Boehner: The cuts we promised are still on (video)

Republicans, in their Pledge to America during last year’s campaign, promised to cut federal spending to “pre-stimulus, prebailout levels saving at least $100 billion in the first year alone.” A New York Times story reported that House leaders were backpedaling as they prepared to take office this week, but new Speaker John Boehner refuted that claim in a press conference today:

(Video from The Right Scoop)

Here’s the operative line about spending from the video:

I will say this: We will meet our commitment to the pledge in this calendar year. There’s no ifs, ands or buts about it.

I’ll consider that a doubling down on the pledge from the speaker.

– By Kyle Wingfield

Find me on Facebook

43 comments Add your comment

Dabir Dalton

January 6th, 2011
5:24 pm

Actions speak louder then words and republicans always talk conservative to get elected only to do the exact opposite once in office. The proof is in the pudding Kyle and I expect you to SHUT-UP if the Republicans once again fail to keep their word.

CJ

January 6th, 2011
5:56 pm

No problem. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has found at least $100 billion in waste over at the Pentagon: http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/defense-homeland-security/136401-gates-surprises-lawmakers-with-plan-to-cut-78-billion-from-defense

But wasteful defense spending has a tendency to enrich the rich (i.e., well connected military contractors), so something tells me that the proposed GOP cuts won’t take advantage of most of Gates’ recommendations. It’s typically the poor and middle class who have to bear the brunt.

With regard to Republican broken promises, didn’t they promise in their “Pledge to America” to follow the open rules process to allow amendments on legislation (specifically to reduce spending)? Yes, they did. But they broke that promise immediately on the repeal legislation for the Affordable Care Act. It turns out that they want a straight up-or-down vote on this legislation. Imagine that.

Didn’t the GOP rules proposal have a provision to make committee attendance public (in the name of transparency)? That provision has been stripped.

Didn’t the GOP promise that all bills will be fully paid for? Yet the CBO estimates that their ACA repeal legislation would increase the deficit by $230 billion over the next decade. There are no spending cuts proposed to offset this increase.

Oh, and not one of the bills that Republicans plan to introduce this week includes a constitutional citation, as promised (although there’s still time before the bill hits the floor of the House).

I’m starting to see a trend here.

CJ

January 6th, 2011
6:01 pm

Whoops. Jay Bookman clarifies. Gate’s proposal is to reallocate the $100 billion in waste for other defense purposes. http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/01/06/secdef-gates-announces-surprising-cuts-in-defense-budget/

Easy come. Easy go.

Peter

January 6th, 2011
6:07 pm

Wasteful spending at the pentagon…HA HA HA……..Republican’s know this group of words….

“Cost Plus Contracts”…… used to Bilk America…… and did zero about it !

Peter

January 6th, 2011
6:08 pm

More promises by the Republican’s. “NO Child left behind”…. HA HA HA.

That is why Republican’s cut education ?

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...

January 6th, 2011
6:13 pm

The liberal losers taunted the Republicans to cross this line and they did, hahahaha, just sayin…

Come on, mouthy mights, tell us we won’t repeal obozo “care.”

Michael H. Smith

January 6th, 2011
7:39 pm

How’s the view from under that “Wall Street” bus socialist libs? LOL

Obama’s chief of staff pick draws heat from left

President Obama’s new White House chief of staff — or, more precisely, his corporate ties — are drawing some catcalls from members of his liberal political base.

Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, said the selection of the former JP Morgan and Chase executive Bill Daley “is exactly the wrong direction” for an administration that wants to create jobs.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/01/obamas-chief-of-staff-pick-draws-heat-from-left/1

Facts + Liberals = Oil + Water

January 6th, 2011
7:52 pm

All you droolers on the left just need to sit down and SHAADAAAAAAAAAAP.

Your heroes had four years in Congress to get spending under control. Do you beady-eyed liberal sheisters want to see the results of your heroine Pelosi’s final tab?

“In the 1,461 days that Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) served as speaker of the House, the national debt increased by a total of $5.343 trillion ($5,343,452,800,321.37) or $3.66 billion per day ($3.657,394,113.84), according to official debt numbers published by the U.S. Treasury.”

And you beanie capped overgrown children on the left want to whine about what Republicans MAY or may NOT be doing just hours after the gavel dropped? What’s wrong with you mental midgets? Don’t you people your beloved Democrat party FAILED to pass a budget in its last term? And that’s irrespective of your heroine Pelosi stating during her sunset days that her Congress abided by “pay as you go.”

