Republican Budget, Once Again, Gives Democrats Everything

 

Despite campaign promises to return to “regular order” (i.e., submit each Federal Department’s budget as a separate {fiscally responsible} bill), the Republican majority has once again crammed everything into a single, bloated omnibus spending bill. And like every other “Bipartisan Budget Deal,” it represents an utter capitulation to Democrats on spending greased by extra pork for the Republican Donor Class. Here are the key features of its 2,200+ pages.

  • Record levels of spending across all departments. Conservatives are supposed to be happy because it increases military spending. Are you happy enough that the military gets another $60 billion that you don’t care about the other spending and bloat?
  • Chuck Schumer’s NY Transit pork project gets funded, albeit indirectly, Donald Trump’s border wall does not. There is a piddling $1.6 Billion for Border Security, which is mostly limited to repairs to existing fencing and ineffective pedestrian obstacles. Only 33 miles of the border will get new fencing.
  • Also, the H2-B Visa American-Worker-substitution-program is vastly expanded (page 1,760 of the bill).
  • No budget cuts to the EPA. Big increases at the Department of Energy for “Clean Energy Research.”
  • Sanctuary Cities are fully-funded.
  • Planned Parenthood is fully funded.
  • No cuts to Obamacare. A $70 billion Bipartisan Obamacare bailout will be voted on separately.

The national debt has expanded another trillion dollars since Trump was elected. About the only hope we have left is that government growth is eventually canceled out by complete fiscal bankruptcy. So far, though, debt does not seem to matter. Leviathan feeds and grows.

This bill sucks as much as any spending bill has ever sucked. Republicans only get away with this because so few people pay attention. While Democrats fight every single day for evermore spending, the Republican party derides fiscal conservatives as “whacko-birds,” concedes everything, and then claims they had no choice but to “compromise.” And their compromises are invariable 95% sell-out to Democrats, 5% lip-service to conservative constituencies.

Is there any point to the Republican Party beyond slowing the erosion of gun rights?

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 118 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Spin (View Comment):
    They don’t even try, do they?

    Hey … that implies work.   If they wanted to work they’d never have run for office!

    • #31
  2. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Spin (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Terry Mott (View Comment):
    This is how you get more Trump.

    Not Trump, per se, but the repeated betrayal of conservatives by the beltway GOP is probably the main reason why an outsider such as Trump had a shot at the nomination. The TEA Party should have been a wake-up call, but it was derided and marginalized by the powers-that-were.

    Trump isn’t the problem, he’s a symptom. THIS is the problem.

    When the GOP finally fragments (as seems more likely by the day), Trump will receive most of the blame. That blame will be misplaced.

    Why should conservatives continue to work to support a party that proves time and again that, when the rubber meets the road, they’re little more than Democrat-lite with a smattering of conservative rhetoric on top?

    I understand, but can’t go along. I’m not inclined to give Trump a pass on this. He’s in the mix and there were “negotiations.” He signs it, he owns it too.

    That seems fair. I would counter to an extent, that Trump should not matter at least not at that point. Trump has no input into the workings of Congress. There is not an Ominbus bill because Trump demanded this. Republicans in Congress promised a return to Regular Order and they lied. Republicans in Congress promised to be more responsible with Public Funds and to reduce deficits, they lied.

    Congress should put forward what they want to do. Then work with the President to get his signature. These guys have run for years on taxes, spending and more recently repealing the ACA. They promised they would do stuff if they had the House, the Senate and the White House. They have it, but they have no idea what to do with it , likely because they were never serious.

    So sure Trump deserves some of the blame if he was negotiating the current deal and signs it. Congress could have made the President much less relevant to this discussion.

    But…Trump was elected to do things differently. If he signs this, then he’s party to it. As it should be.

    Listen I agree, I wish Trump would not sign this pile. But… every Republican in Congress ran on doing thins different. They promised regular order, fiscal responsibility, gutting the ACA and many of them defunding planed parenthood (this one is the weakest promise/ not as many members) They write the stupid bills, they should have done better.

    So what does this show us? People, possibly correctly, have commented that Trump has no fixed ideology. Now we know the whole Republican Party (pro-trump and anti-trump) doesn’t either.

    • #32
  3. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: Despite campaign promises to return to “regular order,” (i.e. submit each Federal Department’s budget as a separate {fiscally responsible} bill), the Republican majority has once again crammed everything into a single, bloated omnibus spending bill.

    Why, why, why, why, why is it so [redacted] difficult for Congress to do their jobs the way they are supposed to?

    Not enough opportunity for graft.

