The House Republicans unveiled their “alternative budget” yesterday, and this time it actually had numbers. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the top Republican on the House budget Committee, rolled out the Republican alternative, which I have attached below. From the New York Times:
The Republican plan, introduced after days of ridicule from Democrats about the absence of an alternative to President Obama’s proposal, would also freeze most domestic spending for five years, increase Pentagon spending, permanently extend the Bush-era tax breaks and eliminate any taxes on successful investments in 2010 as a way to spur the economy. Republicans said they would spend $4.8 trillion less than Democrats over 10 years.
I have not read the entire document as of yet, but one key feature is the projected deficits. The Republican budget projects less of a deficit than the Obama budget, but still contains huge deficit spending. David Bernstein over at the Phoenix has summarized the deficit issue very nicely:
Well, as I quickly read the GOP alternative, they’re jacking up the total debt to a total of $10.8 trillion in five years, and $13.6 trillion in ten years. That may be, as they claim, $3.6 trillion less than Obama’s version at the 10-year mark, but can you really make a big stink out of that difference? Can you really convince the public that one path would demolish the value of the dollar and trigger hyper-inflation, while the slighly-fewer-trillions path is good policy?
Hard to argue that point. The Republicans have been trying to use the deficit issue as a club against Obama and the Democrats. (Rather funny in light of their own deficit record). This budget simply gives that issue up, and will allow the Democrats to counter the deficit argument by citing Ryan’s own numbers. (Maybe the Republicans were better off filing without numbers.)
Other features that can be highlighted now include a five year spending freeze on discretionary spending (exempting veterans services, homeland security and defense), makes the Bush tax cuts permanent, converts Medicaid into a block grant program, and would convert Medicare for those under 55 to something like the plan that Congress enjoys for itself. (I am not sure if privatization is the right word, but it would be a substantial change). It would also eliminate the recently passed stimulus bill.
As I mentioned in my first posting on the Republican budget alternative that had no numbers they have been tormented by Democratic taunts on the budget, and have fallen into a political trap that will create divisions in their own ranks and allow the dems to parry Republican criticisms. Bernstein’s analysis, in my view, hits the nail right on the head. We will now await the Republican fallout on the deficit issue. Has Chairman Steele made any salient comments yet?
Read the David Bernstein piece here.
Read the Ryan Wall Street Journal piece here.
Bill Manzi.com 
So, letsee: cut more taxes, remove any stimulus spending, and still grow the debt? Exactly what am I missing here?
For a party trying to separate itself from the last eight years of Bush, they sure are doing a good job of tying the boat anchor around their necks! And filed on April Fool’s, no less!
I recommend watching Comedy Central tonight …
-FM
LikeLike
Mayor Manzi:
Here is the closest thing Ive seen yet.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20764.html
Gerard
LikeLike
Your Honor,
Some facts.
If the Republicans came out with a budget that was balance it would get the same attention the one presented yesterday—-None. So what’s the point.
Your argument compares 1/2 billion dollar deficits to 10 or 13 trillion dollar deficits as being indistinguishable.
But, again the Democrats have the power to get what they want.
Maybe things will change at the next mid-term election.
Obama’s policies support by the Mayor, will place a heavy tax burden on the folks and the impending inflation is his and yours.
Jules
LikeLike
Well I wish that I could say that I was a confidant of President Obama, but up to this point all my calls have gone unreturned. But the “Manzi/Obama Inflationary Spiral” does have a certain ring to it. I guess that your point is that the more media coverage that the Republican alternative gets, the smaller the deficits shown. That is quite a point. In the FY 2009 budget the Republican deficit was roughly the same as the Obama deficit. And if you think showing a ten trillion dollar deficit over the course of the Republican budget period constitutes serious deficit reduction I have a bridge you might like to buy in South Lawrence. Why is it always a matter of not dealing with the matter at hand? We have discussed the Democratic Budget, and aired all of the criticisms. Now I post the Republican alternative, and you dismiss a ten trillion dollar deficit by saying they did not get sufficient media coverage. Come on Jules, what about the numbers? What about the hypocrisy? What say you about the ten trillion dollar deficit?
LikeLike
Your Honor,
I was not talking about the media coverage, I’m talking about the Democratic members of congress. They dismiss republican alternatives; so what’s the point.
So we have the Obama/Manzi/Mertz non-stimulus inflationary budget.
Did you know you took top billing over the President? It’s the President-Messiah/mayor in that order. Geeze, there is a thing called protocol.
Jules
LikeLike
Gerard:
Did you miss this one?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20748.html
-FM
LikeLike
I just skimmed the proposal: still light on numbers, and a bunch of handwaving around a new more or less flat tax. Can’t really tell how much they’ve analyzed the revenue side, since they offer both the current tax code and the new flat tax code (which of course would have the poor pay more, the rich pay less), so I’d be inclined not to trust the deficit calculation (when and if I actually find it). Wait. There’s a graph on page 43 that shows revenue as a percentage of GDP absolutely flat after 2020. Hum …. by what mechanism does that happen?
They talk about a freeze in non-discretionary spending for next year, but an increase afterwards, but then there’s a floating table table that directs that 1.3T be cut from non-defense budget items over the next ten years. Looks like a fudge factor.
Most of the jobs it seems to purport to create are of the “drill, baby, drill” variety. I didn’t see much in justification for the job increases of this budget vs the real one.
Too much reads like the Republican National Platform, not enough actual meat. Maybe someone else will spend some time and try to make sense of it. I’m sure it will provide fodder for the coming weeks ahead. You’d have to wade through a lot to try and weave a coherent storyline out of this.
-FM
LikeLike
Your Honor,
I am keeping an eye on the budget votes.
100% Republican proposals, including John McCain’s, voted down. Democrats get 100% accepted. A Super Tax and Spend feeding frenzy.
I would say Deval is envious.
Where does Obama get our contribution to the Trillion non stimulus to the IMF?
Jules
LikeLike