More

Democrats Warm To GOP's Short-Term Budget Cuts

Short Term Cuts

First Posted: 02/25/11 05:56 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:35 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans unveiled a stopgap spending bill on Friday afternoon that would avert a government shutdown for two weeks while making dramatic cuts to social programs, totaling $4 billion. Senate Democrats flatly rejected such an offer on Wednesday, but today took a more conciliatory stance, while continuing to press for a monthlong extension.

The change in tone gives the impression that lawmakers are more willing to cut a deal than they are to let the government shut down on March 4 -- kicking the same debate down the road to March 18.

The bill released Friday is the exact same measure floated on Wednesday, according to a Republican leadership aide. When the GOP plan was leaked in the middle of the week, Senate Democrats hit back hard.

"The Republicans' so-called compromise is nothing more than the same extreme package the House already handed the Senate, just with a different bow. This isn't a compromise, it's a hardening of their original position. This bill would simply be a two-week version of the reckless measure the House passed last weekend," Jon Summers, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), said at the time.

The proposal's formal language has now been released by the GOP, and Reid's office is striking a more cordial tone. "We are encouraged to hear that Republicans are abandoning their demands for extreme measures like cuts to border security, cancer research and food safety inspectors and instead moving closer to Democrats' position that we should cut government spending in a smart, responsible way that targets waste and excess while keeping our economy growing," Summers said in a statement.

What changed in two days, if not the Republican offer? For one, Senate Democratic staffers met on Thursday afternoon to find a list of tens of billions in cuts, moving closer to the Republican position. Additionally, say Democratic aides, the GOP backed off of budget cuts that simply would have been unacceptable.

"Instead of doing a prorated version of their $61 billion in cuts, they are adopting the cuts that the president put forward in his budget and the ones that we have signaled we are targeting as well, which we take as an admission by them that the measure they passed on Saturday is dead," a Senate Democratic leadership aide said. "They could have just done a prorated version of their cuts to border security, the [National Institutes of Health], food safety inspectors and all the other proposals we had rejected as going too far. Instead they are honing in about the kinds of cuts we have said we would have an open mind to."

Last Saturday morning, the House passed a spending package that would fund the government through the end of the fiscal year in September, aimed to cut spending by $61 billion, with many ideologically-driven cuts and riders that would cripple government regulation and the implementation of health care reform.

As time to fund the government runs out, the new bill would fund the government for two weeks, which House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said is an "attempt for us to try and find a ground that we can work on with the Senate in a bipartisan way." But the two-week bill is merely a short-term implementation of the bulk of the GOP's long-term cuts. It cuts funding to earmarked projects, but makes numerous exceptions, largely for Army Corps of Engineers projects.

The two-week measure does not contain the types of riders that some House Republicans had pushed for -- language that would defund health care reform or Planned Parenthood, for instance.

The cuts in the short-term spending bill dovetail with some in President Barack Obama's fiscal year 2012 budget. Nearly $460 million in cuts come from the Department of Education, targeting funding for reading programs for at-risk students, need-based grants and literacy efforts, according to an analysis of the two-week bill done by Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee. The GOP proposal would also cut Pell grants to college students by nearly one-fifth, from $5,500 to $4,860 per year.

About $2.7 billion in cuts were taken from programs slated for funding through earmarks, which Republicans have vowed not to support. Those cuts come from a wide variety of departments and programs, including $77 million in cuts from scientific research from the Department of Energy's Office of Science, $397 million removed for health resources and services and $22 million from special-education funding.

House Republicans said on a conference call Friday that they expected the Senate to accept the two-week stopgap bill, claiming that to do otherwise would lead to government shutdown.

"If the Senate Democrats walk away from this offer -- things Obama has proposed and they have embraced -- they're then actively engineering a government shutdown," Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) said.

Senate Democrats applauded the short-term plan, with Reid's office calling it "a modified version of what Democrats were talking about." But they signaled that they may not be willing to cooperate with Republican efforts for further cuts moving forward, setting up another battle between the House and Senate over funding within the next month.