DELUSIONAL at its finest liberals!

TGT

January 6th, 2011
8:09 pm

With regards to Democrats and debt/spending:

Every year Moody’s publishes its State Debt Medians Report. According to Moody’s, “Debt burden is one of many factors that Moody’s uses to determine state credit quality. In considering debt burden, the focus is largely on Net Tax Supported Debt,” which is defined as “debt secured by state operating resources which could otherwise be used for state operations. Any debt to which state resources are pledged for repayment is considered to be net tax-supported debt.”

Again, according to Moody’s “Two measures of state debt burden – debt per capita and debt as a percentage of personal income – are commonly used by analysts to compare the debt burden of one state to another.”

The states with the most debt per capita: 1.) Connecticut 2.) Massachusetts 3.) Hawaii 4.) New Jersey 5.) New York 6.) Delaware 7.) California 8.) Washington 9.) Rhode Island 10.) Oregon.

The states with the largest debt as a percentage of personal income (2010): 1.) Hawaii 2.) Massachusetts 3.) Connecticut 4.) New Jersey 5.) New York 6.) Delaware 7.) California 8.) Kentucky 9.) Washington 10.) Rhode Island

Notice the “blueness?”

No coincidence: The states with the lowest bond rating (by Moody’s): 1.) California 2.) Illinois 3.) New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Michigan, Louisiana, Hawaii, Mississippi, Rhode Island, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Maine (all tied).

TGT

January 6th, 2011
8:14 pm

Father Time

January 6th, 2011
9:05 pm

The federal budget cycle is based on a October 1 to September 30 fiscal year, By saying ‘calendar year’ Boehner just bought himself three more months. But don’t expect the media to figure that one out.

Tracy

January 7th, 2011
6:48 am

Did you actually believe Boehner and the Republicans were actually going to cut spending ? The “smaller government, smaller spending, more freedom” is a warcry of the GOP that they have NO intentions of following.

Do you have no memory ? Every election we hear this, then we get a fresh round of Republicans ready to spend and expand the government out of control. Under W Bush they were worse than Clinton. Their next round of having control will even be worse.

The only difference between the Democrats and Republicans is how they spend, how they ballon the government and how they cut our civil liberties. They both do it equally, just in different ways.

Why do they do it ? Why not ? They know their voters will continue to fall for it every year. Oh, and as for the Tea Party endorsed candidates…Boehner and the mainstream Republicans will make sure they conform or become outcasted.

independentand frustrated

January 7th, 2011
7:25 am

Let’s see Kyle- who passed unfunded medicare drugs for the elederly so he could get reeelected in 2003? Obama? Pelosi? . Who decided to fight two endless wars with no increase in taxes? Bill Clinton? Who passed ADA restrictions so onerous that MARTA is almost bankrupt from providing door to door shuttles for anyone with an ADA prescrition from a doctor (The same doctors that provide the scooter store with millions every year for overweight people who do not feet the need to stand up)? Jimmy Carter? Who passed Medicare Advantage without any increase in premiums so that the elderly get free gym memberships and allowed private insurers to make healthy profits on Mediccare? Obama? and which governor soaked the federral government for the bridge to nowhere as part of an earmark package? Roy Barnes?

Wooten's Mini-Me Completes Him

January 7th, 2011
7:54 am

Clyde Wingnut is……Right.

Read Boehner’s lips.

bwa

John

January 7th, 2011
8:12 am

What a joke the Republican House is and only a couple days in the new session.

Read the Constitution (skipping parts they decided to skip) on the first day in session then 2 of their members unconstitutionally participated in votes when they had not been sworn in. Oh, that’s right, those 2 members were watching it on TV and raised their hands so they thought they had taken the oath.

Pledged to cut $100 million from the deficit and now are backtracking on it. They knew before they came out with their pledge when the fiscal year begins. He claims in the video to go back to 2008 spending levels. They just cut the House budget by 5% but that leaves it’s budget higher than the 2008 level.