    • #33
  4. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: Despite campaign promises to return to “regular order,” (i.e. submit each Federal Department’s budget as a separate {fiscally responsible} bill), the Republican majority has once again crammed everything into a single, bloated omnibus spending bill.

    Why, why, why, why, why is it so [redacted] difficult for Congress to do their jobs the way they are supposed to?

    Why put in the work when we will just keep voting for the same idiots. They don’t see a political risk to last second omnibus bills that can include literally anything.

    • #34
  5. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Jager (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: Despite campaign promises to return to “regular order,” (i.e. submit each Federal Department’s budget as a separate {fiscally responsible} bill), the Republican majority has once again crammed everything into a single, bloated omnibus spending bill.

    Why, why, why, why, WHY is it so [redacted] difficult for Congress to do their jobs the way they are supposed to?

    Why put in the work when we will just keep voting for the same idiots. They don’t see a political risk to last second omnibus bills that can include literally anything.

    Yes, it’s doubly frustrating when there have been recent political movements and at least a degree of attention paid to spending issues.   And still nothing.

    I feel disloyal in a sense saying this, but if it’s really “butter” to have “guns,” I’d say neither.  The purse is the only way to slow government growth.

     

    • #35
  6. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    The congressional GOP leadership remains pathetic.  As to Trump, it was clear during the campaign that doing something on spending was not a priority for him.  What’s going on should be no surprise.  There is no meaningful constituency in Congress in either part or in the Executive for doing anything about spending.

    • #36
  7. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    What bothers me even more is hearing Ryan and the other Republicans thumping their chest about what a great victory this is. It isn’t. I’d respect them more if they just admitted that this budget sucks on ice.

    • #37
  8. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: Despite campaign promises to return to “regular order,” (i.e. submit each Federal Department’s budget as a separate {fiscally responsible} bill), the Republican majority has once again crammed everything into a single, bloated omnibus spending bill.

    Why, why, why, why, why is it so [redacted] difficult for Congress to do their jobs the way they are supposed to?

    It may be that there is a disconnect between what they think is their job and what we think is their job….

    • #38
  9. RyanFalcone Member
    RyanFalcone
    @RyanFalcone

    Jager (View Comment):

    RyanFalcone (View Comment):
    Only 51 Republican Senators and a half-dozen or so of those are not conservative. I’m not sure what people expect from this process. The only way it changes is if we get over 60 in the Senate in November and all of them are able to be herded into the conservative pen when votes are cast. You don’t need 60 votes to continue the status quo. You need 60 to stop it. I don’t like it either but crying about it and calling the entire lot of the republican party names is counter productive.

    You have a point about the problems with changing the Status Quo. My read of this is that this bill does change the Status Quo. However rather than moving in a more fiscally conservative direction it spends more money.

    Control of the House and the Senate, by whatever margins, is sufficient to live up to one big Republican Promise. The return to regular order. Separate spending bills that go through committee. We were promised an end to this last second omnibus stuff. This is solely the fault of Republicans in Congress. This has nothing to do with Trump or the Democrats. Republicans run the Congress they could have run the budget properly but chose this path.

    The status quo is to capitulate to the Dems. That has been the MO for over 70 years. Republicans spend as much as the Dems do. That has been the case since after WWII. Recently, conservatives have been retaking ground in the Republican party as the left has begun taking us down the slippery slope of utter idiocy as the diminishing returns of 90 years of almost unchecked victory politically and socially have made it painfully clear to some conservatives that we are at the end of the plank.

    This is obviously a discouraging loss. However, we are probably 12-13 Senate seats from being able to win. There are 10 seats available to Republicans if we win the states in November 2018 that we won in 2016. I know it won’t happen but we were actually close. Its a bitter pill. Just remember that the Democrats did this not the Republicans. Sure, there is an old guard running things that is to weak and stupid to effectively fight but I continue to believe that we are merely 6-7 Senate seats away from having an effective mass of conservatives in place to shove out walking corpses like McCain, Collins, Murkowski and Flake and put enough pressure on some of the weaklings to get them on board. I don’t think that will lead to immediate victory but it will check the advance of progressive doom. We just aren’t there yet sadly.

    • #39
  10. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Victor Tango Kilo: And their compromises are invariable 95% sell-out to Democrats, 5% lip-service to conservative constituencies.

    We have to get the right people to enter the primaries and beat the incumbants.  We had a good shot against Lindsey Grahamesty last time, but the field was too crowded.

    Term limits come to mind, and I’d even consider a “one and done” at this point.

