<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.7600.16722"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV>
<DIV class=postContent>
<P>
<TABLE width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 5px" class=postHeader colSpan=2>
<H2><A
title="Permanent Link to The Ugly, the Ugly, and the Ugly: A Look at the 2011 Funding Deal"
href="http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/09/the-ugly-the-ugly-and-the-ugly-a-look-at-the-2011-funding-deal/"
rel=bookmark><FONT
title="http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/09/the-ugly-the-ugly-and-the-ugly-a-look-at-the-2011-funding-deal/
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#003366>The Ugly, the Ugly, and the Ugly: A Look at the 2011 Funding
Deal</FONT></A></H2></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD>By: <A title="Posts by David Dayen"
href="http://news.firedoglake.com/author/dday/"><FONT
title="http://news.firedoglake.com/author/dday/
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691>David Dayen</FONT></A> Saturday April 9, 2011 7:58
am</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></P>
<P><FONT face=Calibri><A
title="http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/09/the-ugly-the-ugly-and-the-ugly-a-look-at-the-2011-funding-deal/
CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/09/the-ugly-the-ugly-and-the-ugly-a-look-at-the-2011-funding-deal/">http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/09/the-ugly-the-ugly-and-the-ugly-a-look-at-the-2011-funding-deal/</A></FONT></P>
<P>In<STRONG> the end, the deal to a avert a government shutdown and keep
funding going for the rest of the fiscal year amounted to a $38.5 billion cut in
appropriations from the 2010 baseline (although </STRONG><A
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/reid-says-impasse-based-on-abortion-funding-boehner-denies-it/2011/04/08/AFO40U1C_story.html"><FONT
color=#0f6691><STRONG>WaPo</STRONG></FONT></A><STRONG> puts it at $37.8 billion,
the joint Boehner/Reid announcement used the $38.5 billion number, so that’s
what I’m going with). There was a time last December, with the
McCaskill-Sessions compromise, promoted by the very conservative Republican
ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, when Republicans agreed to a 2011
budget appropriation $20 billion ABOVE the 2010 baseline.</STRONG> If mixed in
with the tax cut deal, that level could have been put in place. Therefore, this
deal inked late last night cut $58.5 billion from the level of
McCaskill-Sessions. This equals all of the tax advantages that didn’t extend
current law, outside of the business expensing provisions, in the December 2010
tax cut deal. The entire stimulus is gone. </P>
<P>Incidentally, John Boehner made <A
href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2011/0409/Federal-shutdown-averted-at-last-minute"><FONT
title="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2011/0409/Federal-shutdown-averted-at-last-minute
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691>an additional point</FONT></A> – because the cuts to agency
appropriations end up setting a new baseline and magnifying over time, the total
impact of cuts in this bill is $500 billion over the next decade.</P>
<P><STRONG>This comes at a time of 8.8% unemployment, when many economists
believe additional fiscal stimulus is needed to prop up a nascent and
still-fragile recovery. But Washington has gone into austerity mode. You had a
Democratic President last night touting the “largest annual spending cut in our
history,” as if that were something of which to be proud.</STRONG> <STRONG>Yet
it’s undeniable that this cut sets the country backwards and puts it on bad
footing for the additional bigger spending fights ahead. To quote </STRONG><A
href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/its-a-deal-dems-republicans-strike-spending-deal-to-avoid-government-shutdown.php"><FONT
title="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/its-a-deal-dems-republicans-strike-spending-deal-to-avoid-government-shutdown.php
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691><STRONG>Brian Beutler</STRONG></FONT></A><STRONG>: “That the focal
point of policy on Capitol Hill is on what should be cut — and not when to cut,
or whether cutting is even wise — illustrates just how brief the progressive
moment lasted after Obama’s election in 2008. It also represents a colossal
failure of government.”</STRONG></P>
<P><STRONG>Indeed, the </STRONG><A
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/2011-is-not-1995/2011/04/06/AFxPaT5C_blog.html"><FONT
color=#0f6691><STRONG>boasting</STRONG></FONT></A><STRONG> about “historic” cuts
coming from Democrats, after months of rhetoric where they said these same cuts
would eliminate jobs and hurt the economy, was tough to take. I don’t have Mark
Zandi’s home phone number, but he said previously that cuts of $61 billion would
cost the country 700,000 jobs, based not really on where the cuts went but
simple macroeconomic projections. So this $38.5 billion cut will cost what?
