iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Spending Freeze Would Save $200 Billion: Report

Obama State Of The Union

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 01/26/11 11:16 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:25 PM ET

President Barack Obama proposed a five-year freeze in government spending in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, but the actual significance of that freeze will depend upon how it's implemented.

The size of the savings from such a freeze is unclear, just as the permanence of such a policy would also be an open question, according to a new report from Goldman Sachs analyst Alec Phillips. The "freeze" Obama has proposed -- which would prevent about 12 percent of the Federal budget from expanding above current levels -- would likely build on the three-year freeze he outlined in his speech last year, and it might not be as constricting as it might seem.

The president's proposal comes at a time when lawmakers of both parties have warned about the rising deficit, as spending is currently projected to outpace revenue by about $1.4 trillion. Meanwhile, the government debt has surpassed $14 trillion, as the U.S. must borrow money to fund its obligations. The issue will come to a head when Congress debates whether to raise the debt limit, a move that could prevent a disastrous default, many economists say.

Under Obama's new proposal, keeping non-defense discretionary spending flat over the next five years could save $1 trillion, compared to a policy in which such spending rose with GDP, the new report says. However, seen as an extension of his previous freeze, this new proposal would save only $200 billion over 10 years, according to the report. In his speech, Obama offered another estimate, placing the 10-year savings at $400 billion.

Whether the freeze would continue for the length prescribed is also unclear. As the report notes, the freeze must be re-approved every year, given the nature of the budgeting process. As Obama's program would affect only discretionary spending, it wouldn't touch Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Defense Department or Homeland Security, Bloomberg News notes.

Republicans have criticized Obama's proposal as inadequate. Another proposal, advanced in December, would cut such discretionary spending to 2008 levels. While Obama's freeze would keep that level at around $520 billion, a return to the 2008 level would mean cutting back to to about $392 billion, according to Bloomberg.

With the five-year freeze, the government would spend $500 billion more than if it returned to 2008 levels, according to the Goldman report.

"Freezing after the last two years' spending binge is clearly not much," Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told HuffPost's Ryam Grim.

Economist Paul Krugman, by contrast, saw the freeze as yielding an inconsequential savings, compared to its potentially destructive impact.

"It's both trivial in fiscal terms and likely to inflict some real harm on government effectiveness," he wrote.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
President Barack Obama proposed a five-year freeze in government spending in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, but the actual significance of that freeze will depend upon how it's implement...
President Barack Obama proposed a five-year freeze in government spending in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, but the actual significance of that freeze will depend upon how it's implement...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 104
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
11:35 AM on 01/29/2011
Zeitgeist Moving Forward
is on Youtube
peace
Clevelandinwi
Progressive is good; regressive, not so much.
08:45 AM on 01/27/2011
200 billion over the next 2,000,000,000 years.
Clevelandinwi
Progressive is good; regressive, not so much.
08:37 AM on 01/27/2011
Medicare at the top of the list?
07:32 AM on 01/27/2011
Barry is corrupt. The gang is robbing the Treasury.
"Slush fund accounts of major US politicians identified and seized at Vatican Bank (Rome). Connection established with Daniel Dal Bosco RICO indictment, which cites Giancarlo Bruno, Silvio Berlusconi & Ban Ki Moon.
On Wednesday 5th January 2011, it emerged that US establishment-related slush fund accounts had been located in, and seized from, the Vatican Bank in Rome. The source of funds for these accounts in almost every instance was found to be the US Treasury.
Beneficiaries of the covert Vatican accounts include Barack Obama, Michelle Obama and each of the Obama children, Michelle Obama’s mother, all the Bushes and the Clintons, including Chelsea Clinton, Joe Biden, Timothy Geithner, Janet Napolitano, several US Senators, including Mitch McConnell, several US Congressmen including John Boehner, several US Military Chiefs of Staff, the US Provost Marshal, the US Judge Advocate General, the US Supreme Court Chief Justice, John Roberts, several US Judges, the Pope, and several cardinals.
Big money was found in each of the accounts. The longer the beneficiaries have been in office, the greater the account balances were found to be. They range from a few million USD to more than a billion USD in the case of John Roberts. The total number of slush fund accounts so far identified at the Vatican Bank is said to be between 600 and 700. This number is likely to grow as international élite corruption investigations spread worldwide."
http://www.wallstreetsurvivor.com/CS/for...
Clevelandinwi
Progressive is good; regressive, not so much.
08:44 AM on 01/27/2011
No such link.
07:27 AM on 01/27/2011
I really wish Obama would stop regurgitating Republican talking points or acting on them unless he plans to put an "R" behind his name.
photo
joeisright
Semper Fi
03:34 PM on 01/27/2011
When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:35 AM on 01/27/2011
Why does it cost America nearly four TRILLION to run the government and WHY don't I see any of these supposed services provided by said government. Is it because I'm in my 30s, work hard, own several guns (for protection) and pay for my own health insurance. Should I work less, get on medicaid and other government programs, so I can benefit from the government? I don't think liberals understand why us conservatives are so mad over this big government. Well, it is because we work and pay for everything for ourselves. We believe in self preservation and being responsible. If others in this country would do the same then maybe my taxes would be lower and maybe the government wouldn't be so big. Its really upsetting to hear that the government can only find $20 billion to cut from a $4 trillion dollar budget!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RunningBecky
Runner, nurse, chess player
02:48 AM on 01/27/2011
That's your creed. But as a radio personality tells the story (and I checked, it's true). A very rich German industrialist was being interviewed by a conservative reporter. The reported kept going back to the fact he pays 50% income take and trying to evoke some criticism. Finally the German gave up and explained, "No I don't mind because I don't want to be a rich man in a poor country."
Anyway, open your eyes. You benefit from government programs, rules and regulations from the minute you wake up to the minute you go to sleep. Starting with the safe food you eat and water you drink. You just take them all for granted. Huggs Becky
08:25 AM on 01/27/2011
Is the Fed. Govt. going to bail out the states when they are ready to declare bankruptcy? If the Fed. does bail out the states then watch the deficit soar despite cost cutting policies.
photo
Moxo
Our enemies are in the GOP.
01:11 AM on 01/27/2011
I bet the Republicans are mad at themselves for forcing Obama to extend the Bush tax-Cuts and thus adding hundreds of Billions of US dollars to the Debt.
photo
ses190e
Trying to be an optimist, dammit!
01:41 AM on 01/27/2011
They're crying all the way to the bank
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ResearchtheFacts
Alert, awake & paying attention to the details.
12:50 AM on 01/27/2011
Does anybody still believe this guy is capable of telling the truth?  The lies just keep coming.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PatrickforO
America needs a Labor Party
12:17 AM on 01/27/2011
Krugman's right, but politically there's no way we can have enough stimulus to get us back on track. I believe Rep. Paul Ryan knows very well that the austerity measures he proposes will throw us into a double dip or worse, but he and his party want this because they think if the economy gets worse they can get back into power in 2012. I fear these folks don't really want what's best for you and for me; they want....unlimited POWER!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kenhamlett
11:31 PM on 01/26/2011
One hand doesn't seem to know what the other is doing. On the same day, the President says the deficit has to be cut -- spending freezes, agency reductions, etc. -- then sends forth the message that he is cutting taxes on corporations. So, anything gained on the one side will be lost on the other. This has gone on throughout the Bush years and is now carrying over to the Obama administration. Inconsistent policy like this is the equivalent of treading water and solving nothing. An editorial in one of our papers today said that the key element in the new bipartisanship is that both parties have agreed that neither will work to solve our most serious problems. More and more, it seems true.
11:30 PM on 01/26/2011
It is all for show. Obama is pretending he is Reagan now when he is really Jimmy Carter. We just need to elect a new Reagan in 2012 and the economy can start to recover.
photo
Moxo
Our enemies are in the GOP.
01:13 AM on 01/27/2011
We just need to elect a new Reagan in 2012 and the economy can start to recover.

