So many media outlets are portraying Obama’s supposed budget as a big saver, as him reigning in federal spending. The Politico discusses Obama’s “hard choices.” CBS discusses that this $3.73 budget will somehow reduce the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years, and cuts are deep. The NY Times is, of course, thrilled, and doing their normal high school cheerleader routine. And we have the Washington Post
President Obama will roll out a $3.7 trillion budget blueprint Monday that would trim or terminate more than 200 federal programs next year and make key investments in education, transportation and research in a bid to boost the nation’s economy and reduce record budget deficits.
In other words, he may be trimming in some places, but, he is adding in others. Remember, Obama’s proposed 2010 budget was $3.6 trillion. That jumped from the $3.1 trillion for 2009. Somehow, adding $100 billion is a good thing? And, yes, I, along with most conservatives, were unhappy with the budget during the Bush years, as we watched it increase by $100 billion every year.
Here’s where 1/3 of his “cuts” come from
Obama also would raise hundreds of billions of dollars in fresh revenue, which Republicans adamantly oppose. He would increase taxes on the wealthy by limiting the value of their itemized deductions and by allowing the recently extended George W. Bush-era tax breaks to expire in 2012. He would end subsidies for oil and gas companies, and would eliminate certain tax breaks for corporations that do business overseas. And he assumes that Congress will develop a plan to pay for a $556 billion transportation bill, a measure traditionally funded by increasing the federal tax on gasoline.
So, tax increases. That should make the 2012 elections interesting. If the GOP was wise, they would submit legislation in the next month or so that would make the “Bush tax cuts” permanent, and reduce the corporate tax rate. Yes, they could go and do away with many loopholes, but, all Obama’s tax increases will do will be to drive more employers overseas and keep their money there. Oh, and increasing the cost of living. Obama doesn’t seem to understand that raising fuel prices will increase the cost of most other services and goods.
As far as transportation, looks like he is still on his “everybody(else) needs to ride the rail!” kick. He also wants a ton more funding for teachers, which should make the teachers unions happy. And a nation wide wireless internet network, which would bring high speed to areas that do not have it (because it is too damned expensive for private companies to build out, and it would lose money. So, tax payers will get to foot the bill for Someone Else yet again.)
All in all, he’s cutting from some places (and some of it makes sense, like reducing overlapping programs), but increasing in others. To his pet projects and donors.
See more responses to the article at Memeorandum.
- Bruce McQuain: I mean where else would you find a line like “the other one-third of savings would come from tax increases” than in a Washington DC budget discussion?
- Weasel Zippers: He’s spending this country into oblivion.
- Gateway Pundit: The administration also said they expect the Obama deficit to grow to a record $1.65 trillion this year.
- Gay Patriot: Instead of making the “draconian” cuts our elected officials need make, the president is only cutting anticipated increases.
- RS McCain: In what alternative universe can a reduction of $110 billion per year (the simple math of $1.1 trillion divided by 10) in an annual projected deficit of more than $1.3 trillion be called “sharp cuts”?
I tried to find some quotes from Lefties, but, they are strangely silent on this issue.
Some on the Left finally responded, and they do not seem to like Obama’s budget. Excitable Andy says how they all must feel
He convened a deficit commission in order to throw it in the trash. If I were Alan Simpson or Erskine Bowles, I’d feel duped. And they were duped. All of us who took Obama’s pitch as fiscally responsible were duped.
Gee, you think, Andy?