400,000 jobs? 500,000?</STRONG> From a self-preservation angle, this is
lunacy:</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=wbq>
<P>Right now, the economy is weak. Giving into austerity will weaken it
further, or at least delay recovery for longer. And if Obama does not get a
recovery, then he will not be a successful president, no matter how hard he
works to claim Boehner’s successes as his own. Clinton’s speeches were
persuasive because the labor market did a lot of his talking for him. But when
unemployment is stuck at eight percent, there’s no such thing as a great
communicator.</P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>So now that a six-day stopgap has passed, with the final deal to pass next
week, we ask ourselves, what’s in it? Where do the cuts come from? What part of
the budget? What programs? And what policy riders are in there?</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Let’s go with what we know:</P>
<P>• From the <A
href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-congress-spending-20110409,0,2020186.story"><FONT
title="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-congress-spending-20110409,0,2020186.story
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691>Los Angeles Times</FONT></A>: “The stopgap measure would fund
government operations through Thursday, using $2.5 billion in unused
transportation funds. Those cuts would be counted toward the overall
reductions.” OK, so what does “unused transportation funds” mean? Initially, I
was told that $1.5 billion of this comes out of high speed rail, perhaps the
unused funds that Florida sent back to Washington. But I have not been able to
confirm that. At any rate, when President Obama said in his speech that
“infrastructure projects will be delayed,” this is part of what he means. That’s
$2.5 billion on the sidelines that could have gone into transportation
infrastructure and construction, i.e. jobs.</P>
<P>• Also from the LA Times: “Democrats pursued reductions from one-time cuts
and accounts with surpluses. In the end, about half the cuts, nearly $18
billion, come from such areas.” This matters for the future, because agency
appropriations end up becoming the new baseline, so the cuts magnify over
time.</P>
<P>• From the WSJ: “Includes $513 billion for defense – less than Republicans
and President Obama wanted but more than the $508 billion provided in 2010.”
<STRONG>So defense actually gets a $5 billion increase above the 2010
baseline.</STRONG> This is equal to what was in McCaskill-Sessions in December.
Defense didn’t get touched.</P>
<P>• WSJ: “Bans the use of funds for the transfer of prisoners from the
Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba to the U.S. mainland.” Not that this was
in doubt, but this rider continues for the rest of the fiscal year. This is
already a Lost Cause, as KSM will get a military commission, and
<STRONG>Guantanamo will remain open</STRONG>.</P>
<P>• From <A
href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/its-a-deal-dems-republicans-strike-spending-deal-to-avoid-government-shutdown.php"><FONT
color=#0f6691>TPM</FONT></A>: “Republicans have also been promised votes in the
Senate on riders to defund Planned Parenthood and health care implementation.”
Those votes will fail, and everyone – including Republicans – know it. So that’s
not a big deal. In fact, Democrats will be happy to put some Republicans on the
record on defunding the quite popular Planned Parenthood.</P>
<P>• From the Christian Science Monitor: “<STRONG>Anti-abortion lawmakers did
succeed in winning a provision to ban the use of government funds to pay for
abortions in the Washington capital district</STRONG>.” This is a radical step.
The District of Columbia will not be able to use even its own tax dollars
collected from its constituents to pay for any reproductive choice services.
When this says “government funds,” we’re not only talking about federal
government funds, we’re talking about DC’s local government funds. Annals of
colonialism!</P>
<P>• But that’s not all! From <A
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-wire/post/sources-budget-deal-includes-dc-abortion-rider-money-for-school-vouchers/2011/04/08/AF3ET24C_blog.html"><FONT
title="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-wire/post/sources-budget-deal-includes-dc-abortion-rider-money-for-school-vouchers/2011/04/08/AF3ET24C_blog.html
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691>WaPo</FONT></A>: “The spending deal agreed to Friday night to
avert a government shutdown includes a provision banning the District from
spending its own funds to provide abortions to low-income women <STRONG>as well
as funding to continue a controversial school voucher program</STRONG>.” Yes,
the ridiculous DC voucher program, which Boehner made a personal crusade, got
put in at the last minute. These both were Republican programs that Democrats
cancelled; now they’re back. And the voucher program will get funding for five
years.</P>
<P>• From the <A
href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704503104576250541381308346.html"><FONT
title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704503104576250541381308346.html
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691>Wall Street Journal</FONT></A>: “Also in the deal is a provision
requiring an annual audit of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which
had been created by last year’s Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law.” Apparently,
the GAO and a <EM>private company</EM> will conduct this annual audit. This
might mean a day of spin every year or it might be used as a weapon to undermine
CFPB.</P>
<P>What we don’t know is precisely where the rest of the budget cuts will fall,
or what other riders will be found in this agreement. We’ll get that information
soon.</P>
<P>Note that there’s nothing in here about one looming item: the debt limit.
America reaches that sometime in May. That’s <A
href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704843404576251213484999994.html"><FONT
title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704843404576251213484999994.html
CTRL + Click to follow link"
color=#0f6691>next month’s big fight</FONT></A>. It’s not logical to hope for a
better outcome.</P></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>