Not all spending cuts are created equal. Congressional Republicans struggle with this, but there is such a thing as "penny wise, pound foolish."
If we cut spending on volcano monitoring and tsunami warnings, for example, we save a little money on maintenance, but pay a lot of money on damage repairs after disaster strikes. If we cut spending on food safety, we save a little money on inspection, but pay a lot of money on health care costs when consumers get sick. For every dollar the IRS spends on audits, liens, and property seizures, the government brings in more than $10, so if we spend less on IRS enforcement, it doesn't save money, it costs money.
And yet, GOP policymakers keep making this mistake. Brian Beutler reports that Republicans are now trying to slash the budget for the Office of Management and Budget. Why is this unwise? Because OMB houses "the executive branch's leading budget-cutters."
The House Appropriations Committee is advancing legislation that would gut key Obama administration priorities across the board, but the kicker is that they're also seeking to slash OMB -- the one agency that knows where all the fat is. It's the one arm of the executive it makes sense to fully fund if the goal is to reduce government spending, and squeeze other cabinet level departments -- particularly if you believe the country will be run by the GOP next year.
House Republicans are proposing to cut OMB funding by almost $9 million -- nearly 10 percent below its fiscal year 2012 budget.
That would, according to the administration, require OMB to eliminate 90 full-time equivalent jobs -- which would amount to a 17 percent staffing reduction. In other words, to save money, the House GOP would start by firing the beancounters.
It's tempting to think House Republicans are just confused, or perhaps ignorant about federal policymaking, but by all appearances, that's not really what's going on here.
Rather, the House GOP is just being childish, targeting OMB, without regard for consequences, because they see political value in picking a pointless spat with the White House.
Two years ago, Norm Ornstein said Republican leaders in the House "are becoming the Bart Simpsons of Congress, gleeful at smarmy and adolescent tactics and unable and unwilling to get serious." They've only gotten worse since.
Leave a Comment:
while they may be confused, ignorant, and/or childish, their biggest problem is 30+ years of being flat-out anti-government.
if you don't believe that government can do anything right, you don't want to let government do anything.
Ahh but they sure know how to kiss big business's butt.
Good thing for Republicans that the average American is as dumb as they are. We couldn't be in this mess without the clueless contributions of the wonderful average American.
Yes but then there once was this thing called trust. It allowed you to elect a person of "character"(another old term) that would do the right thing for the right reason.
Trust is dead and all hope is gone.(I almost smiled as I typed that little ditty)
Hey Disgusted...I totally agree!!!!! We have so dumb down the public discourse that most of America knows absolutely nothing other than what they gather in 60 second sound bites. Very few people read a daily, or Sunday paper anymore to learn in depth about what is transpiring around them . They simply listen to Fox, CNN, or MSNBC in the background as they go milling about. Never stopping long enough to get enough information to understand even a quarter of what's going on in the world, even in their own backyard. Case and point...a majority of voters, voted for Scott Walker in Wisconsin, and Chris Christie in New Jersey, and then they were utterly shocked when those guys threw them in mass out of there jobs, in order to give tax breaks to someone who is going to sit on there money until the market gets better for investing. (Can someone please tell me how this creates jobs?????) Then to make matters worse, they blame the president for their new found woes, while an inept congress does absolutely nothing in four years, and the majority of incumbents are projected to keep their seats in November. It's totally astounding...and yet we still profess to be the most intelligent species on the plant...I THINK NOT! Something tells me the animals in the forest are giggling their asses off while watching the daily 24 hour human reality show.
Yes, but then came the great 30+ years of failed conservative ideas of unfettered markets, deregulation, and tax cuts paying for themselves. This ushered in the era of inequality which lead to campaigns being financed by the monied which lead to laws passed for the monied which lead to more inequality and now we're caught in the vicious cycle. It could have been stopped if there had been a supine Democratic party but there wasn't. There was no issue large enough that the Democrats would draw a line in the sand. Not tax cuts, not guns, not campaign finance, not ... There was no issue small enough that the Democrats wouldn't give in. And so inch-by-inch, hard won lessons that were learned in the 19th and 20th centuries were unlearned and we find ourselves already in the Gilded Age of the 21st century. People don't realize that we are already there because they haven't seen the history books of the future with the pictures all in it, but we are already there.
And it's all because there no Democratic party to stand up to the bullies. This is what happens when bullies are allowed to take your lunch money for 30+ years. Stupid wins every time.
Even worse Thomas, if they did read the paper they would only learn what the defenders of false equivalence want them to. They would see:
- both sides are equally wrong,
- fake even-handedness
- pulling punches and mincing of words
The media, print or otherwise, has ceased to perform its societal function: to inform the public and paint a picture of the body politic that reflects reality.
The transformation of the society to a Fascist corporatist regime is nearly complete, and hardly anybody realizes it.
There is only one hope: Obama wins. And that is such a disappointment because he has been such a clueless observer of how toxic and malignant a threat the Republican party is to the country. His decision to be "bipartisan" let the bullies off the hook early in his administration, his handling of the banks, his decision to accept the argument that deficits and debt were the problem in 2011, and lending his ear to the clueless bankster Tim Geitner were monumental mistakes that are almost unforgivable.
Nevertheless, we better damn well hope he wins because he is all that stands to stop the barbarians from ransacking the city.
By this reasoning we should give the IRS a trillion dollars and spend the ten trillion return on paying everyone's mortgage. Sounds good, yes?
Give the IRS the funding necessary for enforcement - you know, so everyone pays their fair share.
So it is FAIR!
Then use the increased revenue to decrease the deficit.
Sounds good, yes?
[Where did you get "paying everyone's mortgage" from?]
It's like a cash-strapped business cutting the department that collects overdue invoices.
I am not a business person, but even I can figure out that that would be really stupid.
A few considerations for you...
OK - let's consider
The following website lets you download an Excel file with Historical Budget 1972 through Fiscal year 2011:
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42911
Table F-2 Individual Income tax revenue for 2011 was $1091.5 Billion.
Total Revenue for 2011 was $2302.5 Billion
Table F-1 Total Deficit for 2011 was $1295.5 Billion
Another good website for financial information is:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/index.html
I don't really know what you are referring to. My understanding is that there was some discussion about what the penalty was going to be to enforce the mandate. Need more information
I know there was a ton of $$ that went to bail out the banks (TARP). In the ARRA (Stimulus) a big chunk went to the states to close state budget gaps and some (most?) went to pay for teachers, police firefighters, infrastructure. You could say that went to "we the public".
I agree with you 100% about the housing crisis. In previous recessions, one of the areas of the economy that helped lead the way out was housing (sales, construction, remodeling, etc.). This time, not only do we not have the whole sector of the economy, with the drop in housing value, many people lost large portions of their wealth putting a crimp in any spending that further hampers recovery. We bailed out the banks, I really think we should have helped out the homeowners.
"Printing our way out of trouble" means borrowing, correct? And - umm- sorry you lost me.
In case you refer back... printing refers to Treasury giving bonds to the Fed in exchange for an increase of the national bank account. Also called monetizing debt.
Of course they want to cut the OMB, they are supposed to be non-partisan and they are telling the truth about what would happen if their policies were enacted! They all say the same thing, if their policies are enacted our deficits would get a lot worse and President Obama's policies are working and will reduce the deficit and improve our economy.