Paul Ryan: Tax the rich? Nah, just cut services for the poor

» But don’t worry, not everyone gets the shaft under Ryan’s proposal. Although 2/3 of the savings derived from his plan come by cutting services for poor people, his budget does firmly protect–surprise!–George Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. In all fairness, letting those cuts expire would increase tax rates for the highest earners by an appalling 4%, but it would also save the country an additional $1 trillion over the next ten years. So let’s get this straight: Ryan wants to cut services for the poor and retain absurdly-low tax rates for billionaires. Wasn’t this guy supposed to be the new face of the Republican party?

Posted by Seth Millstein • 0 Comments • Permalink

We take it for granted that because of the intense political pressure being applied by the Tea Party, [John Boehner] needs to play an outside game as well as an inside game. As long as he continues to negotiate, it’s OK by us if he needs to strike a different pose publicly. Since last week, the two sides have made steady progress on a package of $33 billion in cuts.
Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer • Calling out John Boehner, who’s insisting that no deal has been reached with the Democrats, and that $33 billion in cuts just isn’t enough. Who’s fibbing? We’ll find out by Friday, when either a budget will pass, or the government will shut down. source

Posted by Seth Millstein • 0 Comments • Permalink

» Why this number matters: Forty-one is the magic number of senators needed to mount a filibuster and, in doing so, block a bill’s passage. Harry Reid has already stated that the anti-Planned Parenthood amendment passed by the House of Representatives won’t be included in the final legislation; however, with this group this size backing him up, Reid’s words now carry much more weight. Interestingly, while the Gang of 41, as someone will undoubtedly refer to them sooner or later, is composed entirely of Democratic-aligned senators, three Republicans have also voiced opposition to stripping Planned Parenthood of federal funds. This will undoubtedly complicated budget negotiations going forward, but we’re nonetheless heartened to see this many senators stepping up to defend such a vital national service. Here’s to hoping they remain intact.

Posted by Seth Millstein • 0 Comments • Permalink

$3.73
trillion the size of Obama’s latest budget plan, just released today
$1.1
trillion the amount Obama plans to cut from the deficit over the next decade

2/3 the share of deficit cuts that would come from cutbacks in various federal programs
$7.2T the amount that would be added to the public debt – not the deficit – over the next decade
$4T the amount Obama’s own deficit commission wanted to cut over the next decade source

» Only one silo gets the cuts: Obama wants to effectively limit all non-security discretionary spending for the next five years, an area which only accounts for 12 percent of federal spending, at the cost of doing something about defense spending or programs like Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security – which, as popular as they are, account for huge chunks of the pie. The cuts are also much lower than what Republicans want, although they’re also hoping to avoid defense spending cuts, even though that’s a huge chunk.

Posted by Ernie Smith • 0 Comments • Permalink

06 Apr 2011 23:26