Lastly, they talk about cutting the deficit and put into place this “cutgo” policy. But now they want to add an additional $230 billion to the deficit by repealing the Health careWhat a joke the Republican House is and only a couple days in the new session. Read the Constitution (skipping parts they decided to skip) on the first day in session then 2 of their members unconstitutionally participated in votes when they had not been sworn in. Oh, that’s right, those 2 members were watching it on TV and raised their hands so they thought they had taken the oath. law. Knowing they would add to the deficit without cutting anything else, Republicans exempted health care repeal from their “cutgo” policy. Boehner is now basically saying the CBO doesn’t know what they’re talking about…that’s it only their opinion.

carlosgvv

January 7th, 2011
8:28 am

Politicans will say and do anything to get elected and re-elected. I would think that everyone would realize this by now and not be supprised when political deeds do not match promises.

independentand frustrated

January 7th, 2011
8:30 am

Oh I forgot to mention which president was responsible for the EPA and clean water act costing businesses billions? Johnson? and which president spent billions on an armas race unnecessary because the Soviet Union was bankrupt? (with most of the naval vessels subsequently destroyed or mothballed)?Roosevelt?

jt

January 7th, 2011
8:46 am

Oh yes,
Obama-care will be repealed,
only to be replaced by Republ-care.

Republicare will not be a return to a free market in medical care. Real medical freedom means a complete deregulation of the health insurance industry, unrestricted freedom of contract, the freedom of insurers to discriminate, the absolute right of refusal of coverage, and the repeal of all federal laws related to drugs, health insurance, or medical care. It also means no medical licensing laws, special privileges for the AMA or Big Pharma, restrictions on a free market in organs, federal nutrition guidelines, or federal vaccination programs.

Admit it, Republicans are absolutely terrified of the free-market……and liberty in general.

A Hearty Cheese Sauce

January 7th, 2011
9:06 am

Its time to trim the fat and cull out the deadwood from these overpaid, do-nothing Federal employee ranks and pass along a pay reduction to the rest of them. Govt workers need to understand they work for US…WE THE PEOPLE and WE THE PEOPLE need to exercise our right to fire their lazy behinds.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

January 7th, 2011
9:09 am

Good morning all. I think you hit it right, Kyle – my first impression, coincidentally, incorporated the phrase “double-down.” “Great minds….,” and all that rot.

independentand frustrated

January 7th, 2011
9:11 am

Big Pharma is projected to get $7.2 trillion for Medicare part D payments from the US over the next 75 years See the Financial Report of the United States Government, 2009 . “Perusing the tables, one encounters the gigantic new, unfunded entitlement enacted in 2003, namely Medicare Part D.”

How much taxes is Boehner and company going to tax Big Pharma or taxpayers to fund this Bush funded vote buying scheme? Zero I bet. Where in the constitution does the Congress have authority to dish out that kind of federal give away Kyle?
Oh stupid me, that only applies to Obama care where you force peope and insurance companies to fund something and equally share in the cost of healthcare that is currently crippling the economy.Any idea how much hospitals spend on the uninsured?

Bobby from Denison, TX

January 7th, 2011
9:12 am

“The Two Santa Claus Theory” the republicans uses will dictate what Boehner and the new congress does. When republicans are in power, they will spend like drunken sailors, cut taxes for the wealthy and run up huge deficits. As soon the democrats are put back in power, they scream bloody murder about the huge deficit they created. This political attack is relentless, which forces the democrats to either cut spending or raise taxes or a combination of both. This allows them to transfer more wealth to the upper class and destroy the social safety net programs that benefit the workers and the poor. It also makes the democrats look like “Grinches” and the people will vote republicans back in power again. Perfect plan.

DannyX

January 7th, 2011
9:18 am

Spending cuts??????

The very first Republican “victory,” after the election was the tax cut compromise which contained a bunch of goodies that increased spending by $100 billion without any offsets.

Republicans like Kyle said they would figure out how to pay for the extras later. Republicans very first act was to increase spending without paying for it. The same mo that got us into this mess.

Spend, spend, spend + tax breaks. Here we go again.

Kyle, you promised us the Republicans would identify a funding source or offset to pay for the goodies in the tax cut bill.

How will the tax cut bill be funded? We’re waiting.

John

January 7th, 2011
9:35 am

“The very first Republican “victory,” after the election was the tax cut compromise which contained a bunch of goodies that increased spending by $100 billion without any offsets.

Republicans like Kyle said they would figure out how to pay for the extras later. Republicans very first act was to increase spending without paying for it. The same mo that got us into this mess.”

Not exactly true. Republicans believe you don’t have to pay for tax cuts since it will trickle down and increase revenue. Republicans believe if you cut revenue, revenue will be increased.

