Thune Admits Senate Republicans Split on $1.5 Trillion Spending Cuts
Is it because they want to cut way more than $1.5 trillion? Nope. Gotta protect Medicaid and other sacred cows!
Senate Majority Leader John Thune admitted that the Republicans in the chamber are split on cutting $1.5 trillion in spending.
The House of Representatives barely passed the budget resolution on Thursday. All but two holdouts voted for it because the leaders promised to cut at least $1.5 trillion in spending.
The resolution is only a framework. Congress wants to push through President Donald Trump’s agenda, which includes extending the 2017 tax cuts and addressing military spending, border security, and energy policy.
I touched on Thune’s comments in my piece but wanted to expand on it more because, honestly, $1.5 trillion is not enough, especially if they want to continue the 2017 tax cuts.
I wish the amount were the reason for the divide.
Nope. Most don’t want to touch a sacred cow: Medicaid.
Republican senators have raised concerns about Medicaid cuts despite House Speaker Mike Johnson’s statement that they’re “committed to finding at least $1.5 trillion in savings for the American people while also preserving our essential programs.”
The House Energy and Commerce Committee must find $880 billion to cut over 10 years. (Uh…I thought it was supposed to be at least $1.5 trillion?)
Politico claimed most of that money “would likely come from Medicaid.”
Cue the freakout. As much as I would love to slash it all, I’m pretty sure they can find trillions to cut that don’t include a sacred cow.
Then again, everything is a sacred cow to Congress. *eye roll*
From Punchbowl News:
It’s a delicate balancing act for Thune. He was reflecting the will of his own conference, which includes a strong contingent of senators drawing the line on Medicaid cuts. Leading up to the House’s vote Thursday morning, Thune even flashed some rare public frustration with House Republicans.
“At some point, these guys just have to take yes for an answer,” Thune told us. “We’re aligned. We’re completely aligned with the House.”
Thune reasserted his leverage by noting — again — that the Senate is subject to stricter rules about what can be done under the filibuster-proof reconciliation process, particularly when it comes to spending cuts.
“Because the House isn’t subject to the Byrd Rule and the Senate is, as we think through how we do this and what we can achieve, we’re gonna have to be in very close coordination [and] consultation with the House,” Thune said.
Then we have a few Republican senators wanting to protect the clean energy tax credits.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) said $1.5 trillion is “too meager.” He “wants to cut ‘way more’ than $1.5 trillion over the next decade.”
Our debt is $34 trillion. $1.5 trillion won’t put a dent in the debt.
Also, forget about trying to bring in revenue in other ways. Just cut all the unnecessary spending. It’s out of hand.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Why would the Senate even consider any cuts in spending? They are worried about the votes to keep them in office today.
After all, that spending won’t bankrupt the nation until years out, when most of these asshats will be long dead – and the debt will fall onto the next generation. Fookit – let your grandchildren deal with the problem.
This is a reason that the Senate needs to go back to being appointed by the legislature of the individual states. At least the states would have some semblance of representation.
The next generation inherits not only the debt, but the means to repay it, namely the bonds.
So, ummmm, why isn’t the National Debt being reduced? How do you know the future of the nation will have the assets to pay down the debt?
Shitbirds like you were bitching about the $5 trillion debt under Reagan, yet here we are with nearly $35 trillion and a good portion of our taxes go to paying interest.
But you do you.
I’ll take your track and just say fuck it. When the debt hits $60 trillion all will be OK even if the entire tax collection pays interest, the economy is in the tank, and we have hyperinflation.
Huh? Bonds ARE debt. It’s a good chunk of what’s got to be repaid.
So, I guess when the shit hits the fan, the bonds go from the right pocket to the left pocket of the suit, and all is forgiven.
Do you have a breakdown by age cohort, Nationality on bondholders? How about the breakdown of institutional, individual or government held?
Where the Treasury issues a bond the gov’t now pays interest to the bond holder over the term of the bond. We have about $9 Trillion maturing over the next year +/-. Those bondholders may decide not to buy new Treasury instruments to replace them which means the Treasury gotta pay back the $9 Trillion in face value of the bonds. We don’t have a spare $9 Trillion.
All COVID budgets should be reduced to pre-COVID levels for departments not already eliminated. No questions. Just do it. Fear is an ignorant way to run a budget. Act. Better yet, pass a balanced budget bill and cut now.
