1) Obama gets his full lifeline, long-term debt limit increase that
will take him beyond the election ($2.1-2.4 trillion), without making
any transformational concession. There is no realistic roadmap to
entitlement reform; not a single agency or program, domestic or
mandatory, will be eliminated; Obamacare is off limits; there will be no
balanced budgets, ever. We will still add trillions more to the debt
over the next ten years. Yes, there is a second tranche that will
trigger the latter $1.2-1.5 trillion increase, but unlike previous
versions of Boehner's plan, Republicans have no control over that
trigger to use it as a precondition.
2) The only real cuts will be in 2012, when we cut $21 billion in outlays
(just $7 billion in budget authority). The rest of the $917 billion
will be baseline cuts that permanently lock in the fundamentals of the
Obama era. This will overwrite and override the House-passed budget
that remanded spending to pre-Obama levels. In addition, the extra faux
cuts create self-fulfilling fake interest savings, thereby double
counting total savings. Furthermore, how much of the discretionary cuts
agreed upon for the first tranche of the debt increase will be from
defense? The White House put out a memo saying that "the discretionary
savings are spread between both domestic and defense spending."
3) What about the $1.2-$1.5 trillion in savings and entitlement
reform from the super duper debt commission 19.0? Does anyone really
believe that this commission will be more successful than
Simpson-Bowles? That blue-ribbon panel identified policy changes that
both parties liked and hated; it called for some cuts and entitlement
reform – and more taxes; nevertheless, Obama threw his own commission
under the bus. We are really to believe that Obama would approve a
commission report that calls for the good entitlement reforms without
tax hikes? Oh, but then there would be an automatic sequestration that
would cut a commensurate amount of spending. Really? See #4
4) So Obama's punishment for raising the debt ceiling without
adopting real cuts is that he must suffer a sequestration. This
sequestration cuts 50% from defense spending, while exempting all
welfare programs from the process. Keep in mind that much of the
discretionary cuts triggered from the first tranche will include defense
cuts. Some of the remaining cuts will come from the government's
obligations to healthcare providers. This will force many providers to
dump Medicare patients, thereby forcing them into Medicaid and other
Obamacare programs, which are conveniently firewalled from the
sequestration process. That's some concession from Obama. More
precisely, it appears that he will be able to have his cake and eat it
too.
5) At the very least, we should never lose ground from a deal that
was forced by our superior leverage. However, this plan paves the way
for the committee to impose massive tax increases, including the
expiration of Bush tax cuts [see Dan Mitchell's article and Erick's post].
The White House is explicitly saying that the commission will pursue a
balanced approach. There are times when no deal is better than a bad
deal.
What if GOP leaders appoint those who will only propose cuts and no
tax hikes? Let's just say they appoint Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, Rand Paul,
Jim Jordan, Michele Bachmann, and Jeff Flake. There certainly won't be
any tax hikes, but Democrats will never agree to any entitlement
reform. See #1,3, and 4
6) This bill dramatically increases mandatory spending for Pell
Grants – a pet stimulus handout to Big Education that Obama has fought
for.
7) As we pointed out last week, Boehner's budget authority for 2012
is higher than the authority granted in the House-passed budget. Most
of the 12 appropriations bills have already been drafted, while half of
them already passed the House. This means that extra spending will
actually be inserted into the remaining bills. The two largest
non-defense appropriations bills; the Labor/HHS/Education and
Transportation/HUD bills, are being saved until after August. The Ryan
budget blueprint achieved the most savings from these bills; $26 billion
of the estimated $47 trillion in discretionary savings for 2012.
Boehner’s plan would allow liberal Republican appropriators to reinstate
some of the spending to the most undesirable activities of some of the
worst government agencies. Congressman Steve LaTourette, a shill for
Big Labor, is already agog over the opportunity to spend more on Labor.
8) The one ancillary benefit of coming up with an agreement and
avoiding the default Armageddon was that we would supposedly avoid a
credit downgrade. Yet, S@P has announced
that this plan might not be sufficient to prevent a downgrade of our
AAA credit rating. Moody's announced that they will take and wait and
see approach; however, once the future cuts fail to materialize, and the
debt continues to rise, they will inevitably issue a downgrade. The
bottom line is that we only addressed the debt ceiling crisis in this bill; not the debt crisis.
Remember that this debt deal is being portrayed as a victory for John
Boehner and even the Tea Party. As such, we would totally own any
responsibility for a downgrade.
9) This bill will do nothing to help the economy because it doesn’t
actually limit government. Cutting spending is not just about saving
money; it is about eliminating job-killing programs and government
agencies. How ironic that, despite the breakthrough debt deal, the
market enthusiasm has been tamped down by a terrible report on manufacturing.
The languishing state of our manufacturing sector, as well as other
major sectors of our economy, are endemic of the onerous regulatory
state that costs our economy $1.75 trillion a year. Consequently, even
those who advocate for Wall Street at the expense of the rest of the
economy, will be disappointed in the coming days.
Cross-posted to RedState.com
No comments:
Post a Comment