    • #40
  11. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    RyanFalcone (View Comment):
    Only 51 Republican Senators and a half-dozen or so of those are not conservative. I’m not sure what people expect from this process. The only way it changes is if we get over 60 in the Senate in November and all of them are able to be herded into the conservative pen when votes are cast. You don’t need 60 votes to continue the status quo. You need 60 to stop it. I don’t like it either but crying about it and calling the entire lot of the republican party names is counter productive.

    Their self-made rules, their fault. Entirely.

    • #41
  12. Chuckles Thatcher
    Chuckles
    @Chuckles

    Fritz (View Comment):
    her mini-me Maria Cantwell (D-Tech$)

    In South Texas Cantwell is a mattress.

    • #42
  13. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    The congressional GOP leadership remains pathetic. As to Trump, it was clear during the campaign that doing something on spending was not a priority for him. What’s going on should be no surprise. There is no meaningful constituency in Congress in either part or in the Executive for doing anything about spending.

    Well, many of us have been nice to Trump here over his cabinet appointments and deregulatory initiatives.  Budget requests come through the agencies, and, if regulation is down, one might expect spending on enforcement and creating the regs to be down.  Apparently not, which could indicate that the same old same old practice of padding budgets so your agency doesn’t lose any money is alive and well.

     

    • #43
  14. Chuckles Thatcher
    Chuckles
    @Chuckles

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):
    What bothers me even more is hearing Ryan and the other Republicans thumping their chest about what a great victory this is. It isn’t. I’d respect them more if they just admitted that this budget sucks on ice.

    Do you think he believes what he is saying?  I don’t.

    One of the unalienable traits of liars is that they lie.  Liars lie.

    (How do you know when a politician’s lying? His lips are moving.)

    • #44
  15. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    RyanFalcone (View Comment):
    Only 51 Republican Senators and a half-dozen or so of those are not conservative. I’m not sure what people expect from this process. The only way it changes is if we get over 60 in the Senate in November and all of them are able to be herded into the conservative pen when votes are cast. You don’t need 60 votes to continue the status quo. You need 60 to stop it. I don’t like it either but crying about it and calling the entire lot of the republican party names is counter productive.

    I’m sorry Ryan, I tried to let this go, but I have to call B.S.  This is just the same old tired excuse.

    1990’s – “We can’t do anything because we only control the House.”

    2001 – “We can’t do anything because we only control the House and the Presidency.  We need the Senate, too.”

    2003 – “Now we have the Senate, but still can’t do anything because we don’t have a super-majority in the Senate.”

    2007 – “Oops – lost the House and Senate.  Nothing we can do.”

    2009 – “Lost everything. Nothing we can do.”

    2010 – “Elect us!!! We’ll put a stop to all this leftism!!!”

    2011 – “TEA Partiers are hobbits who just don’t understand how things are done around here.  We can’t do anything because Obama would just veto it.”

    2016 – “Regular order! Regular order! Regular order!  Re-elect us and get Regular Order! And Obamacare repeal!”

    2017 – “Still can’t do anything because we don’t have a super-majority in the Senate.”

    Meanwhile, through all that, the government just kept growing and the left kept getting their agenda enacted.  Sometimes not as fast as they wanted, and they had a setback or two, but they kept getting part of a loaf, even when completely “out of power.”

    Why do leftists get more of their agenda passed without Democrats having even a simple majority in either chamber, but conservatives require a super-majority of not only Republicans, but conservative republicans?  I suspect it’s because they continually raise a stink and make demands rather than just shrugging, making excuses and saying, “nothing we can do.”

    To hell with being reasonable.

    • #45
  16. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    • #46
  17. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Yep.  Nice and bipartisan. Meaning of course, leftists get something while we conservatives get squat and are told to be grateful that the leftists didn’t get more.

    • #47
  18. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Terry Mott (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Yep. Nice and bipartisan. Meaning of course, leftists get something while we conservatives get squat and are told to be grateful that the leftists didn’t get more.

    Interesting.  In both parties you had right around 60% voting for it. 

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    I feel disloyal in a sense saying this, but if it’s really “butter” to have “guns,” I’d say neither. The purse is the only way to slow government growth.

    If anyone thinks your statement is disloyal, I’m about to be branded a traitor.  I not only wouldn’t feel bad if the military budget isn’t increased, I’d prefer to see it cut.  We spend as much on the military as about the next 8 countries combined.  Would we really be trampled by invaders if we only spent as much as the next 6 countries combined? 

