|
 |
 |
|
Despite lawmaker criticisms, many ideas from Obama’s last budget made the cut
Congress jealously guards its power of the purse and because of this instinct, presidential budget proposals have a tendency to get ignored even in the best of times.
With President Obama set to unveil his 2013 budget in the coming days, a close look at last year’s document shows that some of Obama’s suggestions were implemented in the end.
To be sure, in general terms, the February 2011 Obama budget was discarded by both parties.
Obama originally proposed $1.140 trillion in discretionary spending for 2012 and that was whittled down by almost $100 billion to $1.043 trillion, excluding war and disaster spending.
The original ten-year goal of $2.1 trillion in deficit reduction, including reduced war funding, was expanded to $4 trillion in cuts over ten years by Obama himself in the September recommendations.
The February budget did put forward 200 “terminations and reductions” to save $30 billion in 2012. Many of these were in the end enacted.
Despite some grumbling by defense hawks, three defense projects targeted by Obama were terminated: the Marine Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, the SLAMRAAM missile and the second engine for the Joint Strike Fighter. Despite opposition from liberal Democrats, Community Development Block Grants were cut by 7.5 percent as Obama had called for, and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) was cut by $1.2 billion. The LIHEAP cuts were less, however, than the $2.5 billion Obama had been seeking.
The maximum Pell Grant award was maintained while funding for summer school and for reduced interest payments were eliminated, as Obama had recommended.
Jason Peuquet, research director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, pointed out additional enacted provisions.
He said that Teacher Quality Block Grants and the Career and Technical Education program were cut only regarding the Senior Community Service Employment Program.
The EPA’s State Revolving Funds were also cut by $950 million, he said.
Obama had proposed slashing the Community Services Block Grant program by half and in the end it was cut only by 3 percent. The Agriculture department’s single-family home loans program was also cut but by only one-eighth the size Obama recommended.
“As the debate in Washington has focused more and more on curbing future deficits and debt compared to previous years when the focus was more on economic stimulus, it wouldn’t be surprising that a large portion of proposed cuts were enacted. And probably more than in previous years,” Peuquet said.
He noted that Obama’s tax increase proposals such as eliminating tax breaks for oil and gas were completely ignored. Reduced grants to airport and the elimination of funding for medical education were also not enacted.
Scott Lily of the Center for American Progress said that Obama would probably put forward some terminations and reductions again this year but that overall the budget would reflect the $4 billion increase in discretionary spending allowed for 2013 under the August debt-ceiling deal.
Lily said he expects Obama to provide some guidance on how to avoid the $1.2 trillion in cuts triggered by the failure of the deficit supercommittee but he hopes Obama did not compromise too much by revealing his final offer on alternatives. That would be a bad negotiating tactic, he said.
Bob Bixby of the Concord Coalition, on the other hand, said that it would be “very helpful” if Obama laid out a plan for how to avoid the triggered cuts.
He said he was sick of hearing budget experts argue that the president should not give too much away in the budget in order to preserve a negotiating position.
“Why not try some leadership up front?” Bixby asked.
In addition to minor terminations and savings used to pay for new jobs programs, Bixby expects the budget to count saving from the reorganization of the Department of Commerce and other trade agencies which President Obama announced this month. That consolidation is expected to save $3 billion.
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
