President Who Began 2011 Saying "No Cuts" Now Poised to Sign Largest Spending Cut Since WWII

Visited the Speaker's site to get the facts not spin we are hearing from both sides. Ended up leaving my comments after reading some of the more naive remarks I have seen yet by posters. If this is indicative of what people are learning about government in the public schools, we have a problem. This lack of understanding that it takes three separate entities, House, Senate, and President to get a bill signed into law is mind boggling to be kind. There are only two ways a President doesn't sign a bill and it becomes law:

1. The President vetoes a bill and 2/3 of the Senate and the House are required to override for the bill to become law. (Override a veto)

2. The President doesn't veto or sign the bill for ten days (not including Sunday) and it becomes law unless Congress is adjourned. If Congress has adjourned, the bill does not become law after ten days (not including Sunday) because of no action by the President. (pocket veto)

The Supreme Court also plays a role in the rare instances where a new law is challenged in the court system ending up at the Supreme Court for a final decision. A law passed by both houses of Congress and signed or pocket vetoed by the President can be overturned by the Supreme Court or even portions of the law thrown out.

Consider the above on how a bill becomes law the Government 101 tip for the day.

If Republicans only control the House, the chances of certain agenda items passing the Senate and being signed by the President are zero, zip, nada. These people going after Speaker Boehner on giving Planned Parenthood and NPR a separate vote as part of the negotiated agreement are showing how little they know about how the Government works.

The idea that the $38+B is worthless is unfathomable. It is a start that we never would have had without Democrat negligence on the FY11 budget.  How hard is it to understand if the Democrats had done their job there would be NO $38B in budget cuts and no vouchers for DC students? Also there would be no separate vote on Planning Parenthood and NPR funding that will put the Senators and House members on record if they support funding these two groups. Do some people not understand basic politics and how to play the game? It sure looks like it. 

As Speaker Boehner has pointed out Obama was saying "No Cuts" at the beginning of the year, but is now going to sign into law the FY11 budget with $38B in cuts along with restoring vouchers for DC students. If that is not a win for the Republicans in the House, not sure what is. Obama reminds me of the typical politician that is pushed into a corner and then spins the result. There is no way to spin going from no budget for FY11 by Democrats to 'no budget cuts' at the beginning of 2011 to caving on $38B in budget cuts to save funding for Planned Parenthood and NPR. That hasn't stopped the Obama White House from frantically spinning away with the help of the Obama media that this is what the President wanted. Obama is 180 degrees opposite of John Kerry spinning his Iraqi funding vote that he was for it before he was against it -- Obama was against the budget cuts before he is for them. Democrats and some Republicans have a habit of flip flopping for political gain.

President Who Began 2011 Saying "No Cuts" Now Poised to Sign Largest Spending Cut Since WWII
Posted by Speaker Boehner Press Office on April 12, 2011

White House spin merchants are in overdrive this week, contending that their boss – who just months ago called for a spending freeze that would result in no cuts to federal spending levels – will be getting most of what he asked for from Congress when he signs into law the largest non-defense spending cut in American history. The White House-spun yarn goes something like this: “Despite his January call for zero spending cuts, the president has actually always been in favor of spending cuts, as long as they are cuts in mandatory spending. And since the final agreement contains significant cuts in mandatory spending along with significant cuts in discretionary spending, it means the president won.”

Here are the facts:

Republicans believe dramatic reductions in both discretionary and mandatory (“autopilot”) spending are essential to help reduce uncertainty in our economy and create a better environment for job growth, and the agreement makes historic cuts in both types of spending -- just months after President Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress called for zero cuts and claimed spending cuts would hurt the economy.

Democrats note that some of the spending cuts in the agreement were proposed in the president’s budget, but disingenuously fail to note that many of those cuts were used in the president’s budget to offset additional or new spending elsewhere. In the context of the agreement, those cuts are now real cuts – chopping billions of dollars off the baseline, rather than being used to offset other Washington spending sought by the administration.

As Chairman Paul Ryan said Tuesday, the agreement "[secures] tens of billions of dollars in spending cuts, forcing the President and his party’s leaders to retreat from their reckless spending spree. The historic spending cut turns the page from Washington’s pervasive culture of spending, sending a welcome signal to job creators and cleaning up the unprecedented budget mess left by the last Congress.

The agreement cuts nearly $40 billion compared to FY 2010 spending levels (nearly $38 billion compared to the March 4 continuing resolution) – the largest non-defense spending cut in American history – and will cut $315 billion from the federal budget over the next decade, clearing a path for the landmark Path to Prosperity budget offered by Chairman Ryan, which cuts trillions more over the next decade. The bill also eliminates the ability of students to draw down two Pell Grant awards at the same time, saving an additional $35 billion over the next 10 years.

The gross spending cut in the bill is nearly $45 billion. The total spending cut would be nearly $45 billion had the Speaker not fought for – and won – a $5 billion increase in defense spending, which is included in the agreement.

As a result of the agreement, the federal government will spend $78.5 billion less than President Obama proposed spending this year.

The agreement eliminates one Obamacare program, cuts a second nearly in half, and eliminates four of the Obama Administration’s controversial “czars” – including the president’s health czar charged with overseeing his government takeover of health care, his auto czar responsible for managing the federal government’s takeover of U.S. auto manufacturers, and his climate change czar tasked with implementing the president’s job-crushing national energy tax.

The agreement secures Senate votes and debate on de-funding of two presidential priorities – Obamacare and Planned Parenthood – while saving the successful D.C. school choice program Democrats have been trying to eliminate for years.

The agreement includes zero earmarks – a stark contrast to two years ago, when President Obama accommodated a Democratic House and Senate and signed into law a massive omnibus spending bill containing an estimated 9,000 earmarks.

The agreement makes real cuts in discretionary spending and includes no tax increases. After initially opposing any spending cuts, the White House and Congressional Democrats abandoned that position during negotiations and tried to cut their losses by demanding tax increases and trying to prevent virtually any cuts to discretionary spending. Republican negotiators rebuffed this gambit and forced the White House to accept an agreement with a mix of cuts from both discretionary and mandatory spending programs, and zero tax hikes.

The agreement terminates more than 40 ineffective programs at the U.S. Department of Education alone, including Educational Technology State Grants, Even Start, Advanced Credentialing, Mental Health Integration, Exchanges with Historic Whaling Partners, Women’s Educational Equity, Tech-Prep Education State Grants, Smaller Learning Communities, Legal Assistance Loan Repayment Program, Thurgood Marshall Legal Opportunity Scholarships, and B.J. Stupak Olympic Scholarships.

For a full list of federal programs that are cut or eliminated by the agreement, click here.

Strong believer in the Department of Education is out of control with grants that do nothing except line someones pocket. It is an agency that needs brought back under control by putting it under another cabinet department and getting them out of day to day operation of the public schools. Understand that the Education Department at the Federal level is necessary for certain items like standardizing graduation requirements around the Country that allow states to increase standards but not lower them. An idea to make it a separate agency sounded like a good idea but it was turned into a disaster. It seems to get worse not better every year.

If you can combine all the various agencies into Homeland Security, why not do the same with other agencies and cut the bureaucratic red tape? Too many separate agencies and departments has led to a very bloated payroll under Obama starting with the Czars to oversee the various departments and agencies. Cutting government positions has ceased and now the Federal Government is adding positions and becoming overmanned once again which leads to more red tape.