UPDATED 4:45 p.m. ET with new HIV, Hepatitis, STD, TB prevention figure (below).
Capitol Hill (CNN) – This is not a simple deal, folks, but here is a first bottom-line American Sauce take at the cuts and some of the policy in this budget proposal. (The one funding government through September.)
Note, there is still some significant confusion about a few of the biggest numbers. Meaning, confusion within government itself. So read carefully.
Read the bill: here.
Listen to our American Sauce, "what is going on?" podcast on the budget deal here. Or keep reading for what others might miss as well as the biggest cuts and biggest budget increases in the deal.
Total Spending Cuts: nearly $40 billion in cuts over current spending for the year.
This Spending Deal: Nearly $28 billion in cuts.
Previous Cuts: $12 billion in previous short-term deals. ($4 billion, $6 billion and $2 billion.)
Highlights – Three Things Others Might Miss
1. Border security cut – The bill cuts $226 million from the border fence program. Critics call that program a boondoggle, but supporters insist secure fencing is needed.
2. New climate office eliminated – This budget deal would eliminate NOAA's "Climate Service" office, which would coordinate several current climate programs in one place. Some (opponents and critics) saw it as a something that could become government's one prominent climate change/climate science division. This bill eliminates it entirely.
3. Many "cuts" are not really cuts. Some simply reclaim surpluses (as with WIC funding). Some were always intended as one-time spending last year (FY2010) and no one expected the funding this year (as with the dairy subsidies).
Some of the The Biggest Cuts, in order of cut size.
(Immediate spending cuts for the rest of the fiscal year, through September. All relative to current spending.)
– Dept. of Defense Construction: Cut $6.2 billion. (Note, below, DoD overall got a spending increase.)
– Census: Cut $6.2 billion. (Note, this figure is from GOP appropriators. The Census Bureau says it has a different understanding. I am off/on phone with Dept. of Commerce to sort out.)
– High-Speed Rail Construction: Cut $2.9 billion. (Bill says the budget is cut to $0.)
– *Update* – HIV, Hepatitis, STD, TB prevention: *NO* cut to this program specifically. American Sauce confirmed the initial Republican document showing a $1.045 billion was actually a typo. Yes. A billion-dollar typo.
– Clean Drinking Water fund for states: Cut $997 million.
– Community Development Fund: Cut $942 million.
– General Gov. Construction: Cut $812 million, from the Gen. Services Admin. budget.
– FEMA: Cut $786 million from first responders grants.
– Dept. of Defense Environmental Clean Up: Cut $638 million.
– WIC food program for infants and mothers: Cut $504 million. (BUT much if not all of that is expected surplus.)
– Energy Efficiency/Renewable Energy program: Cut $438 million.
– State/Local Law Enforcement assistance: Cut $415 million.
– United Nations: US is cutting its contribution to the U.N. $377 million.
– Dairy Subsidies: Cut $350 million. (BUT, that's not a real cut. This is one-time money allocated in 2010 and never intended to be spent in 2011. No farmers expected this money.)
– Border Security: Cut $226 million for border fencing and technology.
– Striving Readers Program: Cut $250 million.
– Foreign Aid – Economic Support Program: Cut $205 million.
– Juvenile Justice Programs: Cut $148 million.
– Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal: Cut $98 million
No Cuts or Barely Any Cuts (relatively)
– Title X Family Planning: Cut $17 million.
– Corporation for Public Broadcasting: No cuts in current funding.
– International Trade Administration – Administrative Budget: Cut $5 million (Pres. Obama originally proposed cut of $93 million.)
Biggest Spending Increases
– Department of Defense: Increase of about $5 billion.
– Veterans Affairs: Increase of $600 million.
Someone needs to point out that tax cuts are a form of spending, too.
Imagine that you are the typical middle class family. Let's say there 2 kids in early teens, both parents work to make ends meet. They are meeting the mortgate, car note, and grandma's medical bills, but just barely. Now along comes another costly ongoing expense that must be dealt with. What would you do, or not do?
A) Cut spending when and where you can. But, it's not enough.
B) Go applying for a new and better paying job.
C) Go applying for a second job.
D) Go to your current boss and tell him you need a pay cut.
E) Go borrow money. Again.
And why would you do or not do each choice? Feel free to add any choices of your choosing.
"A Democratic senator, Dick Durbin of Illinois, is preparing to introduce legislation that aims to end the golden era of tax-free Internet shopping."
It never ends with democrats.................tax, spend, tax, spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax.........your money is their money.
Cut subsidies to wealthy farmers (such as Bachman's family). Also to the people that buy a goat and put it in a pen in the back yard and say it's a farm (like Dick Armey).
@Rickster: Go ask your local small businesses how they like the fact that you can buy stuff on the internet for less, despite the fact that the local store offers you service, has to pay rent on their facility etc. It is simply unfair to owners of regular, small shops and businesses (book stores vs. Amazon etc.).
Of course, you can also do it the other way around, and abolish sales taxes altogether. Good luck filling that billion- or trillion-dollar hole in tax revenue then!
Have you ever heard NPR coming out of your car radio? Not satellite radio, broadcast radio. I'm asking do you know where to find it on the dial, or just stumbled across it by accident as you were changing stations. Uh-huh. That's what I thought.
What about left wing talk radio? Hmm? How about right wing talk radio? Hmm?
Taxes are the people's money. No arguments from me there.
Tax cuts are a form of spending. No arguments from you there.
I guess that means we agree.
I see the birthbagger fools are here obsessing over microscopic budget items while ignoring the huge elephant in the room.
#1: On the spending side why aren't the GOBPbaggers trying to end welfare for corporations, and only attacking welfare for needy people?
Answer: Because the GOBP is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the filthy rich. And they don't care a bit about average Americans.
#2: To the extent revenues have been reduced because of the GOBP-caused economic meltdown, cutting taxes only makes the revenue side of the equation worse. So Durbin's idea is a good one. An even better idea would be for those who own 80% of this nations wealth to provide 80% of the revenue needed for the budget. When will the filthy rich be asked to make the same sacrifices the rest of us are asked to make?