Mitt Romney Budget Cuts Would Have Severe Consequences

Mitt Romney Budget Cuts Would Have Severe Consequences

Excerpts

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 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.

The GOP front-runner suggests raising the Social Security retirement age and reducing cost-of-living increases for better-off retirees.

He generally endorses a plan by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to gradually transform Medicare from a program that directly pays hospital and doctor bills into vouchers for subsidizing future beneficiaries in buying health insurance.

Because Romney promises to protect current Social Security and Medicare recipients from cuts, he cannot get much savings from those programs by 2016. Combined, they are projected to make up about 44 percent of the budget that year. Interest costs, which cannot be touched, would make up an additional 9 percent of the budget, while Romney promises to add almost $100 billion to the Pentagon budget that year, based on his pledge that military spending reach 4 percent of GDP.

So what's left to cut?

_MEDICAID: Like House Republicans, Romney promises to transform Medicaid into block grants for states and shed federal supervision of it. He would cap the program's annual growth to inflation plus a percentage point. His campaign says the approach would unshackle states to innovate and, by the end of a decade, cut costs by more than $200 billion a year.

Advocates for the poor say the inevitable result will be that millions of people will be bounced from the program. An Urban Institute study last year estimated that Ryan's cuts would force between 14 million and 27 million people off of Medicaid by 2021. Romney's budget would make deeper cuts.

_DOMESTIC AGENCY BUDGETS At issue are these programs, just to name a few: health research; NASA; transportation; homeland security; education; food inspection; housing and heating subsidies for the poor; food aid for pregnant women; the FBI; grants to local governments; national parks; and veterans' health care.

Romney promises to immediately cut them by 5 percent. But they would have to be cut more than 20 percent to meet his overall budget goals, assuming veterans' health care is exempted. It's almost unthinkable that lawmakers would go along with cuts of such magnitude for air traffic control and food inspection or to agencies like NASA, the FBI, Border Patrol and the Centers for Disease Control.

Among the few specific cuts listed in Romney's campaign literature are proposals to cut the federal workforce by 10 percent through attrition, eliminate federal family planning money, privatize the money-losing Amtrak system and trim foreign aid.

_OTHER BENEFIT PROGRAMS: Like Ryan's budget, the Romney plan would also cut benefit programs other than Social Security and Medicare. They include food stamps, school lunches, crop subsidies,
Supplemental Security Income for very poor seniors and disabled people, unemployment insurance, veterans' pensions and refundable tax credits to the working poor.

"There's good reason why Ryan's budget and the Romney budget don't have details," said Jim Horney, a budget analyst with the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy priorities think tank. "If people knew what it would actually have to be done to accomplish what they're saying should be done, it's hard to imagine there would be widespread support for it."

read:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/22/mitt-romney-budget-cuts_n_1443743.html#comments
.......

So there you have it, folks. If Romney would become president, the corporate-raider in him will have no difficulty at all with cutting all help to the poor, benefits worked for, and government help for education, food stamps, food inspection agencies, veterans health care, school lunches, crop subsidies and the extreme austerity moves he promised to make will astound everyone.

BUT: Romney promises to ADD $100 BILLION to the Pentagon budget....while forcing from 14 to 27 million people off of Medicaid...cutting funds for the FBI, national parks, NASA, homeland security, and other government agencies.

A block grant each year for states to handle their own Medicaid plans with no federal supervision. Romney promises over $200 billion a year from cutting those costs.

Nowhere in the bill was there any hint of creating jobs, nor higher taxes on the wealthy to offset the cost to the American people of eight years of Bush Tax Cuts that drained our revenue base.while financing Bush’s Two Wars along with giving the rich his Tax Cuts.

A vote for Mitt Romney assuredly means severe austerity, with the middle class and poor taking the brunt of cuts, people dying for lack of affordable medical care, national parks closing, loss of border patrols, no school lunches for poor, hungry children. School education being changed by cutting costs..laying off teachers, assistants, and many school programs meant to help blacks and Latinos stay in school to get their diplomas and hope for a good job.

A vote for Romney means an almost immediate depression for America, with MORE unemployed due to his extreme cuts, while a vote for Obama means a more guarded cut in spending with smaller cuts in each department but with greater savings by the end of his tenure. You may remember the trillion dollar cuts offer to Speaker Boehner, who turned it down!

What is apparently forgotten in this deficit problem is the trillions in deficit that GW Bush left the country as he slunk out of the White House, so immediately after his inauguration, President Obama already had over an $11TRILLION dollar debt waiting to add to his own needed spending in trying to lift the country out of the recession.

