Ryan-Murray Budget Deal Already Drawing Conservative Critics
The proposed Ryan-Murray budget, Rubio said, fails to drastically reduce the nation’s debt or take steps to provide good-paying jobs, “making it harder for more Americans to achieve the American Dream. Instead, this budget continues Washington’s irresponsible budgeting decisions by spending more money than the government takes in and placing additional financial burdens on everyday Americans.”
Conservative groups immediately lined up against the pact. Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, said the agreement is not just bad policy, it is bad politics.”
“The American people remember hard-won bipartisan spending limits set by the sequester and are not pleased to see their conservative representatives so easily go back on their word to rein in government over-spending,” he said. “This is about protecting the pocketbook of average Americans, not about shutting down the government or refusing to compromise. Lawmakers should simply continue an existing, bipartisan agreement that has already reduced overspending and is not compromising our modest economic recovery.”
That group was joined by Freedomworks. President Matt Kibbe maintained that “it’s disingenuous for Republicans to surrender the only real spending reforms accomplished under the Obama Administration and call that a deal. Immediate spending and revenue hikes without long-term reforms to spending and entitlement programs isn’t a deal, it’s just another manufactured, govern-by-crisis shakedown.”
Meanwhile, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) received a letter from 18 lower chamber conservatives, led by Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) demanding that spending levels remain at sequestration levels.
“What has become clear is that Democrats are not interested in solving the problems created by the sequester: they are only interested in using the threat of the cuts as leverage to increase spending across the board, to increase our national debt, and to raise taxes and fees,” the letter said. “Or worse, they are interested in using feigned concern over national defense in order to distract attention from the disaster that is Obamacare.”
Regardless, Boehner expressed support for the compromise, saying it “represents a positive step forward by replacing one-time spending cuts with permanent reforms to mandatory spending programs that will produce real, lasting savings. This framework is consistent with sequester replacement legislation passed by the House in 2012. It would also help to further reduce the deficit without tax hikes that would hurt our economy."
The White House also lent its support, with President Obama calling it “a good first step.”
“This agreement replaces a portion of the across-the-board spending cuts known as ‘the sequester’ that have harmed students, seniors, and middle-class families and served as a mindless drag on our economy over the last year,” Obama said. “It clears the path for critical investments in things like scientific research, which has the potential to unleash new innovation and new industries. It’s balanced, and includes targeted fee increases and spending cuts designed in a way that doesn’t hurt our economy or break the ironclad promises we’ve made to our seniors. It does all this while slightly reducing our deficits over time – coming on top of four years of the fastest deficit reduction since the end of World War II.”
The House, which is scheduled to wrap up work this week for the Christmas break, could take the measure up by Thursday.