The House Republican majority has already begun to send mixed signals on just what it is they they would like to see cut, with the Republican leadership and the Republican House Study Committee appearing to differ greatly on what should be cut in this fiscal cycle. The Study Group has pushed for budget cuts in this fiscal year that would be roughly double that of the recommended levels of the Republican leadership. And as the attached clip of Eric Cantor on Meet the Press clearly shows the Republicans, at this point, are just not ready for prime time on balancing the federal budget. Two things that I took out of the clip.
1) When pressed for specific cuts the best Cantor could point to was an abolition of public financing of Presidential elections, a $500 million dollar savings. Yes $500 million seems like a lot, but is is a joke when talking about addressing fiscal imbalances. The Republicans apparently forget that the campaign is now over and that they actually have to make governing decisions as the majority.
2) Cantor, when pressed about the real meat in the federal budget, (Social security and Medicare) took a pass. He cited book passages from his new work with Paul Ryan, but as in the campaign he just refused to talk about the reality of the medicine that would be needed to bring the budget in balance. A book passage? Funny stuff. He did cite the Ryan Roadmap, but failed to note that that Roadmap has scant Republican support in the House.
He and the Republican leadership have also started gaming the numbers already, saying that the $100 billion dollar cut in spending in this fiscal cycle they promised was actually a $100 billion dollar cut over two years. Good luck to Cantor and Boehner in dealing with their caucus, many of whom believe that you can reduce the deficit without cutting entitlements and defense. The Republican Study Group proposal should be an interesting starting point for the Republican caucus. Cantor said Defense was on the table, but the Republican Study group seems to disagree with their leader. The debt limit vote should be the political flash point, with all signs appearing to point to great difficulty in getting that through the House. Can’t wait to see the specifics. But it looks like we will all have to continue to wait.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Bill Manzi.com 
Your Honor,
(Eye Roll) Wouldn’t it be nice if the great tax and spend Democratic Liberal Party (14 trillion so far and climbing) even did a single speak?
Jules
LikeLike
Jules,
But the Democrats did not run on that platform, the Republicans did. Balance the budget immediately, right??? Am I incorrect about that? The Republicans, during the campaign, begged off specifics because they said they needed time and a majority to implement “sweeping cuts”. They have had plenty of time, and they now have a House majority. Where is the balanced budget???? Where are the $100 billion in cuts in this fiscal year????? As far as 14 trillion I would be a bit hesitant to point to that number, as most of it was accumulated during Republican Administrations. Where is the beef?
Bill
LikeLike
Your Honor,
Your Democratic party can generate stupendous spending volumes as a nature of the beast.
Take the President’s speech being foisted on the American people tonight. It will be laced with spending disguised in most obtuse terms.
Your Honor, this guy has NOT moved to the center. He can’t change his spots and he can’t change his species.
The beat will go on.
Bet you coffee on that.
Jules
LikeLike
Jules,
On your last point you have a bet. On the overall point I have to say that I am a credentialed deficit hawk, but even I believe that we need to spend/invest in rebuilding infrastructure, on educating our kids, on Research and development, and in areas that help make us competitive on the world stage. But you have to pay for such spending, just as you have to pay for military spending, wars, and tax cuts. Your guys just don’t want to pay. They do however want to spend, and their true ineffectiveness will be obvious very shortly.
Bill
LikeLike