Federal law requires that the president send a proposed budget to Congress each year by February 1. That date was set so that Congress would have input from the president before it debated and then adopted its own budget for the fiscal year. It seems that someone forgot to tell president that February 1 came and went ten weeks ago. During those ten weeks, both the House and the Senate adopted budget proposals. But big news being reported by the press today is that Obama is going to send in his budget proposal to Congress next week.
The only proper reaction to Obama's budget proposal is laughter. Okay, maybe a yawn would do as well. After all, what difference does it make when the budget proposal arrives months after it was due, and more important weeks after the Senate and House have already voted. This is the equivalent of attending a lecture on a subject only after taking a written test on the material.
So why did Obama delay his budget by so much? The answer is the usual one: politics. In early January, the fiscal cliff was avoided in a deal which required each of the Senate and the House to pass a budget by a fixed date or else the members of that body would see their pay suspended. For the Democrats this was a calamity. Senate Democrats had gone four years refusing to pass any budget. Spending was done by Continuing Resolution; this method allowed federal spending substantially every year without any Democrat in the Senate having to actually vote in favor of such increased spending. Senate Democrats could and did run for re-election advocating responsibility in spending without being exposed by those pesky votes on sky high budget spending. Those Democrats up for re-election in 2014 (especially the seven who are particularly shaky) were forced to face a future where they actually had a record on spending.
But what does this have to do with Obama's late budget? I am getting there. You see, in his latest budget proposal, Obama is going to advocate for "cuts" in Social Security and Medicare. In English, Obama is going to proposed adoption of a more accurate cost of living adjustment to Social Security payments which will mean slightly lower payments over the next ten years. For Medicare, Obama is going to propose lower payments to hospitals and doctors for Medicare services. Now these reductions in payments to hospital and doctors will be on top of the $714 billion that was already cut this way in Obamacare (which changes the press tells us are harmless to beneficiaries of Medicare). These reductions are also on top of the $4 billion in cut to payments to doctors and hospitals by Sequestration (which changes the press tells us are likely to result in the destruction of life as we know it). These reductions are also on top of the cuts made by Congress years ago but which are delayed each year in a bill called the Doc Fix.
The truth is that the Obama Medicare cuts are not real. Congress has not even allowed cuts made nearly ten years ago to go into effect; the Doc Fix prevents it each year. Nevertheless, when Obama talks about cutting entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, millions of Democrats across the country become apoplectic. That is why the press is telling us (in accordance with the talking points) that Obama is offering the cuts in response to pressure from Republicans to gut the Medicare and Social Security programs. Now you may think it strange that the budget adopted by the House contains no cut to these programs over the next ten years (which is as far as the budget goes). After all, if the GOP wants to cut Medicare and Social Security, you would think that such cuts would be in the GOP's budget proposals. But no, there is nothing of the sort there.
Obama, you see, is offering cuts to entitlements that he knows will not go into effect in exchange for further tax increases. Obama gets more money to spend from taxation while the entitlements just go on as before. Clearly, Obama does not expect that to ever happen; this budget is just a blueprint for the next campaign in 2014. Obama wants to bash the GOP for its assault that forced him to agree reluctantly to lower Social Security and Medicare in exchange only for raising taxes on the rich. Then Obama wants to bash the GOP for refusing to take these entitlement cuts even though they are the ones who wanted them, just in order to protect their rich contributors from tax increases. It's nonsense, but you would be surprised how many Americans vote on the basis of nonsense.
But we still did not get to the delay, so here's the point. By delaying his budget until after the House and Senate have already voted on budgets, Obama can make this proposal without forcing Senate Democrats to vote on his proposal. Just imagine the quandry faced by a Mary Landrieu were she to have to vote for Medicare and Social Security cuts. Ain't no way that is happening! Indeed, there are probably a dozen Democrat senators who would never vote to cut entitlements just before an election (or ever). So the delay to the budget lets Obama put forth his fantasy designed for bashing the GOP without forcing Democrats in Congress to support cuts to entitlements.
Just for once, it would be nice if president Obama made a proposal on spending that was designed to help the country rather than just the Democrats.
