Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) 92% explained his principled opposition to the Ryan-Murray budget deal on CNBC’s Kudlow Report Wednesday night. As we have explained, there are myriad reasons to oppose the deal. It’s terrible policy, and contrary to the remarks of Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) and other supporters of the deal, it doesn’t mean more deficit reduction — it means more spending.
Rep. Huelskamp provided a clear conservative perspective both on the budget itself and on the dynamics between various Republican lawmakers.
It will mean more revenue from Americans to Washington. There are fee and tax increases included in there. You can call it whatever you want — it’s more revenue going to Washington’s coffers for more spending.
Conservatives now have to fight to maintain even the small but effective sequester cuts, which Republicans have long championed as a victory.
Earlier in the segment, Larry Kudlow directly quoted the Heritage Action statement on the budget deal:
Over the next few days, lawmakers will have to explain to their constituents, many of whom are our members, what they’ve achieved by increasing spending, increasing taxes and offering up another round of promises waiting to be broken. That will be a really tough sell back home.
The Ryan-Murray budget is not a principled approach to budgeting. The spend-now-cut-later mentality is totally flawed. And if we stay on this path, it could mean that in 2023 — when our debt reaches $25.228 trillion — we’ll be looking back nostalgically on our (relatively smaller) $17 trillion debt, wondering what went wrong.
Increases spending in the short term
The deal increases spending in the next two years by $63 billion above current law. Current law allows for discretionary spending to be $967 billion in FY14 and $995 billion in FY15. This bill raises that by $45 billion in FY14 (to $1.012 trillion) and $18 billion in FY15 ($1.014 trillion).
Increases deficits in the short term
While the agreement increases spending $45 billion in the first year and $18 billion in the second year, it only contains $6.5 billion worth of deficit-reducing offsets during those two years ($3.1 billion in FY14 and $3.4 billion in FY15). Because the policies on the front end are the most predictable and least likely to be overturned, these are the years that really matter. Unfortunately, only 10% of the new spending in these early years is offset in real time.
The savings are severely back loaded
While the agreement purports to produce $23 billion in deficit reduction in the first ten years, it does so by relying heavily on savings in 2022 and 2023, a full 9 and 10 years into the budget window. In fact, the bill’s savings do not fully catch up with its front loaded spending increases until 2023. During this time, we will have had one, possibly two more presidents, and we will have had four different elected congresses with little-to-no ownership of this current deal. The cuts in this bill are so back loaded that a full 55 percent of the cuts ($47 billion out of $85 billion) occur in just the last two years.
The back loaded savings are highly dubious
“It looks like a hold-your-nose, vote-yes kind of vote for me. There are other things I don’t like, but the trade-off is, we do for the first time bite into sequestration,” said Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA) 10%.
This remark gets to the heart of the budget agreement reached by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) N/A% and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) 7%. Some lawmakers have been eager to undo sequestration, an imperfect but effective tool at cutting spending, and this budget deal is their opportunity.
The spend-now-cut-later budget deal negotiated by House Budget Chair Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senate Budget Chair Patty Murray (D-WA) will be voted on in the House this week.
While increasing spending in the budget by tens of billions of dollars might be acceptable to the Washington establishment, conservatives will not stand for it. Now is the time to call your Representative to oppose the Ryan-Murray budget deal.
>> Call your Representative now.
On top of raising the spending caps for 2014 and 2015, the budget deal will breath life into the already dead Obama legislative agenda, including immigration reform. The budget also includes revenue increases to pay for the increased spending.
Call Your Representative Now
House and Senate budget negotiators are nearing an agreement on a budget deal, but it may prove to be one that is not agreeable to conservatives or to the taxpayers footing the bill for out-of-control government spending.
The 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA), though imperfect, was effective in cutting discretionary spending, and a budget that breaks the caps set by it is unacceptable. Yet, there is mounting pressure from appropriators to replace part of automatic spending cuts put in place by the BCA. Meanwhile, many Democrats are seeking to reverse the sequester on their “favored domestic programs,” like transportation, housing and the ineffective Head Start program.