Showing posts with label budget reconciliation process. Show all posts
Showing posts with label budget reconciliation process. Show all posts

Friday, March 1, 2013

Top Ten Sequester Lies

Liberty.com: By now you’ve probably heard more than you care to about this looming “sequester” and chances are good that you’ve been fed lies, cleverly disguised as fear mongering clichés, courtesy of liberals.

Does the following sound familiar? The budget sequester Obama opposed will hurt the economy, arbitrarily cut $85 billion in spending, and put hundreds of thousands of federal employees out of work; yet Republicans refuse to compromise. There are nine lies right there. Let’s break them down for the low-information voter:

  1. The sequester will hurt the economy. Spending cuts don’t hurt the economy; they show investors and employers that we’re trying to resolve our debt crisis. They also pave the way for tax cuts, which—from JFK to Reagan to Clinton to Bush—have stimulated the economy.
  2. Obama opposed the sequester. Obama swore to veto attempts to repeal the sequester his party stuck into the Budget Control Act. Democrats bet that in the sequester game of chicken, Republicans would flinch, because they wouldn’t be able to stomach defense cuts. Democrats bet wrong.
  3. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees will lose their jobs. Whatever time these workers spend off the job, they will most likely be paid for via furlough appeals or unemployment benefits. No furloughs even begin until April, which gives negotiators a month to work things out.
  4. Fires won’t be put out, crime won’t be stopped, air traffic will halt, etc. All the essential functions of government will continue during a sequester. Most agencies have ballooned since Obama took office; a return to 2009 levels isn’t going to send them into a tailspin.
  5. The cuts are arbitrary. The bipartisan supercommittee hashed out the cuts in the sequester, half each from domestic and military spending. Yet propagandists make it sound as though lawmakers opened the federal registry and randomly targeted hapless employees to fire.
  6. Republicans won’t compromise. Republicans didn’t consider the sequester ideal, but realized it might be the only way to force Democrats to cut spending. Republicans are willing to take a haircut on defense if Democrats will trim a whisker off the leviathan entitlement state.
  7. There will be large budget cuts. The sequester will yield cuts of $85 billion—a whopping three percent of the projected $3.6 trillion 2013 spending (also known as a “budget” before Democrats came to power). The Washington Post admitted, “[S]ome White House allies worry the slow-moving sequester may fail to live up to the hype.”
  8. The sequester will cut $85 billion out of the 2013 budget. Actually, it will cut only $44 billion. The $85 billion figure references the cut in “spending authority,” the other half of which Congress will merely postpone indefinitely until voters have forgotten about it.
  9. The sequester will cut spending. Actually, the sequester will merely slow spending increases. Even with the sequester, the 2013 budget will be larger than in 2012. The sequester will no more cut spending than shooting a bullet through shrubbery will reverse its course.
  10. Republicans can win the sequester fight. Republicans can win the sequester fight… only if they stand up and make the above points—in easy-to-digest language, with concrete examples, refutations of fear-mongering quotes, and relentless attacks on Obama for lying to Americans and treating them like children.

Related:

They Eat Their Own

Senate GOP ponders ceding power to President Obama

Sequestration: Chicken Little Not Only Fears Armageddon, He Prays For It

Senate GOP ponders ceding power to President Obama

Obama Gets Cold Feet: On Second Thought, You Might Not Notice the Sequester

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Send This Letter to Your Congressman and Senator: 9,000,000,000,000 Ways to Balance the Budget

This is a letter that Dr. Coburn sent to all of his Senate colleagues on the 27th:

July 27, 2011

9,000,000,000,000
Ways to Balance the Budget

Dear Colleague,

Nearly everyone in Washington agrees we must reduce the deficit, but few offer any specifics as to how to do it. Last week, I released a report, BACK IN BLACK, outlining thousands of detailed budget options within every federal department and nearly every major program that, if taken together, would result in savings of more than $9 trillion over the next decade.

I do not expect anyone to agree with everything recommended in this report, but I expect everyone will find things with which they agree. With negotiations stalemated, I wanted to bring your attention to some very simple commonsense ideas I believe most of us—and most Americans—regardless of party or ideology could support that would save at least $355 billion.

End Unemployment Payments to Millionaires
Savings: $186 million over ten years
Nearly 3,000 households with incomes of $1 million or more were paid a total of $18.6 million in unemployment insurance benefits in 2008. Those earning $1 million a year do not need and should not qualify for unemployment compensation.

