schoolchild who eventually will have to pay for all this debt).

It’s worth noting that the U.S. House has never—EVER—failed to pass a budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974.

1974.

But I’m happy to say that there is some political courage left in Washington. And some fiscal responsibility.

My congressman, Tom Price of Georgia, and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio have introduced a budget resolution on behalf of the Republican Study Committee (RSC), the conservative caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives.

And get this: the RSC budget proposal is a balanced budget proposal. It makes some tough choices to get to balance, but it gets there.

For example, the RSC budget takes us back to pre-stimulus, pre-TARP spending levels and keeps us there for ten years.

The RSC budget repeals ObamaCare.

The RSC budget makes the 2001 and 2003 tax relief permanent, fixes the AMT permanently, and includes none of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid tax increases. None.

And the RSC budget gets a handle on runaway entitlement spending—not by slashing it all back to zero (as the Democrats will falsely claim)—but by curbing its growth and eliminating gross amounts of waste and fraud.

Although they did not have to, Reps. Price and Jordan provided a 34-page supporting document that cites Founders like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as the intellectual basis for the RSC budget and that lists dozens and dozens of ways that Congress could reduce spending and the size and scope of the federal government.

The RSC has shown that it’s not enough to just mock the Democrats for not producing a budget. We conservatives must also produce a budget of our own to put our numbers, our ideas, our principles down on paper for the nation to see.

That’s courage.

And they should be commended.

COMMENTS

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica

    Liars and cheats.

    They require that Americans “sacrifice” and live within their means and tell everyone to demonstrate “American values” to the world while we fork out cash to develop other countries.

    And us? Debt and non-development.

    Just more extensions of unemployment benefits to delay facing the truth.

    No budget = another delay tactic, a distraction from publicly admitting the magic tricks Obama passes off as “economic policies” are failures.

    Obama should be buying his suits from Sears, Pelosi from Macy’s.

    He should forfeit his wages as POTUS as well.

    Suitable “sacrifice” for Obama.

  • revolutionary

    Nancy can’t be seen at her parties in cheap suits…what would that make the $100 bottles of Jack look like? I mean come on- the people elected to these postitions have totally lost focus. Normal Americans don’t continuously spend over their means without having to pay a steep price for it. I mean, you can for a while, but eventually Peter meets Paul and they realize you are pulling a fast one and the piper comes to collect. I say good for the RSC for making the tough call. Of course the Dumbocrats will trash it and spin it, but they won’t be able to censor it and the public will know where the RSC stands on tough choices. When you overspend and then have to live on a budget, there are tough choices and luxuries you became accustomed to are pared back. It is not forever people…ask Dave Ramsey. Rice and beans and tuna fish…now he is a MULTI MILLIONAIRE and completely DEBT FREE. It CAN be done!

  • Beasley Beesmeal

    we’re gonna need it in a few months

  • Common_Cents
  • IJB

    The ads virtually write themselves:

    “Congress, for the first time in history, failed to pass a budget. Then they went on vacation a week early…”
    [cue shots of Obama, and various House Dems, playing golf]
    “Your family has to have a budget. Why can’t Congress do the same? Shouldn’t we have a Congress that does its job and works for *us*?”

    Like I said, these ads virtually write themselves…

  • E Pluribus Unum

    How can this be?

    I’m sure that the Dem failure to even propose a budget resolution, and the Republicans’ offering of one, will get above-the-fold coverage in the the Washington Post.

    No? Wha….?

  • E Pluribus Unum

    How can this be?

    I’m sure that the Dem failure to even propose a budget resolution, and the Republicans’ offering of one, will get above-the-fold coverage in the the Washington Post.

    No? Wha….?

  • Locked and Loaded

    If what I learned from this video is true, by refusing (not failing) to pass a budget resolution, the House is reverting to last year’s budget targets, but they are now not subject to points of order. Which goes to the question I wanted to ask: What can be done to counter this, other than providing a Republican budget, which is sure to be treated with derision? I had hoped there might actually be some consequence available to exploit and bring the House to a standstill, such as points of order, objections, whatever. Of course, I suggest these on the presupposition that we have at least one congressman who might do so.

    I also found it quite interesting how we got the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Nixon had been refusing to spend all of Congress’s appropriations, but following his Watergate transgressions, he lost his resolve to face off with them and signed the Act.

    Maybe one of our House members could just introduce a bill to change the 1974 Act’s name to the “Just Spend the D**n Money Act.”

