AFP Responds to President Obama’s Budget | Americans for Prosperity


President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2013 Budget

Just another Tax-and-Spend Proposal

On February 13, President Obama released his budget proposal for the fiscal year starting October 1, 2012.  Just like every budget he has offered, this proposal spends too much, taxes too much, uses budget and accounting gimmicks, and fails to address the nation’s biggest challenges.  Last year, the President’s budget was so unserious that the Senate rejected it 97-0; not even a single member of his own party supported the plan.  This year he hasn’t done much better.

Spends Too Much, Taxes Too Much:  Once again the President produced a budget that never balances, creates trillion-dollar yearly deficits and uses campaign rhetoric instead of pro-growth tax policy.

  • The President’s budget envisions over $3.8 trillion in federal spending in 2013.  Over the next five years, his budget runs up $20.6 trillion in government spending.
  • The budget calls for $1.9 trillion in higher taxes while the economy struggles to regain its footing.  Economists of all stripes agree that raising taxes during a recession is bad policy, but the President is more concerned with campaign rhetoric about taxing the rich than using proven policies to restore economic growth.  What’s more, raising taxes only gives politicians more money to spend; it will only undermine efforts to control federal spending.
  • Even with all these new taxes, the President foresees a $1.3 trillion deficit for this year; the forth straight year with a trillion-dollar deficit.  For 2013, Obama’s budget projects a deficit of $901 billion, but if we strip out the budget’s unrealistic assumptions, yet another trillion-dollar-plus deficit is nearly certain.
  • The President uses rosy estimates to make his budget look better than it really is.  The past three years the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued an analysis of the President’s budget.  They found the deficits were actually 20 percent higher than the President claimed.

Budget Tricks and Accounting Gimmicks: The President claims over $4 trillion in deficit reduction in his budget based on either budget tricks or policies that he had nothing to do with.  A few of the gimmicks include:

  • $1.2 trillion in spending reductions from the 2011 debt ceiling debate. However, it was conservatives and House Republicans that pushed and pushed for spending reductions during this debate; the President wanted a debt ceiling increase with no cuts at all.
  • $617 billion in so-called “war savings” from slowing U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Counting money we never planned to spend as savings is disingenuous at best.
  • $1.9 trillion in tax hikes.  No surprise here, he’s just another tax-and-spend politician.
  • $429 in spending on the Medicare doctors fix is buried in the baseline, covering up this additional spending without paying for it with other cuts.

No Leadership on Nation’s Biggest Budget Challenges: The three big entitlement programs are the main drivers of the nation’s budget woes. The President has once again failed to offer a serious proposal to address these programs.

  • The President has already installed his vision to try to control Medicare costs.  In his health care takeover, the President empowered 15 unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats at the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) to cut provider reimbursements.  This plan will have the predictable effect of putting bureaucrats between patients and doctors, and creating shortages as even more doctors refuse to take Medicare patients.
  • Enrollment in Medicaid was greatly expanded under the President’s health care law with no plan to control costs.  More than 15 million people will be added to the welfare medicine rolls starting in 2014.  Instead of block granting the program to states so they can use proven cost control mechanisms, the President didn’t offer any serious proposal to rein in spending.
  • The President clung to the failed pay-as-you-go Social Security system that is currently a terrible deal for workers.  Higher taxes, lower benefits or a later retirement age will all make Social Security an even worse bargain for workers. Instead, we should move to an optional private accounts system that will restore the solvency of the system, increase individuals’ rate of return and encourage a personal ownership mentality in a program that is currently at the whim of politicians.

View the forum thread.

This “budget” puts the assault on America’s citizens into focus. The Obama plan suggest 3.8 Trillion in spending. It is a certain recipe for financial implosion, the likes of which the world has never seen. The massive debt accumulated in the past 3 years exceed the debt created over the previous 200 years, combined. Does anyone really believe this is a plan for recovery? Really? This is a radical plan to destroy America from within. There’s simply no other explanation that comes close to explaining this gross and purposeful destruction of America.

Budget? We don’t need no stinkin’ budget! – The Loft — GOPUSA

This is exactly why people are frustrated with Washington politicians. Americans have to work within a budget. When they don’t, things go crazy. It works like that in Washington too, except our elected officials are quite happy letting things go crazy rather than following a budget. Just look at Democrat Steny Hoyer. At a briefing with reporters regarding the fact that it’s been 1,000 days since Congress passed a budget, Hoyer said, “The fact is, you don’t need a budget.” And these guys wonder why Congressional approval is in the toilet?

Hoyer said: “What does the budget do? The budget does one thing and really only one thing: It sets the parameters of spending and discretionary caps. Other than that, the Appropriations committee are not bound by the Budget committee’s priorities.”