----------------------------

So starting in 2012 you want the President to TRIPLE the National Debt... like Reagan did???

WHY???
photo
ses190e
Trying to be an optimist, dammit!
01:43 AM on 01/27/2011
Because deficits don't matter
photo
grilledturbot
If youve got a business.you didn’t build that
11:01 PM on 01/26/2011
so what I hear is 'hey, let's spend 1.2 trill instead of 1.4 trill (I heard 1.5 trill earlier, but what's a few billion) "that oughta do it"
11:01 PM on 01/26/2011
Taxes won't do it. Take all, yes ALL the money anyone and everyone has over say 1 millions dollars. Just confiscate it.

And you won't pay off the debt.

Taxes won't do it.

Spending must be cut.
photo
Moxo
Our enemies are in the GOP.
01:14 AM on 01/27/2011
Yup - zero out the Military budget and in 13 years we are GOLDEN!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JacksonAndy78
Usury Interest is Welfare to BANKSTERS
10:12 PM on 01/26/2011
Two years ago OBAMA could have done WHAT HE SAID LAST NIGHT with the HOUSE and SENATE in his HANDS!

BUT OBAMA'S GOAL was to WASTE TIME with Health Care WELFARE to the three Industries.

Now he knows he has the Republicans to blame for nothing HAPPENING so why NOT PROMISE JOBS and blame them for not doing it.

WIN WIN (LOSE for the PEOPLE as USUAL)!

Both PARTIES ARE SOLD TO INTERNATIONAL BANKSTERS!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipTaylor
Legalized Bribery is an Oxymoron - must END
10:00 PM on 01/26/2011
BUT MOST (75%) OF THE WASHINGTON WORKERS ARE CORPORATE EMPLOYEES (see documentation below by Jane Wedel):

WILL OBAMA CUT THEIR MASSIVELY GROWING DRAW DOWN ON THE BUDGET?

United MEGA-Corporations of America will NOT be shut DOWN BY REPUBLICANS: The Executives will SQUEEL!
 
75% of the people in the FEDERAL Government are Corporate employees and Executives and they will NOT let it happen.
 
It is called PRIVATIZATION! Infiltration of Corporations into our Government.
 
Traditional Government jobs now done by BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON and other Corporations:
 
BOOZ ALLEN decides who gets the NEXT COST-PLUS SOLE-SOURCE CONTRACTS that overcharge­s the TAXPAYER by 1,000% to 10,000%!
 
JANINE WEDEL - Author of SHADOW ELITE (2009)
 
How the World's New Power Brokers Undermine Democracy, Government , and the Free Market 
 
http://janinewedel.info/shadowelite.html