Stop Payments to Dead People
Savings: Over $1 billion over ten years.
Washington sent over $1 billion to more than 250,000 deceased individuals over the past decade. The federal government paid for dead people’s prescriptions and wheelchairs, subsidized their farms, helped pay their rent, and even chipped in for their heating and air conditioning bills. Some of these payments were fraud, some were incompetence, and some were intentionally required by law. Congress should end payments to the dead and federal agencies should ensure beneficiaries and participants of government payments are, in fact, alive.

Eliminate Duplication
Savings: At least $50 billion over ten years
In March, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report examining just 34 missions of the federal government and identified hundreds of duplicative and overlapping programs costing more than $215 billion a year. These included 47 separate job training programs, 88 economic development programs, 82 teacher quality programs, and 56 financial literacy programs. “Reducing or eliminating duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially save billions of taxpayer dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and effective services,” GAO concluded. Another independent study identified at least 180 economic development programs within more than a dozen different agencies costing taxpayers about $17.9 billion annually. Duplication within the federal bureaucracy should be consolidated.

Eliminate Sweet Heart Deals for Government Contractors
Savings: At least $2 billion over ten years
The federal government pays over $500 billion annually to contractors. In 2009, $170 billion worth of contracts were awarded without competition. Competitive bidding for government contracts helps ensure the highest-quality services for the lowest cost, while no-bid contracts waste billions of dollars with little apparent benefit to anyone other than contractors. No bid contracts should be eliminated.

Collect Unpaid Taxes Owed by Federal Employees
Savings: $1 billion over ten years
Nearly 100,000 civilian federal employees were delinquent on their federal income taxes in 2008. These federal employees owe a total of $962 million in unpaid federal income taxes. The IRS should collect these overdue taxes.

Reduce Congress’ Spending on Itself
Savings: $3.82 billion over ten years
Since 2001, Congress has boosted its own budget by 55 percent. At the same time, the average American wage increased by only 23 percent. In real dollars, the budget of the House and Senate has grown by more than $1 billion over the last decade. Congress must lead by example and do more with less. Congress’ spending on itself should be reduced by at least 15 percent.

Stop Overpaying Drug Companies
Savings: $480 million over ten years
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) overpays pharmaceutical companies nearly a million dollars a week. According to the Government Accountability Office, drug companies were overpaid $3.9 million in a single month! HRSA should be required to routinely monitor prices to ensure taxpayers are not being overcharged and take immediate corrective action to recoup any excess payments.

Reduce Unnecessary Government Printing
Savings: $4.9 billion over ten years
Federal agencies – excluding the Department of Defense – spend nearly $1.3 billion a year on routine office printing. A third of this printing is unnecessary, according to an independent analysis. Agencies should put an end to this wasteful habit and administrative accounts of each department should be reduced accordingly.

Eliminate Unnecessary Printing of Congressional Documents
Savings: $312.2 million
In the digital age, printed copies of Congressional reports and other documents are as likely to grace a landfill as a bookshelf. In 2010, nearly $100 million was allocated for Congressional Printing and Binding account. A representative of the Government Printing Office (GPO) recently testified, “70 percent of the GPO’s funds are used to digitize legislation, schedules and other federal records, while 30 percent is used to print hard copies.” Reducing the Congressional Printing account by 30 percent would put an end to the wasteful practice of printing and distributing congressional documents that are almost immediately thrown away. The documents would still be available online and users could decide whether or not to print hard copies.

Get Rid of Unneeded Federal Properties
Savings: $15 billion over ten years
The federal government has over 63,000 buildings that are underutilized and not utilized at all. This number has increased by more than 12,000 from only two years ago. It costs over $1.2 billion every year to operate these properties. The federal government should dispose of all excess properties within five years. According to the Obama Administration, at least $15 billion could be saved if the federal government gets rid of its unneeded properties.

End Subsidy for Ethanol Blending
Savings: $2 billion one time savings
Ethanol producers reap the benefits of a vast array of government assistance, including tax credits, grants, loans, loan guarantees, federally-directed markets, and a federal minimum usage mandate. The Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit provides a 45-cent-per-gallon federal tax credit to producers who blend ethanol with gasoline. Ethanol-blended fuel is nearly a third less efficient than gasoline, has contributed to the increased price of corn, and can cause engine damage. Ethanol subsidies are outdated, duplicative, and have failed to meet the intended goals of greater energy independence with a cleaner fuel alternative. The ethanol tax credit should be eliminated immediately.

