Romney budget specifics?

esh_gaApril 22, 2012

And I use that term "specifics" lightly of course since most politicians running for office provide just general guidelines. But those guidelines do help the voters see the general direction of his priorities.

Romney on spending: Guns triumph over butter

Reducing government deficits Mitt Romney's way would mean less money for health care for the poor and disabled and big cuts to nuts-and-bolts functions such as food inspection, border security and education.

Romney also promises budget increases for the Pentagon, above those sought by some GOP defense hawks, meaning that the rest of the government would have to shrink even more. Nonmilitary programs would incur still larger cuts than those called for in the tightfisted GOP budget that the House passed last month.

Differences over the government's budget and spiraling deficits are among the starkest that separate Republican Romney and Democratic President Barack Obama. Obama's budget generally avoids risk, with minimal cuts to rapidly growing health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid while socking wealthier people with tax increases. It's all part of an effort to close trillion-dollar-plus deficits.

Romney, by contrast, proposes broad cuts in government spending, possibly overpromising on reductions that even a Congress stuffed with conservatives might find hard to deliver.

His campaign materials give relatively few specifics, other than a pledge to bring total government spending down to 20 percent of the U.S. economy by the end of a first term in 2016. That is roughly in line with where it was during Republican George W. Bush's presidency.

Estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office put current government spending at $3.6 trillion, or about 23.5 percent of the gross domestic product this year, slipping to 21.8 percent by 2016.

With promising to spend more on military, is there any doubt that he is "pro-conflict" when it comes to dealing with global issues?

I'm all for making cuts but not for increases in military at the expense of education and food inspection to name just a few.

Here is a link that might be useful: source

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
labrea_gw

Rose quits F111 is installed at moma right now the multi paneled work is a testament a commentary on US defense spending & consumerism here it is fresh as it was when it was created in1964. Rep or Dem they are all cattle at the trough of defense contractors

    Bookmark   April 22, 2012 at 4:12PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

How many time can those same beans be refried before they go rancid, I wonder?

    Bookmark   April 22, 2012 at 4:47PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

No comments from the conservatives, I see. I guess Romney's ideas are a-ok with them. "Stock up the army, boys, we'll probably need 'em."

    Bookmark   April 22, 2012 at 9:40PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

A budget? Nahhh we don't have budgets do we?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:14AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tobr24u(z6 RI)

A reverse Robin Hood: Take from the poor and give to the Rich!

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:20AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

A budget? Nahhh we don't have budgets do we?

Deflection. Provides my point that you are a-ok with it and plan to offer nothing to the discussion.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:25AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Oh I forgot, the Great Divider has proposed cuts to defense. Maybe you should check into that. Nothing but words.

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:41AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Appreciate the sidetrack, mrskjun, but what do you have to say about Romney's financial view as seen via his budget comments?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:43AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maddie_athome

Anyone else notice that whenever defense spending is brought there's nothing but deafening silence coming from the cut-spending-crowd? Not that this is a surprise--afterall, all that cash has to end up somewhere...

Easy to make them scream and foam: Let's spread the rumour some of that money will be spend to help Vets.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:48AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

All Mrs can do to defend Romney is to criticize the President. There is no substance to Romeny to grab on to.

I have heard Romney say he supports Ryan's budget. Paul Ryan's budget calls for far less cuts to defense than the budget proposed by the President and submitted by his Secretary of Defense.

No Republican wants the budget discussed during the election because it plays into the President's populist strategy.

There are many that would be happy to see SS outsourced and drastic cuts to Medicare but the majority of Americans don't want that to happen.

I suspect when asked straight out if they would prefer cuts to the defense budget or cuts to key social programmes, most would choose defense.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:59AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Let's see esh. He proposes that defense spending...and do remember that defense is the core constitutional prevue of the federal government....would be 4% of GDP. At the moment it stands at 5% of GDP. Do you think that is a huge increase?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 8:00AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

I don't know about those percentages, I don't see that quoted in several sources that I have checked.

Regardless of the percentage of GDP (and why should it be tied to GDP anyway?), do you think that defense spending should increase?

The largely off-limits budget items - Social Security, Medicare, and military spending - are projected to make up roughly 50% of the budget in 2016, according to the White House's most recent projections, which would put more pressure on Mr. Romney to find cuts in a relatively small portion of the budget.

