• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • How Deep Are the Government Spending Cuts?

    House and Senate leaders are caught in a debate over real and phantom discretionary spending cuts. Senate leaders have proposed freezing 2011 discretionary spending at 2010 levels. Because this rejects the President’s proposed $39 billion increase, they are calling their yet-to-be-released proposal a $39 billion cut—essentially, claiming credits for “cuts” against a spending level that was never enacted in the first place.

    By contrast, the House-passed bill not only rejected the President’s proposed $39 billion hike but actually $61 billion cut off the 2010 level. Thus, only the House bill reduces spending below the 2010 level.

    House v. Senate Proposal

    • Regular discretionary spending in 2010 totaled $1,089 billion.
    • President Obama proposed a 2011 level of $1,128 billion—$39 billion more than in 2010.
    • Senate leaders have proposed funding discretionary spending at the 2010 level of $1,089 billion—essentially rejecting the President’s $39 billion increase. They now claim this as a “spending cut.”
    • The House-passed bill not only refused President Obama’s proposed $39 billion increase; it cut an additional $61 billion in discretionary spending, down to $1,028 billion.
    • In short, the Senate proposal contains no cuts relative to 2010 levels, while the House plan cut $61 billion from 2010 levels.

    Does the House Get Back to 2008 Levels?

    • Originally, the House had proposed beginning with the President’s 2011 proposal of $478 billion in non-security discretionary spending and then cutting $100 billion, down to $378 billion—which was also the 2008 level.
    • However, the House did pass $81 billion in cuts off the President’s non-security proposal (the other $19 billion came out of security spending), so non-security discretionary spending was not brought all the way down to 2008 levels.
    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to How Deep Are the Government Spending Cuts?

    1. George Colgrove, VA says:

      To get back to overall 2008 spending we need to: (from 2010 levels)

      o Security – $554 billion – a savings of $73 billion – real savings!

      o Non-Security – $378 billion – a savings of $85 billion – real savings!

      o Total savings = $158 billion from 2010

      No one is cutting the cost of government this is what your data shows:

      From the 2008 budget the total budget increases

      $197 billion for Obama 2011

      $158 billion for Senate 2011

      $97 billion for House 2011

      The GOP increased the budget by nearly $100 billion. They have not decreased the budget.

      The rest of the article seems like pulling hens teeth to make it look like the ineffective GOP reduced something by $100 billion – yes, they have identified $61 billion in cuts but they also offset that decrease by increasing other spending by $158 billion in other areas.

      We need honesty – not obfuscations.

      Incidentally, we went into debt by $459 billion in 2008. The Magical 2008 budget was not balanced.

      Total tax revenue was also $2.524 trillion in 2008. In 2011 the projected tax revenue is $2.174 trillion – a shortfall of $350 billion. So even if we do go to overall 2008 levels, we will be going into debt by $809 billion.

      If we do accept the GOP (House) budget we will be going into debt by $906 billion by adding their net increase of $97 billion.

      The increase in Entitlement spending between 2008 and 2011 is $517 billion.

      With that – Using the GOP (House) budget we will be going into debt by $1.423 trillion – about the same as is currently projected. In short what the GOP has done is not measurable. To say we are going back to 2008 levels by what they are proposing is being dishonest.

    2. Bobbie says:

      You're absolutely right, George. We need honesty – not obfuscations. But when dealing with the devil…

    3. George, CO says:

      I think the purpose of the article is to point out the budget cut fabrication by the Senate Dems more than it is a pat on the back to the House Repubs. Mr. Riedl has provided a road map for $343B in cuts that could be taken immediately.

      My personal opinion is that they get what they can for this FY2011 that ends in September and get a solid, responsible budget for FY2012. That battle needs to start ASAP otherwise 2012 will look like 2011. And shutting down government for months or longer, while philosophically appealing, is not practical.

    4. woodstock libertaria says:

      This is absurd.

      The media and the democrats screech constantly about the "draconian nature" of the House Cuts. And yet the house "cuts" are not cuts at all.

      Here is just a short list of what I'd like to see:

      Defund any "unspent" TARP funds, and get payback schedules in place from any bank that got the money.

      Schedule the sale of seized assets from GM and Chrysler – divest the government 100% from these entities, and dismantle and defund any committees, czars, offices, etc. set to establish 'oversight'.

      Defund the EPA and any attempt to further regulate the economy of this nation with mythical 'climate change rules'. Freeze all EPA regulations for 10 years.

      Defund any and all aspects of "obamacare".

      eliminate the department of education

      eliminate all foreign aid until our national debt is paid.

      Require our allies to pay 100% of the costs of having US military on their soil for defense purposes.

      Immediately develop plans for 100 large capacity nuclear power plants.

      Reduce the federal workforce in all civilian branches by 1/3 over the next 3 years.

      Repeal the 14th amendment and replace it with the Fair Tax to cover all government costs.

      Set Fairtax rate @ 23% fixed for 10 years, decreasing by .5% each year after that until it locks in at 18%, changeable only by 3/5ths vote of house and senate.

      Phase out SSI and Medicare. If you're over 50, you keep it, and you and everyone else pays for it through the "fair tax" sales tax rate.

      If you're under 50, SAVE some of YOUR MONEY – because the government is NOT going to come to my house and take MINE to pay for your stupidity.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.