Republican Study Group Issues Proposed Budget Cuts

Leading conservative House Republicans announced Thursday some specific programs they plan to target in service of their campaign pledge to cut government spending.

The proposal by the Republican Study Committee, a conservative House GOP caucus, aims to return non-defense spending to 2008 levels and non-security spending to 2006 levels. It would cut funding for veterans programs, scientific research at the Department of Energy, Homeland Security, transportation, housing, education, legal services, foreign aid and the arts, according to a summary released by the RSC.

Republican leadership has been slowly backing off a campaign pledge to cut $100 billion from the budget this year, given the political difficulty of the task. The proposal from the the RSC, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), is a direct challenge to House Speaker John Boehner to follow the lead of the Tea Party. But the cuts to veterans aid and other programs popular across the political spectrum will prove tough to defend. Democrats, meanwhile, will charge the proposal with exacerbating the nation's unemployment crisis and the suffering of the jobless.

"Our immediate goal to cut spending to pre-bailout, pre-stimulus levels," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said. "That's what we pledged, and that's what we'll fight for. But that will be the beginning, not the end, of our efforts to cut spending and create jobs - and we appreciate every Member's input."

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said the cuts would get an up-or-down vote on the floor during the upcoming debate over resolutions to address the expiration of the continuing resolution (CR) that currently funds the government as a result of congressional failure to pass a budget last year.

"I applaud the Republican Study Committee for proposing cuts in federal spending, and I look forward to the discussion on reducing spending that our country so desperately needs to have," he said. "As promised, we will have an open process when it comes to spending bills. I look forward to these cuts and others being brought to the floor for an up-or-down vote during consideration of the CR, and I support that effort."

Unfortunately for the RSC, the most high-profile of their proposed cuts would have little impact on the deficit. Eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting subsidy and the National Endowment for the Arts saves $445 million and $167.5 million, respectively. The national debt is pushing $14 trillion. Eliminating the "Mohair Subsidy" would save a million dollars.

Some of the cuts would shift costs to states. The proposal would save an estimated $16.1 billion by rolling back federal Medicaid funding, putting the burden for those patients on state and local governments instead.

The effects of some elements of the proposal are more difficult to predict. The proposal would eliminate federal control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saving an estimated $30 billion over 10 years, but the effect on the housing market is uncertain, and could wind up draining money from state and federal coffers.

The plan would reduce federal spending by $2.5 trillion over a decade, according to the summary.

A list of specific cuts the RSC is proposing:

➢ Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings. ➢ Save America's Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings.

➢ International Fund for Ireland. $17 million annual savings.

➢ Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings.

➢ National Endowment for the Arts. $167.5 million annual savings.

➢ National Endowment for the Humanities. $167.5 million annual savings.

➢ Hope VI Program. $250 million annual savings.

➢ Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.

➢ Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.

➢ U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings.

➢ Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings.

➢ Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.

➢ John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings.

➢ Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings.

➢ Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings.

➢ Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings.

➢ Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings.

➢ Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

➢ Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings.

➢ Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings.

➢ Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings.

➢ Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings.

➢ New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings.

➢ Exchange Programs for Alaska, Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts. $9 million annual savings.

➢ Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings.

➢ Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings.

➢ Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings.

➢ Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings.

➢ Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings.

➢ Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings.

➢ FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings.

➢ Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings.

➢ Economic Assistance to Egypt. $250 million annually.

➢ U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings.

➢ General Assistance to District of Columbia. $210 million annual savings.

➢ Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings.
➢ Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.

➢ No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings.

➢ End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.

➢ Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually.

➢ IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years.

➢ Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings.

➢ Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees. $1.2 billion savings over ten years.

➢ Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.

➢ Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress.

➢ Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings.

➢ Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings.

➢ Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings.

➢ USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings.

➢ Subsidy to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings.

➢ Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings.

➢ Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings.

➢ Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings.

Comments

[elfish]

05:35 PM on 03/21/2011

INDIVIDUALTERRY Wrote:
 
> When your beloved FDR was elected , the first thing he did
> to tackle the depression was cut spending.
> He cut the military budget , the veterans benefits,
> federal salaries
No wonder the country is in so much trouble, Republicans simply make up facts to suit their ideology:
Here is the economic history of the Depression:

1930 = GNP falls: -9.4%  Unemployment = 8.7%
1931 = GNP falls: -8.5%  Unemployment = 15.9%
1932 = GNP falls: -13.4% Unemployment = 23.6%

Roosevelt Elected

. Democrats take control of congress: Spending programs begin.
. Top tax rate raised from 25% to 63%
. Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 enacted.

1933 = GNP falls: -2.1%  Unemployment = 24.9%
1934 = GNP RISES: +7.7%  Unemployment = 21.7%
1935 = GNP Rises: +8.1%  Unemployment = 20.1%
1936 = GNP Rises: +14.1% Unemployment = 16.9%
1937 = GNP Rises: +5.7%  Unemployment = 14.1%

Roosevelt Cuts Spending.

1938 = GNP FALL: -4.5%  Unemployment = 19.0%

Roo.sevelt begins spending preparing for WWII.