  • Locked and Loaded

  • Locked and Loaded

  • banzaibob

    It’s pretty hard to be serious about a budget when you know it will dig a deeper hole that will anger the public. If the budget information gets out it has a pretty good chance you won’t be around to implement it anyway.

  • teresakoch

    I was under the impression it was one of the few things that they were actually tasked to do as a branch of the Government. Wouldn’t NOT passing one be a dereliction of duty?…..

  • streiff

    there is no requirement for a budget.

  • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

    spending bills must originate in the House. The Senate cannot propose any revenue spending measure unless it mirrors a House Bill.

  • edintexas

    As I started to read the post I heard FNC report that this is the first time the House has failed to pass a Budget Resolution since 1976. Either way (not since the new rules of 1974, or failed to pass in 1976), this is yet another political act by the Democrat Congress. They apparently think they can save a seat or two by not putting the citizenry on notice regarding how they wish to spend our money. Well, make that specify how they wish to spend our money. We already know the generality of “how” is profligate spending.

  • GenEarly

    A Budget is used for allocating Money. We have NO Money, only digital paper issued by the federal reserve with NO basis in reality. The emperor has no clothes and we are bankrupt, right now, not 10 years down the road. The illusion may continue,but the truth is what is real.

  • mbecker908

    We don’t really have a President either right GenEarly. After all, he’s never bothered to prove he was “native born”. And we need to take up a crusade against RiNOs and sit out the election to teach the moderates a lesson, right?

    Enjoy your time in the sun, methinks you’re not long for this site.

  • MF

    OK, maybe I should say his strategies rock. He’s just a guy, a good guy from what I can tell. But his general strategy is never to spend what you don’t have, with the single exception for a home mortgage (and even then, don’t buy the mega house that you really can’t afford, and try to save up as much as you can and put down at least 20%). Credit cards and other loans? NEVER!

    Oh, and as for how MSM will spin this RSC proposal? They won’t. It won’t even get mentioned, unless it is forced CONTINUALLY upon them. It will be ignored and buried and not dealt with at all.

  • Ireland

    Pelosi and Hoyer both know that if they pass this Bill they will lose more seats in Congress because they know how angry America is with the spending, increasing the deficit and ObamaCare just to name a few things that worry most Americans.

    So, she not vote on it or tried to hold a vote outside C-SPAN camera and vote privately behind closed doors and not record how members voted. She’s done this before and will do it again. She doesn’t want Democrats to be held accountable for how they voted and then would lose there seat, come election time. She did this in both 2007 and twice that I could find in 2008 right before the elections and especially because they wanted Obama to win. Had the press reported this, they certainly would have held onto those seats in Congress. However, since our once “free” press has been bought by the progressives, these things go under the radar.

  • tonysc

    I love that political cowardice is being called political cowardice but if the real problem the democrats are avoiding is a true budget with real, BIG, BIG, BIG deficits that the voters will be able to see, say $1.5 TRILLION dollars, then it seems that we’re just playing THEIR game with these approaches.

    The real issue is that their budget, whether in an official or de facto budget resolution is too large and has too big of a deficit. Offering rational alternatives for political cowardice plays into the democrats’ hands by muddying the waters.

    Nobody has really put an actual number to what they’re spending, with or without a budget, offering rational arguments with a ‘rational’ budget when the democrats are fleeing from an emotional reaction of the people is just… the wrong battle to fight!

    I say, the republicans should just state what the democrats won’t, the de facto budget; publish the budget number the democrats would have HAD to put in the budget resolution. Keep it honest, reflect what their current spending program will yield; actually show both spending and deficits for the fiscal year, no hyperbole… no high estimate for effect. Just make it an honest budget estimate and that should be sufficient to bring about what they fear, rejection by the voters.

    The democrats are afraid of those budget numbers for a reason, don’t let them off the hook by arguing a totally different set of numbers! Use their numbers (those numbers are toxic to them) and that should be enough to have the effect that they fear. I say, the KISS principle will be the most effective, highlight what they are afraid of (THEIR budget estimate) and they will get their just rewards, defeat at the polls.

    Well, that seems like the most effective approach to me but, hey, I understand that real warriors like to join the battle when offered by the enemy but, it seems that Napoleon’s (paraphrased) maxim of “Never interrupting your enemy while they’re making a mistake” holds for this situation; it is a MISTAKE to have a budget that is this bad (a pretty big one), don’t interrupt the democrats with a different argument.

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

    if Dems had courage