Reduce the Number of Limousines Owned by the Government
Savings: $115.5 million over ten years
In the past two years, the federal government’s limousine fleet has grown by 73 percent. The federal government had 238 limos in 2008 and that number reached 412 last year. The number of limos owned by the federal government should be reduced to its previous level.

Reduce Federal Vehicle Fleet
Savings: $5.6 billion over ten years
Federal agencies own or lease over 662,000 cars, vans, sport-utility vehicles, trucks, buses and other vehicles. Since 2006, the federal vehicle fleet has grown by five percent and the cost of maintaining and servicing those vehicles has grown over 25 percent, to $4.6 billion. These vehicles consume about a million gallons of fuel per day. The General Services Administration will purchase more than 100 more vehicles this year. Instead, the number of vehicles in the federal fleet should be reduced by at least 20 percent.

Reduce Junkets and Unnecessary Travel
Savings: $43.3 billion over ten years
The federal government spends $15 billion on travel every year. All travel that is not mission-critical should be ended.

Reduce Advertising by the Federal Government
Savings: $5.6 billion over ten years
The federal government spent almost $1 billion on advertising last year. While some advertising may be needed, much of it is wasteful and unnecessary and this amount should be cut in half.

Limit the Amount Spent to Host Government Conferences
Savings: $1 billion over ten years
The federal government spent at least $2 billion on conferences between 2000 and 2006. Some conferences may provide important venues for exchanging ideas or providing training. Others appear to be little more than government funded vacations at beachside resorts and other exotic destinations. Traveling to meetings and hosting conferences are, in large part, no longer necessary with the availability of teleconferencing. Total spending on conferences should not exceed $100 million annually and conferences should only be held when other options are not feasible.

Use Better Measure of Inflation to Determine Increases in Benefit Payments
Savings: Approximately $180 billion over ten years
Many government benefits are automatically increased for inflation every year, based on the consumer price index (CPI). For more than 15 years, many budget experts have agreed the current CPI mechanism outpaces actual inflationary growth, causing the cost of government programs to rise rapidly. The Bureau of Labor Statistics developed a more accurate measure of inflation, known as Chained CPI, which over the last ten years has grown at a slightly slower rate than the current measure for CPI. Congress should adopt the recommendation of the President’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform to transition to Chained-CPI government wide to ensure this automatic spending increase is as accurate as possible to avoid uncontrolled automatic spending increases in federal programs.

MovieEliminate Hollywood Liaisons
Savings: $34.4 million over ten years
Many federal agencies have offices and programs to assist Hollywood movie producers and television execs, often with the goal of ensuring a positive portrayal of the federal government. The agencies have at least 14 employees costing $1.2 million. These should be eliminated.

Stop Purchasing Excess Land
Savings: $4.1 billion over ten years
The federal government has spent more than $430 million to purchase additional land since the start of the recent recession and more than $2.3 billion over the past decade. At the same time, the Department of the Interior maintenance backlog on public lands has surged to as high as $19.9 billion, resulting in serious risk to visitors and deteriorating conditions of important national treasures. The National Mall, for example, has been so neglected it has been called a national disgrace. Until the federal government can afford to take care of the land it already owns, it should be prohibited from purchasing additional land.

End Payments for Coal Cleanup When Projects Have Been Certified as Being Completed
Savings: $1.23 billion over ten years
The federal government continues to send funds intended for the cleanup up abandoned coal mines to several states and tribes that have already been certified as completing their work. The funds are unrestricted and have essentially become slush funds. These dollars should be used only for their intended purpose and directed to states with abandoned sites, with excess amounts should be returned.

Suspend the Automatic Pay Raise for Members of Congress
Savings: $6 million over three years
Members of Congress typically receive an automatic pay raise every year. Congress voted to freeze the salary of its member for the past two years at $174,000. The pay for members of Congress should be frozen for at least three more years.

Get the Department of Defense Out of Education and the Grocery Store Business
Savings: $19 billion over ten years
The Department of Defense currently operates hundreds of grocery stores and dozens of elementary schools in the United States. These grocery stores are in the same communities that have Wal-Mart, Costco, Safeway, and other choices for military personnel. Instead of paying our soldiers more money and allowing them to choose where to shop, we subsidize thousands of federal employees to work in grocery stores around the country. Similarly, the Department of Defense employs thousands of teachers in a unique school district called the Department of Defense Education Activity. Under the Pentagon’s management, taxpayers are spending more than $50,000 per student enrolled in these schools. The Pentagon should shut down its education bureaucracy, send much of this money to bolster local public schools, and return the rest for debt reduction.

