Obama Budget Cuts: Will Order Cabinet to Quickly Cut $100 Million From Department Budgets

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Monday ordered his Cabinet to find ways to slice spending by $100 million, but acknowledged it's a "drop in the bucket" and said there's a "confidence gap" that he needs to overcome. Just back from a Latin America summit, Obama told the first formal Cabinet meeting of his administration that vast spending to combat the economic crisis was "the right thing to do." But he also said taxpayers still need to know that every dollar they give the government is being spent wisely.

"We also have a deficit _ a confidence gap _ when it comes to the American people," he told reporters. "And we've got to earn their trust."

Obama said the $100 million would come from "efficiencies" in agency operations, and would be in addition to future cuts in programs that aren't working.

Yet the red ink in the annual budget is currently in the hundreds of billions. He was asked if the efficiency saving isn't just "a drop in the bucket".

"It is," he replied. "None of these things alone are going to make a difference. But cumulatively, they make an extraordinary difference because they start setting a tone ... $100 million there, $100 million here _ pretty soon, even here in Washington, it adds up to real money."

The federal deficit for March alone was $192.3 billion, and $100 million would represent a minuscule portion of that sum, roughly one-twentieth of 1 percent. Obama in February brought forward a $3.6 trillion budget for the 2010 fiscal year, beginning Oct. 1, a proposal that would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said he applauded all attempts to cut government spending but insisted that a $100 million cut would only cover one day's interest on Obama's $787 billion stimulus spending plan.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said later that the cuts were part of a larger cost-cutting effort by Obama. He said the president "has laid out cuts large and small in administrative costs" and in programs throughout the government.

Story continues below

advertisement

Earlier this month, both the House and Senate passed companion budget plans giving Obama and his Capitol Hill allies a key victory, but 20 House Democrats from GOP-leaning areas abandoned him on the final vote because of unhappiness over deficits.

The Cabinet meeting came just days after a series of "Tea Party" demonstrations across the country in which protesters challenged the administration over it's massive spending to help pull the country and its financial system out of an economic nose dive unseen in decades.

Even among budget cuts cited in a newly released White House summary, a considerable proportion of the savings would occur over a period of years.

It pointed out projected cuts in office supplies and computer software at the Department of Homeland Services, for instance, noting that the agency spends $100 million a year on this "but virtually none of the supplies are purchased through agreements that leverage the department's collective buying power."

Thus, it said, DHS estimates that it could save up to $51 million over five years by purchasing in bulk.

It said that $62 million could be saved over a 15-year lease term if the Agriculture Department were to combine roughly 1,500 employees from seven leased locations into a single facility by early 2011.

The White House summary also said that $6.7 million could be saved over the first five years by having U.S. attorney offices and the U.S. Marshals Offices' Asset Forfeiture program convert publication of forfeiture notices from newspapers to the Internet.

The worksheet also said that $5 million a year could be saved by consolidating embassy posts at the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development.

__

Associated Press writer Mark S. Smith in Washington contributed to this report.

Comments

[themodernleader]

ThemightyT and others. Some of my friends appear to be missing the big picture. President Obama, who I supported from before the start, donated much, and campaigned and voted for, proceeded to double-cross the middle class before even taking the oath. He surrounded himself virtually one hundred percent with bankers of tainted capability and competence who followed the Bush policy of wealth transfer to the banking oligarchy. Now after12-14 trillions spent or obligated for the financial institution, he is informed that there is not much more borrowing available because of a revolt of our creditors, especially China.
He must prepare the helpless citizentry that he will cut spending for everything tangible that might create, produce or preserve jobs. He will show himself as a prudent, selfless administrator who is guarding a bankrupted treasury. Unlike FDR, he will not have the option to create millions of new jobs for our unemployed. That option has already been used up in the corrrupt---yet to prove successful--- banking bailout of swindlers. (Show me where my analysis is flawed.)