"He's really vulnerable on this, not so much because the numbers don't add up," said Allen Schick, a political science professor at the University of Maryland, "but because to add them up you have to do things that are politically unacceptable."

Here is a link that might be useful: another article

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 8:14AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Actually no esh, I don't think we can afford any type of increase in spending. I just wonder why you would only point out Romney as increase in defense spending and not Obama as well. Obama is still the one in charge for the time being.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 8:41AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Because this post is about how Romney's budget priorities would affect us. We already know about Obama's.

Knowing more about Romney helps people decide if they want to elect him, no? Or is it still all just about the anti-Obama position regardless of what Romney says? Romney could be a documented serial murderer (now pardoned) and you'd still vote for him? ;)

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 9:00AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52_gw

WASHINGTON : Reducing government deficits Mitt Romney's way would mean less money for health care for the poor and disabled and big cuts to nuts-and-bolts functions such as food inspection, border security and education.

Romney also promises budget increases for the Pentagon, above those sought by some GOP defense hawks, meaning that the rest of the government would have to shrink even more. Nonmilitary programs would incur still larger cuts than those called for in the tightfisted GOP budget that the House passed last month.

Differences over the government's budget and spiraling deficits are among the starkest that separate Republican Romney and President Obama, the Democratic incumbent. Obama's budget generally avoids risk, with minimal cuts to rapidly growing health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid while socking wealthier people with tax increases. It's all part of an effort to close trillion-dollar-plus deficits.

Romney, by contrast, proposes broad cuts in government spending, possibly overpromising on reductions that even a Congress stuffed with conservatives might find hard to deliver.

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 9:10AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Romney could be a documented serial murderer (now pardoned) and you'd still vote for him? ;)

Give me some time to think about that one esh LOL.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 9:11AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Funny, when the President first announced his cuts to the defence budget the Republicans went nuts saying the cuts were too deep. In fact Congressman Ryan even went so far as to call the top military officials liars when they said that the military came up with the cuts and were not pressured by the President.

Apparently most Americans were pleased with the proposed cuts so now the Republican talking points are that the proposed budget really isn't cuts .......just a lower rate of spending!

Will be fun to watch how they handle the regally huge cuts that kick in Jan 1st simply because congress couldn't do their job!

Here is a link that might be useful: Rtab calls military leaders liars

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 9:33AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

Yeah... "anyone but Obama"... so, that means what, exactly? Charles Manson could be eligible if he'd made parole... or the leader of your friendly neighborhood KKK sect, or militant group, or supreme fundamentalist? Just as long as they don't qualify as "other", and are willing to work at keeping the feeder trough for the wealthy and powerful open and full, and give easier access to Wall Street through those revolving doors... and just as long as they stay away from current tax shelters and loopholes, leaving it all agape.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 10:57AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Suffice it to say, no plan is perfect. And this plan is somewhat unspecific. That being said: I'm down with it. I am happy to note that Romney has no plans to budget for Solyndra (did Obama budget for that, or did he just "do" it? Don't know).

I'm for it.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 11:17AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Obama budget? It's been three years since Obama has had a budget lol.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 11:28AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Solyndra was a DOE loan, not a specific budget item.

It's often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was "rushed through" by the Obama administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush administration launched in 2007.

You'd never know from the media coverage that:

The Bush team tried to conditionally approve the Solyndra loan just before President Obama took office.

The company's backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.

The loan comprises just 1.3 percent of the Department of Energy's (DOE) overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that's known to be troubled.

Here is a link that might be useful: read about it here

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 11:37AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Perhaps I am mistaken but I thought it was Congresses job to come up with a budget. Aren't they the holders of the purse? perhaps I just don't understand.

I'm very sure the President has a budget in place for the branch he is responsible for and he has proposed a budget to Congress every year since elected.

His detailed budget proposal for 2013 is available online for anyone who is interested in a budget with specific details.

Here is a link that might be useful: 2013 Presedential Budget

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 11:55AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Yes esh, Bush administration launched and rejected it.