Terminate HHS’s Community Economic Development Program
Savings: $38 million over ten years.
The mission of the Community Economic Development program (CED) duplicates 180 other government development programs, has a very low success rate, and does not fit within the mission or expertise of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). According to HHS’s most recent report to the Congress, only one out of five funded projects within the CED program were successful. Due to its lack of success, duplicative nature, and inappropriate placement within HHS, CED should be eliminated.

End Federal Subsidies to Wealthy Doctors and Hospitals for Health Information Technology
Savings: $15.6 billion over ten years.
The federal government mandates and subsidizes the use health information technology (IT) for doctors and hospitals, despite scant evidence doing so will lower costs. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the purchase of health IT by doctors and hospitals.

Stop Medicare Payments for Uncovered Services
Savings: $1.97 billion over ten years.
Medicare currently only pays for medically necessary chiropractic services, but a HHS Inspector General report found the program improperly spent $178 million on chiropractic services in 2006. Implementing and enforcing current policies, along with more careful reviews of documentation, could save taxpayers nearly $2 billion over a decade.
This list is just a handful of the savings options contained within BACK IN BLACK. I would encourage you to review the thousands of other recommendations. I would also be interested in hearing other debt reduction ideas you might have.

Sincerely,
Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
U.S. Senator

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

The Irony of “reconciliation”

POSTED AT 9:30 AM ON AUGUST 19, 2009 BY ED MORRISSEY

The New York Times offers a strong hint that Democrats in the Senate will use the ‘budget reconciliation process' as a cover to move ObamaCare through the chamber to avoid a filibuster. The Democrats will “go it alone,” the headline reads, although the actual report makes the how of that rather ambiguous. And well it should, since the Democrats know — or should know — that to try reconciliation would be an invitation to a war that would bring Congress to a screeching halt:

Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority’s cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks.

Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans’ purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month’s Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair.

Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, said the heated opposition was evidence that Republicans had made a political calculation to draw a line against any health care changes, the latest in a string of major administration proposals that Republicans have opposed. …

The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier. The party must still reconcile the views of moderate and conservative Democrats worried about the cost and scope of the legislation with those of more liberal lawmakers determined to win a government-run insurance option to compete with private insurers.

In fact, the article never mentions the word “reconciliation,” the process by which the Senate approves a ‘budget’ for the federal government. Under the rules of reconciliation, no cloture vote is needed, as the chamber has a Constitutional duty to produce a budget. Some Democrats have threatened this for months, notably Chuck Schumer, but the plan has a couple of big flaws. First, the Democrats have to convince the Senate parliamentarian, ostensibly non-partisan, to agree that the bill is primarily budgetary. No one in their right mind could honestly make that judgment about massive regulation of 15% of the American economy. They’re likely to get denied before they even get started.

However, if they do manage to get past that obstacle, the Republicans can shut down the Senate for the next year. Those unfamiliar with the parliamentary procedure may not realize that a great many steps get skipped by unanimous consent. Bill-reading is just one example. One Senator can force each and every bill to be read aloud at every appearance it makes on the Senate floor, including when they are sent to committee. For ObamaCare and cap-and-trade, one bill reading could take a week, keeping the Senate floor locked off from any other business.

Traditionally, Senators give each other the courtesy of unanimous consent to allow business to proceed at a normal pace. If the Democrats try to force ObamaCare through reconciliation, that unanimous consent will dissipate faster than an Obama expiration date. It won’t take the entire Republican caucus to gum up the works, either; it only takes a single objection to end unanimous consent, and the GOP has more than a couple of conservative firebrands who will gladly toss sand in the gears to stop Harry Reid from steamrolling them.

Democrats might think that this will gain them sympathy with the public, but not if they’re breaking rules to pass an increasingly unpopular and intrusive piece of legislation. It will create a firestorm of anger even worse than what we’ve seen in the townhalls thus far. They would be signing their way to minority status, especially in the House. They can kiss the rest of their agenda goodbye for the rest of this session, too, including cap-and-trade. Even budgeting will prove very difficult.

There’s a reason the Times didn’t mention reconciliation. It’s a bluff. Not even Harry Reid is this foolish… or is He???

Source: HotAir

Posted: Daily Thought Pad