The only proper reaction to Obama's budget proposal is laughter. Okay, maybe a yawn would do as well. After all, what difference does it make when the budget proposal arrives months after it was due, and more important weeks after the Senate and House have already voted. This is the equivalent of attending a lecture on a subject only after taking a written test on the material.
So why did Obama delay his budget by so much? The answer is the usual one: politics. In early January, the fiscal cliff was avoided in a deal which required each of the Senate and the House to pass a budget by a fixed date or else the members of that body would see their pay suspended. For the Democrats this was a calamity. Senate Democrats had gone four years refusing to pass any budget. Spending was done by Continuing Resolution; this method allowed federal spending substantially every year without any Democrat in the Senate having to actually vote in favor of such increased spending. Senate Democrats could and did run for re-election advocating responsibility in spending without being exposed by those pesky votes on sky high budget spending. Those Democrats up for re-election in 2014 (especially the seven who are particularly shaky) were forced to face a future where they actually had a record on spending.
But what does this have to do with Obama's late budget? I am getting there. You see, in his latest budget proposal, Obama is going to advocate for "cuts" in Social Security and Medicare. In English, Obama is going to proposed adoption of a more accurate cost of living adjustment to Social Security payments which will mean slightly lower payments over the next ten years. For Medicare, Obama is going to propose lower payments to hospitals and doctors for Medicare services. Now these reductions in payments to hospital and doctors will be on top of the $714 billion that was already cut this way in Obamacare (which changes the press tells us are harmless to beneficiaries of Medicare). These reductions are also on top of the $4 billion in cut to payments to doctors and hospitals by Sequestration (which changes the press tells us are likely to result in the destruction of life as we know it). These reductions are also on top of the cuts made by Congress years ago but which are delayed each year in a bill called the Doc Fix.
The truth is that the Obama Medicare cuts are not real. Congress has not even allowed cuts made nearly ten years ago to go into effect; the Doc Fix prevents it each year. Nevertheless, when Obama talks about cutting entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, millions of Democrats across the country become apoplectic. That is why the press is telling us (in accordance with the talking points) that Obama is offering the cuts in response to pressure from Republicans to gut the Medicare and Social Security programs. Now you may think it strange that the budget adopted by the House contains no cut to these programs over the next ten years (which is as far as the budget goes). After all, if the GOP wants to cut Medicare and Social Security, you would think that such cuts would be in the GOP's budget proposals. But no, there is nothing of the sort there.
Obama, you see, is offering cuts to entitlements that he knows will not go into effect in exchange for further tax increases. Obama gets more money to spend from taxation while the entitlements just go on as before. Clearly, Obama does not expect that to ever happen; this budget is just a blueprint for the next campaign in 2014. Obama wants to bash the GOP for its assault that forced him to agree reluctantly to lower Social Security and Medicare in exchange only for raising taxes on the rich. Then Obama wants to bash the GOP for refusing to take these entitlement cuts even though they are the ones who wanted them, just in order to protect their rich contributors from tax increases. It's nonsense, but you would be surprised how many Americans vote on the basis of nonsense.
But we still did not get to the delay, so here's the point. By delaying his budget until after the House and Senate have already voted on budgets, Obama can make this proposal without forcing Senate Democrats to vote on his proposal. Just imagine the quandry faced by a Mary Landrieu were she to have to vote for Medicare and Social Security cuts. Ain't no way that is happening! Indeed, there are probably a dozen Democrat senators who would never vote to cut entitlements just before an election (or ever). So the delay to the budget lets Obama put forth his fantasy designed for bashing the GOP without forcing Democrats in Congress to support cuts to entitlements.
Just for once, it would be nice if president Obama made a proposal on spending that was designed to help the country rather than just the Democrats.
1 comment:
Bend Over America. Most people who voted for this administration are so naive. Only the entitlement recipients are doing extremely well during Obama's tenure.
The ignorance of our culture can not be believed.
The $ Trillions of Debt is and will continue to keep OUR ECONOMY STAGNANT at Best.
Government produces NOTHING, It is DRAINING the Blood from every citizen.
Wake up---They are shoving it up your???
Between the Cheeks!!!
Post a Comment