"If we need a little more time to agree on a responsible path forward, we should pass a short-term CR for no longer than the next month," Summers, Reid's spokesman, said. "But the 'my way or the highway' approach Republicans have been taking in the past only signals a desire for a government shutdown that our country can't afford. We hope this is a sign that they have abandoned it and will work with Democrats moving forward."

House Republicans said they are still committed to passing their initial funding cut bill -- even though Senate Democrats and the president vowed to block it. The House GOP rejected a report from a Goldman Sachs economist this week that their plan would hinder economic recovery.

"I'd just give it the reverse. If the premise is that if we cut it's going to hurt the economy, didn't we just have the reverse experience with the stimulus?" Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) said on a conference call with reporters. "I think everyone in Congress has the reports and the experience that the stimulus was not the answer. Cutting government spending would create job growth."

Read the text of the bill:


housecr

Sam Stein contributed reporting.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- House Republicans unveiled a stopgap spending bill on Friday afternoon that would avert a government shutdown for two weeks while making dramatic cuts to social programs, totaling $4 bil...
WASHINGTON -- House Republicans unveiled a stopgap spending bill on Friday afternoon that would avert a government shutdown for two weeks while making dramatic cuts to social programs, totaling $4 bil...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,934
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (46 total)
  1 of 2  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
Wendy Davis 10:37 PM on 02/25/2011
OMG this is so fing appropriate: Hey You (Waters) 4:39 Hey you, out there in the cold Getting lonely, getting old Can you feel me? Hey you, standing in the aisles With itchy feet and fading smiles Can you feel me? Hey you, dont help them to bury the light Don't give in without a fight. Hey you, out there on your own Sitting naked by the phone Would you touch me? Hey you, with you ear against the wall  Read More...
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
satanlite
If ur neibor wtchs Fox Nws wtch ur neibor
08:05 PM on 02/27/2011
What's that noise? I've heard it before... oh yeah, the sound of Democrats caving...so familiar.
08:30 PM on 02/27/2011
:D
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cyndeewi
Here to save the day
10:00 PM on 02/27/2011
So true!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ronkw
Wake up and smell the whiskey
06:10 PM on 02/27/2011
"...but today took a more conciliatory stance, ..."

Reid looked at the poll numbers.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
12:39 PM on 02/28/2011
Apparently not. The polls are against this idiocy.
04:31 PM on 02/27/2011
I love how the dems are always willing to bend over for the republicans. Geez.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ronkw
Wake up and smell the whiskey
06:20 PM on 02/27/2011
Yea, the dems like that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cyndeewi
Here to save the day
10:02 PM on 02/27/2011
We have to start a third party.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
03:11 PM on 02/27/2011
The ONLY way we are ever going to balance the budget again is for the top 2% to pay their fair shar of taxes, as the majority of Americans asked for before that segment of society had the Bush/Reagan tax cuts renewed.

When are the rich going to stop freeloading on the rest of us?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ronkw
Wake up and smell the whiskey
06:13 PM on 02/27/2011
At what point / what dollar amount does someone become "rich"?

The way you bash, you surely have thought this thru.....
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
satanlite
If ur neibor wtchs Fox Nws wtch ur neibor
08:06 PM on 02/27/2011
The poster already defined the point. Reading comprehension problems?
08:36 PM on 02/27/2011
"at some point, you have made enough money."

Barack Obama

No figure available.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cyndeewi
Here to save the day
10:04 PM on 02/27/2011
Well we can forget about the top 2 percent paying their fair share thanks to Obama. Another campaign promise broken.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
12:13 PM on 02/28/2011
When you look at the alternative, we didn't have any choice. Seems to me our best option is to insist that Obama keep his campaign promises. He was paid for by Goldman Sachs, but his votes came from the American people. We need to remind him of that.

He promised there would be no new taxes on the poor, but his first act as President was the SHIPP act. A 300% tax on tobacco which overwhelmingly taxed the poor, to provide healthcare for middle class children's healthcare. I'm all for children's healthcare, but why put it on the backs of the poor?