He continued: “The fact is, you don’t need a budget. We can adopt appropriations bills. We can adopt authorization policies without a budget. We already have an agreed-upon cap on spending.”

As noted in the report by CNSNews.com, “the last time the Senate passed a budget was on Apr. 29, 2009.”

The federal government has since been operating on funds approved through a series of continuing resolutions (CR), raises in the debt ceiling, and several appropriations bills. The last CR was passed in mid-December 2011, by both the House and Senate, and signed by President Barack Obama.

That $915-billion deal, along with several appropriations measures, will keep the federal government operating though the end of fiscal year 2012, on Sept. 30.

CNSNews.com also noted that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also spoke about not needing a budget, saying, “We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year. It’s done, we don’t need to do it.”

Is this insanity or what? Hoyer talks about an “agreed-upon cap on spending” as if that is a substitute for a budget. Does that “agreed-upon cap” do anything? NO! All these people do in Washington is vote to make it higher. There is no budget, and there is no spending cap.

Sen. Jeff Sessions issued a statement on Friday when Reid announced that “for the third year in a row, he would not bring a budget plan up for public debate and amendment on the Senate floor.”

nation’s fiscal future and the difficult choices we face. He obviously continues in his belief that it would be politically foolish for his members to go on record in support of any long-term vision. But by refusing to lay out a budget plan for public examination–a fact no one can deny–the Democrat Senate has forfeited the high privilege to lead this chamber.

It’s been 1,000 days since our leaders in Washington have passed a budget. 1,000 days! Isn’t it time to get some new people in there? These guys may understand how Washington works, but they sure don’t know anything about how an average American family works. Get a clue!

A government run by charlatans who refuse to take responsibility for many, many problems. When Harry Reid refuses to come up with a budget, he snorts that America doesn’t need a budget. Friends, that kind of insanity is designed to destroy the financial foundation of our country. It’s simply a full on assault on the remaining remnant of American Patriots by Obama and his Liberal comrades- war by other means.

Popular Gameshow Host Tells How Govt. Can Cut $1.2 Trillion – Patriot Update

Listen to Chuck… there is a LOT of sense in his budget solution. But it is far too simple and, it would reduce the size of wasteful government spending . That’s where the government bureaucrats have drawn a line in the sand… to oppose at all cost .. er…. your cost.

Kitzhaber’s Highly Paid but Incompetent Agency Directors.. told to go back to drawing board

  As usual, we common folks are held hostage by the “government class” who spend their days idly drifting about the public watering trough, at taxpayer expense of course.  The Oregonian reports….

Promise to require agency cost-benefit reports appears stalled
Updated: Sunday, April 24th, 2011 | By Ryan Kost
One of the central themes in Gov. John Kitzhaber”s successful 2010 campaign was smarter, more efficient government. Kitzhaber promised on more than one occasion that he would completely restructure the state”s budget-making process so that the state wouldn”t have to face across-the board cuts and would instead be able to work from a list of ranked state priorities.

In September 2010, he told KOHD, an ABC affiliate, that those priorities would be built using cost-benefit reports from state agencies. “If we build this budget right next session we can avoid in the future having to deal with across the board cuts, we’ll build based on a set of priorities the most important to the least important,” Kitzhaber said.

Each agency, he told the station, would have to submit a report annually — and that the first would be due within 45 days of his election. Well, Kitzhaber has been in office for more than 100 days now; we wondered how those reports panned out.

Turns out, not quite as planned.

After several calls to his office, we finally sat down with the governor”s spokeswoman Christine Miles. Three agencies, she said, were asked for and submitted the cost-benefit reports the governor had mentioned during his campaign. Those agencies are the Oregon Youth Authority, the Department of Human Services and the Department of Corrections.

Miles showed us the report submitted by the Department of Corrections. It”s about 25 pages full of budgetary pie charts and figures, internal performance measurements and department lingo.

The problem, Miles said, is that after the governor”s office looked over the three cost-benefit reports, staff realized that each department was using a different set of measurements, a different set of terminology. They came to the conclusion “that we”ve got to figure out a better way.”

“We need to be all on the same system,” Miles said. “We need to report the same way.”

So, the office put a hold on the cost-benefit report requirement. “We wanted to go back, start at the basics … (so) the lingo, the accounting at one agency matches up with another agency.”

To that end, the governor has tasked Michael Jordan, the state”s first chief operating officer, with creating a new metric by which agencies can measure, among other things, the effectiveness of their various operations. Once that”s done, Jordan said, the agencies will once again be asked to file annual reports that match the foundation he creates.

