« Tough Truths From The President | Main | Matt Holt Speak »
January 26, 2006
Flower Child
Poor Judd Gregg. One year you're an all-powerful feudal lord commanding your corner of the Senate, the next you're an azalea:
Senate Budget Committee Chair Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) on Wednesday called for spending reductions in the fiscal year 2007 budget, "particularly in health care programs" such as Medicare, CQ Today reports. The FY 2007 budget process will begin on Feb. 6, when President Bush delivers his proposed budget to Congress. Gregg said, "I'm not here to be a potted plant. ... If we're going to do a budget, it's going to be a serious budget." Gregg said that he expects the budget proposal from Bush to include spending reductions, adding, "We can't afford our government as it is currently structured." Gregg also rejected the opinion that Republicans should avoid spending reductions in an election year, adding, "As Republicans, we should look at it as a strength, not a weakness." However, "Gregg's fervor for budget cuts ... is not shared by all of his GOP colleagues," according to CQ Today.
Ah yes, budget cuts in an election year. Cutting programs as an electoral asset. Conservatives are so cute when they daydream. As for the budget, it will most assuredly not be a serious budget, a point well proven by the recently reversed reductions in Medicare spending, which demonstrated quite conclusively that a party too timid to cross either seniors or lobbyists can't really save any money on anything at all. But it's hard to blame the GOP for all this, it's just the reality of it. If anyone ever lets Gregg bloom, the Republican majority will instantly whither and die.
January 26, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83462898869e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Flower Child:
Comments
Gregg says "We can't afford our government as it is currently structured."
Yes, that is painfully obvious in the annual budget deficits since Bu$hCo has been in office operating under their tax cut programs.
The Repubs never even consider that there is an income side to the budget as well as an expense side. With their focus on cutting expenses and their annual forays into cutting revenue through tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, it gets hard to explain if you keep both parts of the equation in public view.
Maybe the real Republican mantra should be reworded from 'pro-tax cuts' to 'pro tax and expense cuts'. It sounds good too. Who could be opposed to both?
With the cost of interest on the national debt approaching the total cost of DoD expenses, soon Wall Street will be the major beneficiary of the two major items in the national budget.
A real interesting question is: When interest on the debt consumes all of the federal budget, how will the Repubs pay for Defense and the war on terra (phonetic pun intended)?
Posted by: JimPortandOR | Jan 26, 2006 3:23:19 PM
Ah, ah, ah! You forget that Gregg was a big supporter of Social Security privatization last year. That by itself would create over $1 trillion of federal spending to make up for all the social services they cut. Plus, they get to attack the Democrats for standing in the way of a SS "solution"!
Can we get Judd Gregg to run the NRSC? Puh-leeze? You Dems are gonna be running scared then!
Posted by: "al" | Jan 26, 2006 11:35:58 PM
The problem is that conservatives have failed to reverse the Democratic decoupling of spending and taxation that occurred sometime around the 60s. I read old newspapers and Newsweeks, and prior to the 60s, when Congress spent money, it was referred to as "Spending the taxpayers' money". If they spent a lot more than the previous year, then the media would say the government was "Spending record amounts of the taxpayers' money".
Now, it seems that on some level many voters think there is no relation between their taxes and how much Washington spends. So tax increases are opposed and spending increases are supported. Tax cuts are supported, spending cuts opposed.
For all the achievements conservatives have made in recent years to get their talking points out there, this is one I really wish they'd start harping on. When Congress spends a dollar, they are taking it out of YOUR pocket.
Posted by: Adam Herman | Jan 27, 2006 7:08:01 AM
Adam, if you'd review the federal deficit, the decoupling clearly started with Reagan.
Posted by: Barry | Jan 27, 2006 11:58:42 AM
仓储笼
仓储笼
折叠式仓储笼
仓库笼
南京仓储笼
上海仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
杭州仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
折叠式仓储笼
折叠仓储笼
折叠仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
折叠仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
蝴蝶笼
储物笼
南京仓储笼
上海仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
蝴蝶笼
储物笼
南京仓储笼
上海仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
储物笼
上海仓储笼
南京仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
蝴蝶笼
储物笼
南京仓储笼
上海仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
蝴蝶笼
储物笼
南京仓储笼
上海仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
蝴蝶笼
南京仓储笼
上海仓储笼
北京仓储笼
广州仓储笼
Posted by: judy | Sep 29, 2007 9:51:05 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.