Especially nearly 2 years before he took up another Campaign promise. That the tax cuts for the top 2%, given them by Bush, would be ended. Then when it finally came up for a vote, he caved. Now he wants to cut other programs for the poor, just to keep the Republicans happy?

While those protesters in Wisconsin are fighting so hard for our Unions, standing out in the horrible weather in wisconsin, day after day, the rest of us need to begin a massive lertter writing, phone calling assault on the White House, demanding he remember, that the ordinary people voted for him, and expect him to represent, US.There is no way to turn this whole debacle around but the voices of WE the People.

There is no way we want to see a Republican President. We had just better fix the one we have.
02:31 PM on 02/27/2011
I haven't decided whether congressional Democrats are clueless or currupt. I suppose it's some combination of the two. Once again they are letting the opposition set the terms of the debate.

We shouldn't even be talking about budget-cutting . WE'RE IN A DEPRESSION. We should be talking about creating tens of millions of jobs. Good jobs.

Once we get out of the depression - an unlikely event given the policies our dear leaders are pursuing - the resulting increase in tax revenues will go a long way toward reducing the deficit.
In the meantime Democrats in Congress should be forcefully pointing out, again and again, that the huge increases in our national debt over the past three decades have been ENTIRELY the result of conservative priorities: a gigantic military, tragically needless wars and tax giveaways to the very rich and corporations.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
satanlite
If ur neibor wtchs Fox Nws wtch ur neibor
08:06 PM on 02/27/2011
I vote corrupt.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cyndeewi
Here to save the day
10:06 PM on 02/27/2011
Right! Creating jobs and getting us out of these wars.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
12:42 PM on 02/27/2011
We should just keep spending money we don't have on tax breaks and social welfare. It'll work... really it will...
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
satanlite
If ur neibor wtchs Fox Nws wtch ur neibor
08:06 PM on 02/27/2011
And wars, and wars ...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edayres
Comedian with a New Jersey attitude commenting on
12:32 PM on 02/27/2011
Someone explain to me exactly how cutting government spending creates jobs? The argument used to be less spending meant lower taxes so businesses could create jobs. Taxes are already at the lowest rate in decades, a big tax cut was just passed, yet all we see are corporations sitting on a mountain of cash. How would this work?
Ifeomamn
When MSM report Facts, USA thrives.
11:34 AM on 02/27/2011
It is always interesting to see how the progressives are easily manipulated by a headline and a story.

These are the same group of people that pride themselves in reading up things and searching for facts.

Those on this thread getting all worked up, what were the proposed cuts made by the Obama Team last years that were ejected by TBGOPers?

Same cuts. The ONLY difference was the earmark the senate wanted.

People can we read up before we get so agitated?
photo
farmilyman
everything is illusion
11:30 AM on 02/27/2011
Warm = cave
Ifeomamn
When MSM report Facts, USA thrives.
11:27 AM on 02/27/2011
HP the headline is a tad off.

Dems are leaning to agree because the cuts the GOPers in the house are presenting for a 2 wk extension of the government spending were originally proposed by the Obama administration which were denounced in 2010 by the same GOPers. The only addition were the removal of the earmarks which the Obama Team had said that they would veto if included.


It would have been more correct to have stated that the GOPers have agreed to the original proposal by the Obama team.

Yeah, that would be saying something that actually favored the president, a NO in these climate?
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BocaMom
10:48 AM on 02/27/2011
It's about time they compromised. If not, we would lose BOTH Houses as well as the White House in 2012!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LameDuckHunting
YOUR AD HERE........
10:46 AM on 02/27/2011
Keep giving the republicans what they want! Go ahead, Democrats. You'd still be the minority party even if you controlled 400 House seats................................
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
satanlite
If ur neibor wtchs Fox Nws wtch ur neibor
08:07 PM on 02/27/2011
Without a doubt.
AnonymousDissenter
Conscientious cultural objector
09:44 AM on 02/27/2011
Blah blah blah Democrats cave after token fight blah blah blah we're screwed.