    • #48
  19. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Terry Mott (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Yep. Nice and bipartisan. Meaning of course, leftists get something while we conservatives get squat and are told to be grateful that the leftists didn’t get more.

    Interesting. In both parties you had right around 60% voting for it.

    The only solace that I could find was that, with the likes of Schiff and Jackson Lee voting against, there must be something positive in there.

     

    • #49
  20. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Terry Mott (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Yep. Nice and bipartisan. Meaning of course, leftists get something while we conservatives get squat and are told to be grateful that the leftists didn’t get more.

    Interesting. In both parties you had right around 60% voting for it.

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    I feel disloyal in a sense saying this, but if it’s really “butter” to have “guns,” I’d say neither. The purse is the only way to slow government growth.

    If anyone thinks your statement is disloyal, I’m about to be branded a traitor. I not only wouldn’t feel bad if the military budget isn’t increased, I’d prefer to see it cut. We spend as much on the military as about the next 8 countries combined. Would we really be trampled by invaders if we only spent as much as the next 6 countries combined?

    Hear, hear!

    I have to wonder, too, about the party breakdown in the recipients of the added defense spending.  Not the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines — the workers, managers, executives, and lobbyists at the various defense contractors.  I don’t know, but suspect that they skew hard to the Democrats.  If I’m right, even that so-called bone to conservatism is just another way to reward the left.

    • #50
  21. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    (Is my cynicism showing?)

    • #51
  22. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Oh yay, Rick Larson voted for it…

    • #52
  23. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    Terry Mott (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Terry Mott (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Yep. Nice and bipartisan. Meaning of course, leftists get something while we conservatives get squat and are told to be grateful that the leftists didn’t get more.

    Interesting. In both parties you had right around 60% voting for it.

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    I feel disloyal in a sense saying this, but if it’s really “butter” to have “guns,” I’d say neither. The purse is the only way to slow government growth.

    If anyone thinks your statement is disloyal, I’m about to be branded a traitor. I not only wouldn’t feel bad if the military budget isn’t increased, I’d prefer to see it cut. We spend as much on the military as about the next 8 countries combined. Would we really be trampled by invaders if we only spent as much as the next 6 countries combined?

    Hear, hear!

    I have to wonder, too, about the party breakdown in the recipients of the added defense spending. Not the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines — the workers, managers, executives, and lobbyists at the various defense contractors. I don’t know, but suspect that they skew hard to the Democrats. If I’m right, even that so-called bone to conservatism is just another way to reward the left.

    Everyone has their sacred cow.  Mine is my money.  

    • #53
  24. C. U. Douglas Thatcher
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Spin (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Oh yay, Rick Larson voted for it…

    Well, my Congresswoman voted against it, and one of our Senators (Mike Lee) has pledged to vote against it.

    • #54
  25. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Noem and Blackburn, two of my favorite female Congresspersons, voted against. Unfortunately I don’t live anywhere near either one of them, and Comstcock voted for it.

    • #55
  26. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    RyanFalcone (View Comment):

    Only 51 Republican Senators and a half-dozen or so of those are not conservative. I’m not sure what people expect from this process. The only way it changes is if we get over 60 in the Senate in November and all of them are able to be herded into the conservative pen when votes are cast. You don’t need 60 votes to continue the status quo. You need 60 to stop it. I don’t like it either but crying about it and calling the entire lot of the republican party names is counter productive.

    As far as I can tell, the more Republicans there are in Congress, the worse they behave.

    • #56
  27. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Noem and Blackburn, two of my favorite female Congresspersons, voted against. Unfortunately I don’t live anywhere near either one of them, and Comstock voted for it.

    • #57
  28. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    I’m glad to see that my representative (Justin Amash) voted NO.  

    • #58
  29. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Noem and Blackburn, two of my favorite females in Congress, voted against. Unfortunately I don’t live anywhere near either one of them, and Comstock voted for it.

    • #59
  30. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    C. U. Douglas (View Comment):

    Spin (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Here’s the final Roll Call vote.

    Oh yay, Rick Larson voted for it…

    Well, my Congresswoman voted against it, and one of our Senators (Mike Lee) has pledged to vote against it.

    I hadn’t even bothered to check Sam Johnson.  Knowing him, all you have to do is claim an increase in defense spending and he’s all in.

    Just checked.  Yep.  He’s all in.

    Honestly, I think someone could propose a bill to round up all the Christians and gun owners into camps, with additional military funding to accomplish the task, and good old Sam would proudly vote for it and claim he’s “supporting the troops.”

    (oops – dripped a little cynicism on my shirt.  Excuse me while I go change…)

     

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.