1939 = GNP Rises: +7.9%  Unemployment = 17.2%

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Sweden.htm

[rickthepainter]

12:33 PM on 02/03/2011

GOP-Baggers budget,BS. If lower taxes were the answer to more job creation,and two thirds of corporations pay no taxes shouldn't we be awash in jobs?When I look at their proposed cuts, all I see is more job losses,more foreclosures,increased decline in home values,and either increased spending in social services or way more homeless.I've always heard it takes money to make money,and increased revenue is what it will take to reduce deficits,not shrinking the economy.Jobs today,deficits tomorrow.Jobs today, deficits tomorrow.Jobs today,deficits tomorrow.Jobs today,deficits tomorrow.PS.efficiency in government is needed,spend your time making government more efficient,not killing Jobs.

[David Amon]

04:46 PM on 01/30/2011

Finally a group ready to make the hard decisions. Considering the only decision previously thought of by the democrats was spend more and tax more this is totally a refreshing idea.

[Ppossom]

01:45 PM on 01/27/2011

Cutting funding for FNMA will unemploy AT LEAST 7 million America families.

[boredinpa]

10:03 AM on 01/27/2011

I went through this list and it looks like a lot of cutting for Poor people...
Legal Services Corp - provides legal aid for the poor
Hope VI program - public housing

Where is the elimination of providing subsidies to the Oil Industry...in doing research that is about 4 billion dollars......

[Mike McMurtrie]

12:57 AM on 01/24/2011

The Repubs will realize their paltry attempt to cut spending combined with their 'no new taxes, don't raise taxes' mantra will need rethinking. Even Reagan and Bush 1 realized the folly of their earlier campaign slogans (which did nothing to curtail budget woes) before raising taxes. Some people have to learn the hard way...

[BillForObama]

09:40 PM on 01/23/2011

Military spending should be at 1950 levels.

[RTIII]

10:21 PM on 01/24/2011

Or LESS.

[Independent66]

01:17 PM on 01/23/2011

It's a start, but it is not even close to enough.

1. Department of Energy goes.
2. Department of Education goes.
3. Department of Commerce goes.
4. Reduce the spend in Defense by $100B/ yr in the next 2 years.
5. Eliminate the $100-150b in fraud from Medicare and Medicade. Just pay after patient approval, not just pay any bill!
6. Means test SS payments to the retirement wealthy after they get what they put into it.

I've just begun. There are a lot more targets of opportunity, but this will get us well past the $500b level and make a dent in the next $500b. Anything less than $500b/yr in cuts in the next 2 years is a joke on the American people.

[RTIII]

10:21 PM on 01/24/2011

Why not start with ending the unnecessary, harmful to American's national security interests WARS? That will just about do it all by itself.

[Independent66]

11:20 PM on 01/24/2011

The 2 wars cost roughly $100b a year. That is not enough to close the $1.4t gap. There needs to be a lot more cutting to make a dent on that gap. Keep going!

[SimJack]

09:48 AM on 01/23/2011

Death by a thousand little cuts. Small minds solving little problems with negligible solutions while, in the meantime, they will practice the art of government consisting of taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to another.

[gumbo1049]

09:12 AM on 01/23/2011

how about cutting their salaries and not giving them government health care

[WOODSTOCKER51]

07:35 AM on 01/23/2011

"THE KOCH BROTHERS HAVE SPOKEN"....ITS ALL ABOUT "GRASS ROOTS"...AND PEOPLE ACTING LIKE SHEEP............LOL

[farmilyman]

07:18 AM on 01/23/2011

How about cutting foreign aid to countries like Israel and Egypt.

[soybeaner]

03:34 PM on 01/26/2011

Aid to Egypt is on the list of things to be cut.

[farmilyman]

03:50 PM on 01/26/2011

Great news.......but they need to cut off everyone from the middle east.

[oldngrumpy]

12:45 AM on 01/23/2011

Just more "starve the beast". Moving costs back to the states will require state tax increases which will mean less appetite for federal tax increases. The red states will have no problem cutting essential services for the poor which will cause a migration of the unemployed to the cities and blue states. All domestic services and infrastructure will suffer while we transition from war to war overseas. It's all about lowering overhead expenses and making the military more attractive to the young. The nation's resources and wealth will continue to move up the economic food chain and the middle class will be extinct in 10 years.

[WOODSTOCKER51]

07:34 AM on 01/23/2011

DOES IT REALLY MATTER?....JUST THINK...THE MORE RED STATES HAVE TO PAY THEIR SHARE..THE LESS WE BLUE STATES HAVE TO PAY!.I LOVE IT."VOTE AWAY BAGGERS......SEE WHO WHINES AFTER THE BIG "VOTES"............ROFLMAO

[IM4REAL]

08:17 PM on 01/22/2011

Chicken Crap. Is the only way to describe it. The are just pretending as though they are doing something, just going through motion. They haven't a clue what to do. Just like the Budget they wrote with no numbers and their Pledge to America. They really need to get real. 4Real

[gumbo1049]

09:13 AM on 01/23/2011

AGREED

[gypsysailor]

07:05 PM on 01/22/2011

Cutting the funding for Public Broadcasting is all make believe money. Public Broadcasting gets 99% of its money from donations and twice a year fundraisers.

[oldngrumpy]

12:25 AM on 01/23/2011

The Public Broadcasting Corporation will likely double that amount in backlash donations.

[soybeaner]

03:58 PM on 01/26/2011

Really?

$445 Million x 99 + $445 Million = the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's annual budget?