President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) J. Sonnenberg (R) Lauren Boebert (R) Ted Harvey

15% 10%↓ 10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Doug Bruce

(R) Bob Gardner

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 18, 2015 04:34 PM UTC

Senate Budget: Legislating With Crayons

  • 12 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
gardnerryancash
Sen. Cory Gardner, left, and House Budget “genius” Rep. Paul Ryan. They want your money…but they aren’t sure what to do with it.

Senate Republicans announced their federal budget plan this afternoon, and it…well, it’s not so good. As the New York Times reports:

Over all, the Senate version hews closely to the budgetary intent of the House proposal, relying on a repeal of the Affordable Care Act, turning Medicaid and food stamps into block grants, and cutting domestic programs to end federal red ink without tax increases.

The Senate budget also relies on a significant gimmick by counting on a repeal of the health law but also assuming that $2 trillion from the law’s tax increases will continue to flow into the Treasury. [Pols emphasis]

The budget does little to placate concerns of Republican defense hawks that spending caps imposed by the 2011 Budget Control Act are significantly undermining Defense Department operations. Rather than adding money over the caps, the Senate plan creates what is known as a “deficit neutral reserve fund,” which would allow negotiators later this year to reach an accord that overrides the 2011 budget law.

Did you catch that paragraph about the “significant gimmick?” Senate Republicans want to repeal Obamacare and pocket the $2 trillion in savings.

So, Republican Senators don’t have a plan to replace Obamacare with anything, but they’re going to keep the money from gutting health care so they can spend it on…other stuff? What?

Jonathan Weisman of the New York Times breaks down the Senate plan in pretty straightforward language:

The first Senate Republican budget since 2006 is long on ambition but short on details. It foresees saving $4.3 trillion from mandatory programs like Medicare, food stamps and Medicaid, but unlike the House budget, it does not make specific policy prescriptions, such as converting Medicare into a voucherlike program that allows older people to buy subsidized insurance on the private health care market.

The budget offers up $430 billion in savings from Medicare without saying how. [Pols emphasis] It does require a change to Medicaid to cede much of its administration and control to state governments, saving $400 billion over 10 years. But by maintaining coverage requirements for the low-income elderly and for people with disabilities, the Senate’s Medicaid savings are less than half of the House’s proposed $913 billion cut.

Budget committees from the Senate and House should begin discussing their curious budget proposals next week in hopes of finding some sort of fiscal agreement that doesn’t just completely ignore reality…or totally screw over the Middle Class.

Comments

12 thoughts on “Senate Budget: Legislating With Crayons

            1. The cited FreedomWorks article shows a weak grasp of vocabulary.

              You can read this Fiscal Times report on the CBO estimate of Obama’s budget. They note that Obama’s budget lowers the deficit vs. the baseline (that is, sequestration based) budget – which is what Obama claims that it does. The other complaints in the article you cite have nothing to do with grasp of reality – only about differing visions of the country’s future direction and fiscal policy.

  1. Just as expected, the Reverse Robin Hood budget steals from the poor and gives to the rich.  

    Hey!  How ’bout that Pentagon budget increase?  Yippee!  More wars of choice once the GOP locks up the White House in ’16!

  2. I was just reading an article this morning that said they can’t even get their crazy budget out of committee yet because some of them want increased defense spending without offsets.  The bottom line is they can’t compromise or govern..

  3. It actually gets even more bizarre than repealing Obamacare but keeping the tax revenue. The Senate Repubs have included language which would require 60 votes to use the emergency war spending account! The only person who has said anything even remotely related to reality is Bob Corker who, in discussing repealing Obamacare through reconciliation, pointed out that there is still a Democratic president who will probably veto it.

    Meanwhile, debate on the human trafficking bill continues while, according to Gail Collins in NY Times, Rudy Giuliani wrote a letter to the Senate Republicans (apparently they can receive letters as well as write them) telling them to confirm Loretta Lynch. 

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

82 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!