[Roguewolf]

Gibbs said that only in DC is $100 million considered small he said where he comes from it is a huge amount of money. Two weeks a go he called $80 billion in earmarks "miniscule". I guess where he comes from $100 million is huge and $80 billion is miniscule.

[Roguewolf]

that should be $8 billion.

[theone718]

Compared to the entire size of the omnibus bill, yes.

[FGDinVA]

$100 million was quickly and easily trimmed from a handful of cabinet offices. I'm sure everyone here knows how big the federal government is and how many handfuls of offices there are yet to be examined. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Just as some people don't understand why letting all the banks fail would have been a really bad thing, they don't understand the value of using a scalpel instead of a fire hose to reduce the budget.

[jake1492]

Sure, 'make sure the banks don't disappear.­... just don't let them make off like bandits at our expense. I'm sure there is lots of room to find 30 or 40 billion dollars of these types of savings. Sadly we need to find about 30 times that much.

[cjt1957]

No, they have 90 days to look for the cuts....

[FGDinVA]

Did you reply to the wrong post? I'm not following you.

[wrrock]

This administration is a joke. It is clear.

[cbat]

Yeah and the Bush administration was bigger joke, mainly on the American people.

[cjt1957]

You may not have noticed, Bush is not in office, Obama is...

[jake1492]

What do you mean?

[wrrock]

Obama simply slammed:

ABC's Jake Tapper questioned Gibbs why the Obama administration was making a large deal over saving $100 million in his proposed budget when the administration pooh-poohed $8 billion in an appropriations bill several weeks ago.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/04/20/ap_tapper_confront_obama_admin_over_100_million.html

[Chris McNulty]

Total Joke - Obama is socialist !!

[dragonlady620]

I doubt you can define socialist.

[cbat]

These right wingnuts have no idea what socialist is, they are only repeating what Fox News pundits and Rush tells them. They are too stupid to know that have been using so-called socialist benefits for years.

[cjt1957]

Karl defined it as "To each according to their need, from each accoding to their ability."
Thats where the break down is. We have 42% of wage earners paying no taxes and they want more and more and more from the 58% that do pay taxes. And of course every one wants more from that 5% that just make to much money. That is not the definition of "From each according to their ability".

[cbat]

That socialist claim did not work during the election and does not work now, what next, he is a facist, oops, you guys have already used that too. Why don't you give up your socialist Medicare benefits, which you will undoubtedly have to use one day,

[dontvote4him]

I guess you can say that we are on the socialist lite program.

[Trustandalwaysverify]

There are two things people who voted for or against Mr. Obama have in common.
1. This administration is lying to us all.
2. They deal with us, as if we are idiots who do not understand.

We need to stop calling each other names, stop defending Bush or Obama, and demand real answers and solutions from our government.
Above all, do not forget, the money they are spending is our money, and the money of our children.

[jesseandrews]

excellant post i agree with you 100 percent all of congress are crooks at least most of them anyway they only care what they can get look at murtha millions going to an airport with his name on it that on a busy day has 7-10 people going to washington this really stimulated the econmy there

[mike42nola]

Very well said and I think you speak about the biggest issue that needs to be fixed in this country. The politicians, from both parties, have set examples of partisan one upmanship which in turn has divided the country into this idiotic Red/Blue divide. Now that we are divided they can do anything they want and at least 48% of the people will agree with them.
We need to throw all of these bums out of office come mid term elections in 2010. Every incumbent that has been in office for two or more terms must go.
We need to demand and elect representatives that will truly work in a bipartisan fashion to help us get out of this huge hole we have dug ourselves into.
We need to demand that they balance the federal budget and stop this deficit spending, stop spending our children and grandchildrens money like it just falls off of trees.
We need to demand accountability. This money is being spent to create jobs? How many jobs? How long will they last? What will they pay? In other words make them show and predict the return on investment for the money spent.
We need to elect representatives that will give the President line item veto power so he, at least, will have final say and be able to cut the pork waste that every politician puts into critical bills that the President must sign.
Let's join together to actually get change that we were promised.