Still, “(i)t”s going to take us a while to get all these things lined up,” he said. Likely, it won”t be ready until Kitzhaber is drawing up his budget for the 2013-2015 biennium.

It”s hard to pick a rating for this promise as things stand now. Technically, in order to meet the promise, Kitzhaber should have had more than three cost-benefit reports returned by now. That said, he hasn”t abandoned the idea. It seems like his office is making a genuine effort to rework a promise that, in practice, wasn”t very practical. For now, we”ll rate this a Promise Stalled. We”ll be sure to check back when the next budget negotiations start up.

Sources:

Interview with Christine Miles, April 19, 2011

Interview with Michael Jordan, April 19, 2011

Oregon Department of Corrections” cost-benefit report, December 30, 2010

KOHD News, “John Kitzhaber Reveals His Budget Plan,” September 7, 2010

—————————————————————————————————————————-
Blog response:

Ok so we’re supposed to believe the 3 cost-benefit reports are of no use because they aren’t all written with the same “lingo”?

“The problem, Miles said, is that after the governor”s office looked over the three cost-benefit reports, staff realized that each department was using a different set of measurements, a different set of terminology. They came to the conclusion “that we”ve got to figure out a better way.”

It’s more likely the reports were too revealing.
Here’s a novel idea. Post all three reports online and see what public scrutiny produces. It could be that a broader review will produce some useful data.

What’s the hilarious part? Waiting for Michael Jordan to “figure out a better way”.

The Oregonian needs a “You’ve got to be kidding” meter or a “Laugher Meter”.

Considering Jordan’s lengthy tenure as Metro’s CFO the “better way” will likely be the Metro way that obscures costs, gins up benefits and preserves the status quo.

Isn’t that why Jordan was chosen to be “the state”s first chief operating officer”?

Here’s the punch line.
After Jordan finishes “creating a new metric & foundation” we’ll get a bunch of useless reports with matching “lingo”.

The Truth about the NEA- Government Teachers Union

The NEA stands for.. well, I’ll let the former President of the Union tell you in his own words.

The lust for POWER is the single most important struggle for the NEA. The Union is far left in all matters social and political- They want nothing to do with allowing educational choices. This is a huge money tree that they have carved out for themselves and they fully intend to shake it for all it’s worth. Saul Alinsky is one of the founding organizers of the NEA.. and his tactics, political persuasion, and lust for power is quite evident. No doubt the NEA is the single most influential reasons our educational system has declined so far, so fast.

at 3.33 into the video he get’s to his main point..

Alinsky references of note:

http://www.nea.org/tools/17231.htm

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/03/01/educate-collaborate-agitate-alinskys-tea…

The American Spectator : They’re All Detroit Democrats Now

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), ranking Democrat on the
House Budget Committee, went on CBS’s Face the Nation on
February 20 to argue that the Republicans’ draconian spending cuts
equal to 2% of the 2011 budget, and 6% of the 2011 deficit, would
destroy 800,000 jobs. The Wall Street Journal tracked down
the foundation for that number, and found it was a fabrication put
out by the Economic Policy Institute, a disreputable union
front.

In today’s modern world, that 1930s-1970s Keynesian thinking can only be attributed to a poor education. What increases economic growth, jobs and prosperity is not government spending but increased production, which comes from increased incentives for production. That means lower tax rates and regulatory costs on production. That was the new, more modern, supply-side economics that President Reagan brought to Washington, resulting in a 25-year economic boom without inflation. The rest of the world watched and learned from Reaganomics, which is why countries like China, India, and Brazil have been growing steadily. America is starting to fall behind now because the Democrats are taking us back to the 1930s-1970s era, with their Rip Van Winkle economics pretending that everything since 1980 except the financial crisis of 2008 never happened.

The Republicans’ $100 billion spending cut is just a small down payment on what is necessary and what is coming in House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget that will set spending on a different course for the next several years. If the Democrats cannot abide even a 2% cut for 2011, with a $1.645 trillion deficit, they will be on a different planet when it comes to Ryan’s 2012 budget.

What the Democrats are revealing on a daily basis right now is that they are at war even more with the Tea Party than with the Republican Party. Tea Party activists take note, the daily message of the Democrats right now is that the Republicans don’t want to spend enough. The Democrats are even saying now that smaller deficits and debt will be bad for the economy.

Democrats, the party of dependency, continue to insist that we transfer income and wealth to government employee unions and assorted “dependent” classes, no matter the cost or destructive effect on our economy and job creation. Theirs is a purposeful effort to ignore the reality of economics and follow a Marxist ideological path where the only destination is economic Armageddon. Why do we allow ourselves to be subject to this insanity?