Under the Bush administration, the Department of Energy rejected Solyndra for a loan in early 2009, worrying that the company didn't have good long-term prospects. Yet only two months later, Obama's newly appointed Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the government would give the company a $535 million loan, funded with money from the stimulus.

chase "The Budget and Accounting Act requires the President to submit a budget (see section 15.2). The
President formally transmits his proposals for allocating resources to the Congress through the budget.
The Congress considers the recommendations and uses the information included in the budget as it drafts
and passes laws that affect spending and receipts. Through this process the Government decides how
much money to spend, what to spend it on, and how to raise the money it has decided to spend.
OMB"
In Obamas case, Reid has not allowed his budgets to come up for a vote. Of course Obama has not made a phone call to Reid asking him to allow it either.

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 12:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mylab123(z5NW)

This is a great topic esh, with interesting responses. Thanks - I've been avoiding all threads with the letter Z contained within, you provided one!

I agree with Joe's comments, and David's comments are certainly something to consider, I hope this thread stays alive.

The responses are almost more interesting than the question posed.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 12:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

January 2009: In an effort to show it has done something to support renewable energy, the Bush administration tries to take Solyndra before a DOE credit review committee just one day before President Obama is inaugurated. The committee, consisting of career civil servants with financial expertise, remands the loan back to DOE because it wasn't ready for conditional commitment.

March 2009: The same credit committee approves the strengthened loan application. The deal passes on to DOE's credit review board. Career staff (not political appointees) within the DOE issue a conditional commitment setting out terms for a guarantee.

From the link above. It was the very same committee that first rejected it and then approved it because of the conditional commitment not being ready.

But keep making it all about Obama if you want, mrskjun. I know you think that will matter to someone - perhaps elvis even. Wouldn't that be swell?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 12:41PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

I think if you read that link I provided esh, you might notice that Chu was not Bush's Energy Secretary.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 12:46PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Mrs, the point it that the President HAS met his obligations every single year.

The fact that Congress has not brought that request to the floor is a political decision on their part. Reid says he doesn't have to do that becasue the budget was basically set in conjunction with the debt ceiling debacle. Who knows...

The point germane to this discussion is that the President is on record with a very detailed budget plan....and Romney's would be????

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 12:55PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

mrskjun you are determined to make the issue all Obama's so go right ahead. I'm sure it's not all that simple, but I'm not willing to figure it all out for you.

The loan program is a good one and has helped many - investing in companies with promising ideas is a worthy cause. As said earlier, this loan is the only one in question. Unless you know others?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 1:03PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Ener 1 118 million

Beacon Power 43 million

ahh this is easier than listing them all

"A CBS News investigation found earlier this month that a dozen green-energy companies - which in total received at least $6.5 billion in stimulus money from the federal government - have filed for bankruptcy protection."

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 1:32PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

What a shame. Those companies had private investment sources too. Luckily some are restructuring so all is not lost.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 1:41PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

6.5 billion...how many 1%ers to make up for that, I wonder?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 3:01PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

That is just green energy companies. There are many more, such as 10 Dodge Caravan vans costing almost 200,000.00 that are sitting in storage in Waukesha County, because they couldn't get any takers for van pooling. Or a truck stop in Tennessee that got 424,000.00 to install battery chargers for electric cars that has gone belly up. How many have we not even heard about?

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 3:09PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

God only knows, mrskjun.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 3:10PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

The good thing for you is that it keeps you from having to talk about Romney's budget which clearly you would rather not talk about except to say that you don't agree with any increase in spending.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 3:19PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52_gw

During an interview last week on The Fernando Espuelas Show, Alexandra Franceschi, Specialty Media Press Secretary of the Republican National Committee, said that the Republican party's economic platform in 2012 is going to be the same as it was during the Bush years, "just updated":

As a result of the Bush economic platform, "growth in investment, GDP, and employment all posted their worst performance of any post-war expansion," while "overall monthly job growth was the worst of any cycle since at least February 1945, and household income growth was negative for the first cycle since tracking began in 1967." Meanwhile, the deficit and debt exploded. It would have to be quite the update for the GOP to make anything better happen this time around.

    Bookmark   April 23, 2012 at 7:33PM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
A Cultural Cleansing
ISIS torched Mosul's library. "...books represent...
duluthinbloomz4
Living in terror in the Middle East - ISIL kidnapping Christians
ISIS Continues Its Assault on Christianity With Latest...
momj47
html coding
It seems to work for me if I use small case letters...
duluthinbloomz4
What goes around ...
.....comes around "It wasn't supposed to be like...
ohiomom
Foot - in - mouth disorder?
I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing...
ronalawn82
People viewed this after searching for:
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™