Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
Well, that didn't take long. A few days ago I worried that the Democrats might avoid the
difficulty of writing a final act to The Deficit Monster that Ate America in favor of starting work on a different horror flick, another in the successful Republican Budget Slasher franchise. This morning I received an email from my congresswoman, Anna Eshoo (D-CA) confirming the switch and officially kicking off the 2012 presidential election season.
Representative Eshoo tells me that she has "deep concerns" about the deficit and voted for many amendments to cut spending, "totaling over $55 billion." But the Republicans want to cut $100 billion and this "spending plan is more than cutting -- it's crippling. It takes a sledgehammer to the weakest in our society and to our collective future." She cites the "nonpartisan" Economic Policy Institute--actually an outfit controlled by union leaders and other current and former Democrat officials--to assert that "this legislation will cost more than 800,000 private and public jobs. It will gut research and development..." yada yada yada.
Eshoo honestly expects her constituents to believe that she advocated a fiscally prudent 1.5% cut in the bloated $3.73 trillion budget, unbalanced to the tune of $1.65 trillion, but was rolled over by heartless House Republicans on their way to passing a civilization-destroying 2.7% cut. I wait for the explanation of how, exactly, the incremental $45 billion in cuts will cost the better part of a million jobs.
Of course, no liberal communique would be complete without a paragraph highlighting the disastrous impact of fiscal rectitude on women and children.
Cuts to the Department of Education would slash the Pell Grant, leaving thousands of students unable to afford higher education. Over 200,000 children would be dropped from Head Start education, and the elimination of Title X means that over 5 million low-income women would be denied life-saving health services such as HIV testing and cancer screening.
My reply to Congresswoman Eshoo is posted here.
How do you think this strategy will play outside of deep blue Silicon Valley?
[Edited to add cool Godzilla photo]
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
The specifics of cuts will always prompt some emotional gasps against us, but it remains a net political winner that in these clarifying times we, the Republicans, are regarded as "the cutters" and the Dems as "the spenders".
And "I urge you to see the light and save your country" is as good as it gets, George.
Jul '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
I just wonder how we win this. Nearly half of American households have at least one member who receives benefits from a social welfare program. That number was 45% in the third Quarter of 2008; it must be higher now.
And, of course nearly half of earners pay no federal income taxes.
Add to that the public-sector workers and it seems the productive folks in the private sector are a minority.
This isn't going to be the work of an election or two.
May '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
I am confused about the ability of a GOP House to kill off Obamacare. I've heard that it was defunded, but I've also heard that it has been, in effect, "pre-funded." What's the deal?
Dec '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
I'd tell her that her "deep concern" is not deep enough if she thinks $100 billion in spending cuts is too much and that $55 billion is just right when the deficit is $1500 billion. Then I'd ask her if she is proposing to raise taxes.
Jan '11
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
First let me point out that I agree with you 100%.
And that I know, as you do, that your letter will do nothing to change your representative's mind. Nothing will. She must be thrown out of office, the sooner, the better.
But the arguments that you use, although all true, will fail if carried into the next general election cycle by our side, especially if the economy seems to be improving.
Jack Kemp spelled out the reason years ago when he termed the emphasis on "cutting" and "reducing" as "root-canal Republicanism." The procedure may be necessary, but nobody looks forward to it, nor do they think affectionately about the dentist.
You and I both know the salutary effects of reducing the government's scope. Smaller government means not only better, but stronger government. A smaller government also means bigger citizens, as Mark Steyn so often points out. But until we find the way to express the benefits of the path we are proposing in clear and concise phrases to the public, conservatives are going to continue to be on the defensive.
Jul '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
I simply love Yer response to Eshoo.
The photo's cool too.
Dec '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
Paris, it is complex, but was well known that the original bill included something unusual. The usual rule is that no Congress can commit another Congress to spending money, but, written into the Obamacare legislation was just that, a committment to $105B in funding for implementation. Absent a specific excision of that funding, that money moves into the process. Effforts to get an amendment or a rule change that excised that funding have failed. This is a classic example of under-the-radar stuff. Everybody in Congress knew this was a problem (or a feature!), and all efforts to get rid of it failed.
George, we are at a point, in my opinion where juvenile ridicule is called for. I wonder what might happen were Rep. Eshoo to marry a socialist German. It's possible. She could possibly take the new, hyphenated name of Eshoo-Geshundeit. That may be awful and ad homineml, but I am tired of being the the Ricochet person in a Daily Kos world. If people were literate, in your District, eschew comes to mind. But they are not, anymore than they are in mine. I declare open season on puns!
Sep '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
George Savage:
Eshoo honestly expects her constituents to believe that she advocated a fiscally prudent 1.5% cut in the bloated $3.73 trillion budget, unbalanced to the tune of $1.65 trillion, but was rolled over by heartless House Republicans on their way to passing a civilization-destroying 2.7% cut.
I think House Republicans need to get out the big wooden blocks, and have one of them set 37 of them on a table in the middle of the House floor.
"Now, these 37 blocks together represent the budget, in 37 equal parts. We are proposing to reduce the budget $100 billion, or by one of these blocks. (Demonstrator takes one of the blocks off the table with a flourish). Any questions?"
(All this assuming they ever actually cut $100 billion)
Edited on Feb 19, 2011 at 6:44pmSep '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
What gets me is that the Dems made this big fiscal mess by completely shutting out the Repubs and using dirty tricks to get it all done. The Dems gave us a huge budget and budget deficit, and then howl like banshees when the Repubs try to cut an exceedingly small fraction of that back.
When (if) the GOP gets control of both houses and the oval office, I see no way to force it all the other way other than to use those same dirty tricks. (Unfortunately, we have already seen that the current House leadership and others do not seem to have the guts for these sorts of tactics). Otherwise, as Kenneth alludes to above, it does not get done.
May '10
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
Has this been challenged in terms of the Constitution? Just asking...
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
I like the moral argument against imposing intergenerational burdens without any corresponding benefit. However, I agree that this only works in the context of a Reaganesque pro-growth, pro-opportunity message. So a second leg is the point that the enormous tax rates these deficits will place on our children will choke off their opportunity to succeed. The third leg, undeveloped by today's Republicans, is arguing in favor of specific pro-growth policies today. Right now. We have to avoid the cut-spending-while-treading-water trap being laid by the Democrats. Austerity has to be accompanied by renewed economic growth for us to get out of this mess.
Jan '11
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
I'm not sure I agree, George.
The pro-growth argument you are making sounds like the one the supply-siders made. Laffer and his friends said growth of the economy would generate more revenue, thereby allowing everybody to have what they wanted - a good economy and the social democratic programs of the New Deal and the Great Society.
They were right about both, at least temporarily.
But what if what the Democrats want is poison?
To me the trap being laid by Democrats is getting conservatives and Republicans to accept that their utopian, sure-to-fail, Madoffian programs should be funded. Once we agree to that, the rest is commentary.
But we can't merely say that too much sugar will kill you, even though it will. We have to frame the debate in the light of the real benefits that will flow from doing without and being socially fit. We have to sell the sizzle and the steak.
America will be stronger with a smaller government. I challenge you to craft a list of the positive things that will flow from reducing Washington's scope, the changes that will appeal to ordinary Americans sitting around their kitchen tables.
Jan '11
Re: Return of the Evil Budget Slashing Republican
Mark Steyn on the Ricochet podcast.
“It’s not about finding a way to make this stuff affordable; it’s about ending it.”