« Pew Poll: Top Priorities for 2010 | Main | "The Steady Erosion of Women's Rights in Egypt" »
January 28, 2010
Krauthammer: Obama's "Spending Freeze" is a Fraud
I don't have time to cover much of last night's State of the Union speech, but here's one part that deserves attention:
Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't. And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.
Charles Krauthammer makes mincemeat of it:
Text of Krauthammer below the fold
The reason it's a fraud is that what Obama is doing here is not just excluding all the other spending we know about, discretionary spending, social security and the military, and it doesn't include the stimulus. What he's saying is, 'I'm going to do a freeze on the regular departments.' But what he doesn't tell you is that last year, in their first year in office when they had a free ride in spending, they ratcheted up the spending for all of these departments astronomically, an average over the last half of fiscal '09 and all of fiscal '10 an average of about 20%. Now that's huge because normally year over year you'd increase a department's spending by 3%, 4%, especially with low inflation.So for example, last year alone they increased the EPA budget by 35%. So if you're instituting a freeze, what you're doing is you're ratcheting in, you're locking in the higher spending that Obama slid in last year.
So after hiking up spending to unheard of levels, Obama now poses as a fiscal hawk. Note also that his "freeze" won't even go into effect until 2011.
I suppose you can say that "all politicians dissemble," or blame Bush, but Obama is president and we were told he was going to change Washington and all that. I guess not.
Update
Veronique de Rugy explains that
...the centerpiece of his plan is a three-year freeze on everything but 84 percent of the budget. That's right -- it affects only 16 percent of the budget in FY2011. Plus, there are so many caveats and loopholes that this plan is little more than a joke. For instance, the freeze won't apply to the half-trillion in unspent stimulus funds. Nor will it apply to the $247 billion of Troubled Asset Relief Program funds or to any of the programs that cash from repaid TARP funds will pay for, such as the $30 billion to prop up community bank lending to small businesses proposed by the president during his speech.
Posted by Tom at January 28, 2010 7:45 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/1519
Comments
Good find.
Krauthammer really exposes BHO's much-touted spending freeze for what it really is.
Posted by: Always On Watch 
at January 28, 2010 7:16 PM
I agree, I don't think it's sincere. I wonder if anyone will be convinced by it...
Posted by: Mylne Karimov at January 29, 2010 3:11 PM
I thought perhaps Obama would start imposing furloughs for some Federal employees, like California has.
I recently got a newsletter from my congressman that our Washington State will soon furlough some state employees too, the reasoning being that a 5-8% cut in pay is better than a 100% lay off.
Most of these are middle-class people, yet Wall Street people get millions in bonuses. It seems so unfair.
We are also losing our cultural venues like our Seattle symphony and drama schools and theaters. And sports programs, etc in schools.
We are losing restaurants left and right, as well as other small businesses that need the help more than Wall Street. Our little town had very few chain stores and restaurants, now only the chains remain and more come although their stock is limited and bulk-sized now, and our insurance premiums and credit card etc rates are going up and up, which affects the middle class and working poor class, and not the rich who can pay cash for all that and those on welfare who won't work "at just anything". So, I agree with Obama with what he proposes to help those middle and working classes, but he could also impose a cut in top Federal salaries by furloughing some and not just a freeze. Just my opinion.
Emilie
Port Orchard, WA
Posted by: Emilie at January 29, 2010 4:11 PM
"I thought perhaps Obama would start imposing furloughs for some Federal employees, like California has."
Overpay of Federal employees is a big problem, but during the Obama time the number of rich (over $100,000) a year Federal employees has been increasing a lot. See this article (not to mention those SEIU "public servants" looking to fatten their bloated wallets at the expense of the treasury).
Furloughs and pay cuts are a good idea.
Posted by: dmarks at January 31, 2010 9:34 PM
This spending freeze is a joke. Even if he means it, A YEAR FROM NOW, it's doubtful Dems in Congress will implement it.
I'm really getting sick of this ASS blaming the deficit on Bush. Did he forget he signed a $787 BILLION stimulus bill that CBO now says will cost $75 BILLION more on top of that?
Are we supposed to believe that George Bush sneaks into the Oval Office by some secret door and does all this stuff while Obama is on vacation, or golfing, or traveling overseas, or taking his wife on dates, or playing basketball, or, or, or....
How we ever got a deficit like this from a guy who hardly does any work is beyond me.
Posted by: Mike's America at February 1, 2010 10:26 PM
Good stuff; nice going Tom - reb
Posted by: Ralph E at February 10, 2010 11:50 PM