What’s even more shocking, Republicans want to increase the deficit by $230 billion. CBO projects repealing Health Care will add this amount to the deficit. Publicly, Republicans say it will not add to the deficit but knowing it will they exempted it from their “cutgo” policy.

And they call themselves fiscal conservatives.

Kyle Wingfield

January 7th, 2011
10:09 am

Father Time: The Dems were supposed to have passed a budget for fiscal 2011 before the new Congress began (but didn’t), so the Republican majority’s “first year,” by rights, should have been the fiscal 2012 budget you refer to. If that means we get $50-60 billion of cuts in FY11 plus the $100 billion in FY12, all the better.

John: Repealing ObamaCare only “adds to the deficit” if you believe the rigged assumptions Democrats imposed on CBO to arrive at those bogus “savings” numbers. (I’ve explained all that umpteen times on this blog and am not going to repeat myself here.)

John

January 7th, 2011
10:28 am

@Kyle

Below is the text from Republicans “Pledge to America”. Where in their pledge do they make the assumption Congress would have passed a budget for fiscal 2011? Their pledge does not say anything about fiscal years so where did you get 2012 budget? It just says their first year…their first year has already started.

“With common-sense exceptions for
seniors, veterans, and our troops, we will
roll back government spending to pre-
stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at
least $100 billion in the first year alone and
putting us on a path to begin paying down
the debt, balancing the budget, and ending
the spending spree in Washington that
threatens our children’s future. “

John

January 7th, 2011
10:38 am

Kyle…if what you say is true that repealing Health Care will not add to the deficit, then can you explain why Republican have exempted it from their “cutgo” policy? Also, it’s not ObamaCare…it’s “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”. By using the term ObamaCare, since he was the President who singed the bill into law, means all pieces of legislation singed into law during he Presidency is his? Like the Obama tax cuts passed last month?

Kyle Wingfield

January 7th, 2011
10:47 am

@John: “Where in their pledge do they make the assumption Congress would have passed a budget for fiscal 2011?”

Since adopting its current budget rules in 1974, Congress had never failed to pass an annual budget…until 2010. So why would Republicans have had to include that assumption in the pledge itself? Should they also have included an assumption that the sun would rise in the east each day?

If they make $50-60 billion in cuts to the FY11 budget, which ends Sept. 30, and pass an FY12 budget that includes additional cuts up to or beyond $100 billion, they will have fulfilled their pledge. I’m not sure how you could argue the contrary.

As for ObamaCare: I’ve never understood why its defenders, who generally are fans of the president, object to his name being applied as shorthand for the law. If everyone is going to like the reforms as much as Democrats think, and if President Obama is such a swell guy, why do y’all care?

A Hearty Cheese Sauce

January 7th, 2011
10:48 am

Im hoping for extreme cuts in welfare, food stamps, govt employment, govt jobs, govt jobs programs, school lunch programs, etc.

Its time to trim the fat and lazy.

Kyle Wingfield

January 7th, 2011
10:52 am

Further to my 10:47: I know of no one on the right who objects to referring to the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 as “the Bush tax cuts.”

John

January 7th, 2011
10:55 am

It’s strange how conservatives believe in strict literal interpretations, such as they do with the Constitution. In their pledge, as I posted, they pledged to cut at least $100 billion in the first year alone. Since Congress’ session goes from January to December, that would mean they will have cut at least $100 billion by the end of December if taking a strict literal interpretation. Of course, now they’re backtracking and bringing up things which are not in their pledge.

Same thing with the 14th amendment…if taking a strict literal interpretation, it’s clear that the amendment grants citizenship to all persons born in this country even those children born here of illegal immigrants.

John

January 7th, 2011
10:57 am

So you agree, the tax cuts passed last month are the Obama tax cuts?

Kyle Wingfield

January 7th, 2011
11:03 am

@John: FY11 ends in this calendar year…FY12 begins in this calendar year. For the last time, how does what I’ve described not count as “in the first year”?

As for the tax thing: Did your tax rates go down last month? Because mine stayed the same. And if Obama wanted full credit for the law, why didn’t he do it before the midterm elections? But how about this: You call them the “Obama tax extensions,” and I won’t make a fuss about it.

John

January 7th, 2011
11:13 am

@Kyle

“Since adopting its current budget rules in 1974, Congress had never failed to pass an annual budget…until 2010″

Not exactly correct Kyle. What would be a correct statement is that since 1974 the House has never failed to pass an annual budget. As reported by The Hill on 4/14/2010…

“The House has never failed to pass an annual budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974, according to a Congressional Research Service report. ”

“House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Wednesday that it will be difficult to pass a budget because of the mid-term elections and large deficit projections. He noted that Congress didn’t pass a final resolution that could pass both the House and Senate in 1998, 2002, 2004 and 2006, when Republicans controlled at least one chamber.”

