Fortunately, there are some thinking Republicans to temper the moron
president's pie-in-the-sky promises. :-)


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/10/po...rtner=homepage


March 10, 2005
G.O.P. Senators Balk at Tax Cuts in Bush's Budget
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

ASHINGTON, March 9 - President Bush's plan to extend his tax cuts over the
next five years ran into resistance in the Senate on Wednesday as Republican
leaders offered a budget for 2006 that would undo more than a fourth of the
cuts that Mr. Bush has requested.

Uneasy about the potential impact on the ballooning federal deficit, the
Senate Republicans called for $70.2 billion in tax cuts over the next five
years, as opposed to the estimated $100 billion the White House is seeking.
It does not specify which cuts will be extended or which taxes might be
restored, but Senator Judd Gregg, the New Hampshire Republican who is
chairman of the Budget Committee, said his intent was to extend reductions
on capital gains and dividend taxes, which are set to expire in 2008.

"I think we can get most of the expiring provisions, which I happen to
consider to be fairly benign provisions with a lot of support, under the $70
billion umbrella," Mr. Gregg told reporters after introducing the $2.6
trillion proposal, which lays out a blueprint for spending through 2010. He
added, "I think it's an appropriate approach."

The Senate's proposal to scale back the extension of Mr. Bush's tax cuts
comes at a time when Republicans are also feeling queasy about the White
House's major domestic policy initiative for the year, overhauling Social
Security. And the budget was not enough to mollify some Senate Republican
moderates, who expressed concern Wednesday about extending the tax cuts at a
time when the deficit is at a record high and domestic programs from farm
subsidies to veterans' benefits and education are facing steep cuts.

Like the White House budget, both the Senate budget, introduced on
Wednesday, and the $2.55 trillion House version, which Republicans pushed
through the Budget Committee on Wednesday, promise to cut the deficit in
half in five years, though Democrats dismiss that promise, saying extending
the tax cuts would increase the deficit over current projections. Both the
House and Senate would reduce spending on so-called entitlement programs,
including Medicaid, the insurance plan for the poor, marking the first time
since 1997 that Congress has sought to curb the growth of entitlements.

When asked if she would support extending the tax cuts, Senator Olympia J.
Snowe, the Maine Republican who is an influential member of the Finance
Committee, said, "Suffice it to say, I do have serious concerns with the
fundamental priorities that are being constructed in the budget." She added,
"It's exacting a high price from some of the programs that are critically
important to the future."

Senator Lincoln Chafee, the Rhode Island Republican who has warned about the
federal deficit, said, "I've been consistently opposed to tax cuts when at
the same time we're not controlling our spending, and I don't think this
year will be any different."

The fight over taxes and spending, which will occupy Congress at least
through next week, will be a crucial test of President Bush's strength on
Capitol Hill. Though the budget resolution is nonbinding, it serves as an
important blueprint for federal tax and spending policy. Yet Congress has
failed to adopt a budget for two of the last three years; at a time when Mr.
Bush is emphasizing fiscal responsibility, failure to do so this year would
be an embarrassment for both the White House and the Republican leadership.

But as details of the budget plans emerged on Wednesday, it became clear
that meeting Mr. Bush's spending goals could prove a difficult task, not
only because of the tax issue but because many lawmakers are pressing to
restore Mr. Bush's proposed cuts in domestic programs. Among them is Senator
Norm Coleman, Republican of Minnesota, who has gathered signatures of 57
senators to fight for urban renewal grants, which Mr. Bush proposes to cut.

"I think in the end we'll get there - I hope we'll get there," Mr. Coleman
said when asked if it would be possible to pass a budget this year. But, he
added, "At this point, there's a lot that's open to discussion."

The big fight will occur in the Senate, where the Republicans have 55 votes,
four more than are needed to pass the budget. Their plan also contains
language intended to open a wildlife refuge in Alaska to oil drilling - a
budget maneuver that would enable President Bush's long-stalled drilling
plan to pass the Senate by a simple majority, avoiding the threat of
filibusters that have killed it in the past. That provision is drawing
complaints from Democrats as well as some Republicans.

"I'm not particularly happy about ANWR being shoved back in there," said
Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, using the acronym (pronounced
AN-war) for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Mr. DeWine said he was also
"concerned about Medicaid, and what impact it's going to have on the
states."

Democrats in both the House and the Senate derided the Republicans' budget
as unsustainable and fiscally reckless. They said the proposals would starve
federal programs that benefit the needy while failing to cut the federal
deficit enough.

"The budget situation of the United States is becoming surreal," said
Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the senior Democrat on the Budget
Committee, complaining about "red ink as far as the eye can see."

The House budget tracks the president's plan fairly closely in tax cuts and
overall spending. Representative Jim Nussle, Republican of Iowa and chairman
of the Budget Committee, introduced a draft budget bill that increases
overall spending to $2.55 trillion in 2006; Mr. Bush's budget calls for
$2.57 trillion. Mr. Nussle's panel approved the budget last night by a
party-line vote of 22 to 15.

The House budget calls for $106 billion in tax cuts over the next five
years. The Congressional Budget Office estimates Mr. Bush's proposed tax
cuts would total $100 billion. The budget also instructs other House
committees to pare $68.6 billion from entitlement programs, in which
spending is determined by eligibility, over the next five years. According
to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, Mr. Bush's budget proposed
only $51 billion, or about $18 billion less, in cuts to those programs. The
Senate budget, by contrast, instructs committees to cut $32 billion in
mandatory spending, including $14 billion from Medicaid.

"I think he would be pretty happy with where we are in the House," Mr.
Nussle said, referring to the president. Compared with the Senate, he said,
"We have quite a lot more savings and reform that we are requesting."

While pressure in the Senate is coming from Republican moderates, in the
House the pressure is from conservatives, who criticized Mr. Nussle's
proposal for not going far enough in reducing spending and cutting taxes.

"We would like it to go further," said Representative Paul D. Ryan,
Republican of Wisconsin and a member of the Budget Committee.

He said conservatives planned to push for spending cuts in Medicare, despite
President Bush's threat to veto any changes to the costly prescription drug
benefit passed by Congress in 2003. "We know that is an area where you can
find savings without undoing the spirit of the law," Mr. Ryan said.