Americans need to here one message:
Don’t like high interest rates? It’s because of Washington spending
Want your mortgage rate to come down? Cut the pork and waste
And then send their anger at all these RINOs and Democrats lining their pockets
Green energy this, education that, blah blah blah – just cut it. Can’t stand these crooked RINOs.
Medicaid (beyond fraud and waste) needs to be tackled one day – not today. There are $100s of billions to cut today that don’t involve blowing up midterm elections. Let’s cut the “easy” stuff first.
Nah! They’ll wait until the Boomers all die off, and magically, Medicare spending will be reduced.
Yeah. That’s sarcasm.
Never mind cuts. If they would just freeze the damn spending at current levels we’d eventually grow into a surplus but they will never agree to do even that.
That’s what’s so galling. We can’t even get department/agency budgets back down to their already-obscene/profligate/bloated pre-Wuhan virus levels, as Stephen alluded to, above.
The situation is simply maddening. There is no sense of urgency on either side of the aisle, to deal with out-of-control federal government spending. These idiots are just content to piss away taxpayers’/creditors’ money in the most obscenely and criminally profligate manner, possible.
And to add insult to injury, they piss the money away on countries like Ukraine where the thieves skim off the top and no one can account for where the rest went, to giving money to countries that hate us, to giving away our money for bullshit projects like tranny repair for Zimbabwe boys who wants to be lesbian girls that want abortions.
As soon as I saw $880 Billion over 10 years, red flags were flapping in a stiff breeze. The next Congress in less than 20 months can change the entire budget outlook on their first one.
If Congress wants us to believe them, talk about the budget they control only. That would be the one they are currently negotiating. Don’t be talking about even next year’s budget because priorities may change.
Youtube has a video from the Obama years where he proposed cutting $100 million. His budget was represented in Pennie’s on a table. I am pretty certain that on that table with 1,000 pennies, $88 Billion will require a single penny to be cut to show the effect on the budget.
I advocate (doesn’t mean anything) that every cent that DOGE finds and stops payment or claws back, drops next year’s budget by that amount and starts paying down accumulated national debt.
For a long time, that has been the conventional wisdom. But I think this is basically the last chance to cut the deficit and avoid the looming “death spiral,” where the cost of servicing the existing debt starts rapidly eating up more and more of the government budget.
If the government shows it is no more serious about cutting the deficit than it has been in the past, the markets will conclude its never going to get serious. Then, interest rates will rise. A doubling of rates will double the payment on the existing indebtedness. Causing the government to incur more debt to pay that indebtedness. Causing interest rates to rise further. The death spiral.
What happens then will be Weimar or Zimbabwe style hyperinflation. It will make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park.
And I think it could be as little as 6-10 years away.
I should have read your comment before saying the same thing to Hard-on.
Please, don’t tell us about your troubles with having a hard on.
You are probably fantasying about Dylan Mulvaney, but who am I to judge? To each his own. Live and let live. Trump hosts homosexual orgies at his Florida resort, So who am I to complain about Trump’s support of the GLBGI agenda?
No one here said anything about Mulvaney or having boner troubles, Junior, so I’m guessing you’re just projecting again as usual.
With each flaccid wet fart of a post, you get more and more pathetic.
Shouldn’t you be over in Ukraine by now, carrying a rifle and a rucksack?
What the hell is wrong with you?
I didn’t suck Mulvaney’s dick like you have. After all, your comments always go to transtesticles and Mulvaney.
Project much?
Hope they do not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It’s not like they have the luxury of time.
The DC elite just can’t seem to bring themselves to offer up current year cuts to spending. Always gotta be ‘manyana’.
Uh, we the people voted for these kinds of actions. Besides, are the pols who don’t want to make these cuts convinced that 100% of all medicaid expenses are legit? Spare me!
If Social Security is giving money to people over the age of 115 in the amount of trillions and you think Medicaid and any other government programs are exempt from that kind of obese accounting?
Global debt is $318T, per google. If those bondholders do not want their maturing $9T, someone else will buy it, as a perhaps higher yield. It is a relative game and we are still a decent house in a bad neighborhood. That said, most people do not have the same standard of living as their grandparents and our grandchildren will be even worse off. (The folks in South Africa have a lot more to worry about.)