That’s why Republicans would have had to include that assumption in the pledge itself.

John

January 7th, 2011
11:20 am

@Kyle

“As for the tax thing: Did your tax rates go down last month? Because mine stayed the same.
To answer you question…yes, it did go down. Guess your payroll department didn’t update their system.”

To answer your question, yes my taxed did go down. Guess your payroll department didn’t update their system. Kyle, you can’t call it “Obama tax extensions” since it did more than extend tax cuts…it reduced Social Security taxes as well. So yes, it would be the “Obama tax cuts”.

John

January 7th, 2011
11:25 am

As I pointed out Kyle…the “Pledge to America” does not say anything about fiscal year so where are you getting fiscal year from. It says in the first year. The Congressional year begins in January and ends in December.

Ivan Cohen

January 7th, 2011
12:06 pm

Got to hand it to the Republican Party for these matching pair of bookends “Pledge To America” 16 years after the “Contract With America”. This pledge will end up in the “elephant’s graveyard”.(no pun intended)

light on policy

January 7th, 2011
12:09 pm

Peeks into the ring…Kyle is lying on the floor from a right hook by John…

Why would the Repubs get specific on programs where spending will be cut when they didnt do it in the pledge and got elected anyway? Kyle and the rest of the mainstream media didn’t hold them to specifics and it appears they aren’t doing it now

Kyle Wingfield

January 7th, 2011
12:21 pm

@John: Fair point on the payroll tax cut, but I still think you’re being unnecessarily pedantic about the pledge and the budget cuts. And you’re still dodging my question at 11:03. Why does it matter which fiscal year the cuts are in, if they are made law before Dec. 31, 2011?

frustrated independent

January 7th, 2011
1:22 pm

So Kyle if the $7.2 trillion that is unfunded for medicare part D cannot be covered by any new taxes, what are you and your mentors doing to cut it out of the budget entirely and end unfunded entitlements to the elderly, sick and disabled????????? Or these do not count because Republicans passed them to pander and get votes like street corner hookers claiming to be church moms.How do you fund two two wars for almost ten years with a decrease in taxes and revenues and increase the medicare shortfall by over 100%? All your budgetary rhetoric does not answer that basic question. I have been waiting to heart that answer for a long time .What essential program or entitlement are you guys going to cut?
I never did well in math but when you add a bunch of trillion dollar minuses the republicans created in the budget, they do not convert to a positive from what I remeber. Unless Bernacke just keeps printing fummy money and having the Fed by US debt. And where do you propose the money come from to fund the uninsured who are forcing hospitals to close their doors??Just kick them out on the street? Some guy named Reagan passed a law making that illegal. Isn’t that another unfunded mandate?

John

January 7th, 2011
1:38 pm

@Kyle: I’m not the one trying to backpedal and brought up anything about fiscal years. The pledge Republican have made it to save at least $100 billion in the first year alone; therefore, on Dec. 31, 2011 I expect the deficit to be at minimum $100 billion less than what is was on Dec. 31, 2010. That is what they pledged.

Kyle Wingfield

January 7th, 2011
1:59 pm

@John: I didn’t even mention fiscal years until Father Time implied that Republicans were cheating by talking about FY12. As for this…

“on Dec. 31, 2011 I expect the deficit to be at minimum $100 billion less than what is was on Dec. 31, 2010″

…we agree.

independentand frustrated

January 7th, 2011
9:04 pm

In summarry, Kyle cannot tell us why it is fiscal irresponsibility to pass unfunded entitlements and unfunded mandates if the Repubs are in charge. Instead he hides behind the fact that by the end of some unspecified fiscal year the 100 billion dollar promise will magically appear by cutting stimulus job money (hopefully it will be unnecessary by then) and by at least the end of one unfunded war that the Repubs fought Obama tooth and nail to keep going so the earmarks could keep flowing.
Gotta keep those seniors happy so that they will vote for the person who brings them to the dance and gotta line the pockets of Big Pharma and the insurers in the process. I am 62 and can’t wait to get my free drugs and gym membership. Oh and one of those scooters too .I have a constitutional right to them. I promise to vote Republican afterwards.