[foxfan]

Wow! A whole $100 million. My hero.

[Gumby123]

YAy!

[mgray80]

what a joke http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/04/todays-qs-for-4.htmll
gibbs said 8 billion in earmarks was small a couple weeks ago, now 100 million is large

[Gumby123]

It's amazing how these jokers spin things isn't it?

[LinkSync]

LMAO

[willt7311]

Gibbs said they were working to put this country back on a path fiscal sustainability. Really?

Allowing 8 billion in earmarks to go through and then saying you are going to cut 100 million from spending doesn't seem like a path to fiscal sustainability.

[Avanti2]

Boy is Jon Stewart going to have fun with Gibbs. Best go set my recorder.
I would hate to miss Stewart and Colbert on this FUBAR.

[Gumby123]

I wouldn't hold my breath.

[dontvote4him]

Now I have to watch the JS show which I usually don't do. Guess I can wait until HP posts it up.

[wrrock]

AP slams Obama for this spin.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/SPIN-METER-Saving-federal-apf-14976290.html?.v=1

[psjones006]

I can see where some people here got their copy/paste responses from.

[willt7311]

Why cut government spending when you just passed a bill to increase government spending? What sense does that make?

[jake1492]

How much did the governement increase spending?

[willt7311]

Did I say government spending increased?

Go back and read the post.

[willt7311]

Every American should be offended by this half-hearted attempt at appearing to cut spending.

I remember when he was saying that 8 billion was a small part of the budget. I wonder what he considers a 100 million dollars to be?

By his standard this isn't even reportable.

[jake1492]

Because it's too small? How big should it be?

[willt7311]

Lets start with the 780 billion porkulus bill. So 780 billion would be fine for me.

[dragonlady620]

I am getting sick of this whine. Obama has already stated publicly that this is just a start-but he wants it to set the tone for future cuts, and said there will be future cuts. Just wading through the budget muck, a lot of which has been aound almost from the start ot he country's history, is going to take time. (Then there is no doubt going to be the inevitable squabbles from congressmen who will swear they can't live without their little perks.) When you tackle something with this level of complexity you have to organize the workload as best you can and start with small steps to pare it down.
You think you have a better solution? Fine. You can sit down in a room filled with God knows how many million pages of budget data, and you can read it, organize it, analyze it, and then fix it. Then you can tell us what you come up with. We'll all be listening.

[StoptheBailouts]

At least they(congressmen and women) should TAKE THE TIME at least make the attempt to read things before passing them....Ev­eryone should be outraged that they didn't!! Wake up....this is not the type of representation we deserve.

[dragonlady620]

P.S. : First give an estimate of just how much time you will need to do it.

[Gonzorunner]

Wow your idol cut 100 million. That is two hours of interest in the deficit that he has saddled our country with. Lets see, can you relate to p*ssing in the ocean as a better example of Barack's attempt to do something of value?????

[freedomitchy]

Spending cut versus total budget illustrated.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/04/20/obamas-spending-vs-obamas-spending-cuts-in-pictures/

[jake1492]

Thanks for the link. It shows a big circle with 3.6 Trillion (total annual spending), missing is a circle marked 1.5 Trillion (annual deficit), then it shows a smaller circle inside with 0.787 Trillion (size of the stimulus package), also shows a smaller circl (0.4 Trillion, previous year's deficit), finally it shows a tiny little dot for the 0.0001 Trillion dollars that is the $100 Million.

If I thought that was as far as Obama was going I'd be dissapointed. But this is obviously just a start.

Absolutely no-one has offered an opinion about how much deficit spending is OK, how much we have to cut to get there, and how we could accomplish those cuts. Why hasn't anyone offered those opinions? Could it be because they aren't knowledgeable about it? That they aren't interested? Couldn't be bothered? Would rather just trade insults with someone because that's easy and entertaining?

Obama has us talking and thinking about it. That is the beginning of actually doing something about it.

How much do you think we need to cut from your pretty picture sir?