Sign up for email updates
Latest news from other sources:
Obama’s Budget Proposal Garners Zero Votes in the House and Senate
May 21, 2012
This past week, the Democrat controlled Senate finally voted on a Budget. Although it has beenover 1,000 days since they have passed a Budget resolution, it’s not theirsthat was voted on but President Obama’s. Furthermore, the Senate only took upthe matter because they were forced to. Republicans forced the vote by offeringthe president's plan on the Senate floor. Otherwise, Senators would have beencontent to continue on without a guiding Budget Resolution.
The onlything it seems Senators can agree on when it comes to Budget Resolutions isthat they all don’t support the President’s proposed plan. Senators, Democratand Republican alike, voted 99-0 to reject it.
The Housealso rejected the President’s proposal on an entirely bipartisan basis thisMarch in a vote of 414-0. That means President Obama's budget has failed to wina single vote of support this year. Obama'sbudget plans have had a poor track record in Congress. In May 2011, 97 senatorsvoted against a motion to take up his 2012 budget plan — no senator voted infavor of the motion.
The reasonfor the widespread lack of support for the President’s Budget? Look no furtherthan the details of his plan. The White House has touted the President’s Budgetas a “balanced approach” to beginning to rein in deficits. It calls for taxincreases to begin to offset higher spending, and would begin to level off debtas a percentage of the economy by 2022. While the goal of reining in ourdeficits is admirable, his plan for doing so would produce $6.4 trillion in newdeficits over that time.
Thetotal FY 2013 budget request rolls in at $3.8 trillion. Mainly, it continues toadvocate for tax hikes on the rich, spends new money on infrastructure andeducation, but does nothing to reform the entitlement programs that pose thebiggest long-term threat to the federal budget. It also forecasts a deficit forthe Fiscal Year that is projected to top $1.3 trillion. This is par for thecourse for this President, as the actual deficits of the past 3 years, havebeen in excess of $1 trillion for each year he’s been in office - spending 30%more than we take in each year. This means that the President will not havekept his 2009 promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term.
TheWhite House has billed the document as a “blueprint for how we can rebuild aneconomy where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.” However,billions in new taxes and deficits as far as the eye can see are not “blueprints…forrecovery.” If this President was serious about promoting growth through hisbudget proposals, he would reform the tax code and place the country on a pathto a balanced budget. In addition, he would present a plan for paying off ourNational Debt. These are the true blueprints for a recovery and CapitolWatchwill continue to urge our Representatives in Congress to meet that goal andexpects the same of this President and the next.
Question of the Week