What President Obama is insisting on is a higher tax on the wealthy to fill our revenue coffers to provide jobs in repairing our aging infrastructure, bridges, highways, tunnels, etc. and to run the government without the necessity of firing more federal workers.

 

It would be exactly what's happening in Europe.

http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/245320-austerity-measures-caused-europes-recession.html

 

Bull crap... Europe's issues are due to Socialist pay, pensions, and benefits which the government and the taxpayers cannot sustain. You know.... the Liberal/Democrat plan with public unions for the U.S.A. It's the same reason why our cities, counties, and states are going bankrupt here... it's all the left's heavy spending.

Mitt is finally addressing the the left wing destruction of our children's future. If you are under 35 you should not even consider the left wing platform which is to spend your future away.

 

Austerity is secondary to getting the economy out of a rut. Mitt Romney nor President Obama have the necessary policies to allow this nation to progress and prosper in a responsible manner. If the President was truly focused on job creation, he would be promoting greater across the board tax cuts and the elimination of tax expenditures that do not promote spending rather than saving. If Mitt Romney was truly focused on job creation, he would not be promoting spending reductions within the first year or so of his possible Presidency. Instead, he would be promoting better tax policies, and the creation of an infrastructure bank.

 

The Romney/Ryan plan will put our country back on the path to solvency and private sector growth, which is the only viable solution to our economic problems. Obama had his chance and failed. It's time to go in a new direction.

 

.......

1) Yes republican bull crap...rigid austerity with cuts going only to the middle class and the poor will keep Europe in a longer recession.

2) Unions helped bring power to the working class, which is why republicans want to get rid of them.

3) More republican bull crap. America is still bankrupt from your former president and Congress's disinclination to do anything but obstruct, walk out of meetings, hold silly press conferences, and try to put the blame on the Democrats. Obama has saved us from a prolonged recession with a small stimulus plan that even the republicans now will admit has worked. But we needed a larger stimulus to get our economy going again.

4) Hey...too much bull crap...Romney isn't addressing anything but putting his dog on the roof of his car for a twelve hour drive to their vacation home, with his wife saying: "The dog loved it" He plans to do that to every American if he becomes president, and his obedient wife saying: "The American people all love it."

5) MORE bull crap....Americans of all ages know that GWBush spent our futures away; man up and admit the greatest improvement in the average American's life was in the Clinton's years..you remember the president that handed GW Bush a gigantic surplus which Bush squandered away, then started to embezzle taxpayers' funds to pay for the 2 Bush Wars. There is no doubt that Bush nearly brought down this country while making his rich cronies even richer...he should be in jail, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, to name a few...

 

If Romney does get elected and does get his cuts through it should be the last time any Repub ever sets foot in the White House. It those kicks to the groin don't get the idiot voters upset enough to tar and feather everyone in Washington then nothing will.

 

President Obama has requested tax hikes on the wealthy to put people back to work. The Congress has an agenda to obstruct anything he does in order to keep him a one term president. All this when our country needs forward moving impetus which would have seen us safely away from the abyss that loomed as he came into office. His "Jobs Bill" was turned down, his tax hikes are not even on the republican table so that the recovery is slowed until after the elections.

The recession was caused by a republican president who heaped a gigantic $11TRILLION dollar national debt on Obama, and the obstruction of republicans in Congress has prolonged our recession.

In November we will clear the republicans out, the ones that are left will run back into their little holes.

The American populace has a long memory (republicans constantly talk about Clinton's bj) and Democrats constantly talk about taking back our country.

 

I seems I struck the Socialist nerve point.

The failure of Southern Europe is DIRECTLY attributed to Socialist Government programs spending more money that their tax payers can afford for outrageous retirement, benefits, and pay. It is am implosion of Socialism. There was no conservatism that sunk Greece or Spain or Italy or Portugal it was pure socialist payoffs mirrored here in the U.S. by the Democrats and the Public Unions.

We have a perfect example of what not to do. DO NOT spend your country into insolvency. That is exactly what Barack Obama is attempting to do and what Romney will save us from.

 

Sorry to inform you, but tax hikes do not put people back to work. Only an idiot would think that.

 

.......

1) Wrong..the Romney/Ryan plan is virtual suicide for the average American, elderly and children, people on Social Security, and Americans that need Medicaid and Medicare. It would bestow even more tax breaks for the wealthy, and drive us into a deep depression. I don't believe American voters will stand for any more republican lies, slander, and will go to the voting polls in earnest. The viable solution was always out there for everyone to see. Tax hikes on the wealthiest to replenish our revenue coffers to start repairs on bridges, highways, etc giving jobs to those that need them, plus passing jobs bills quickly...but that is against republican agenda.

2) Obama never failed, Congress failed. Obama has accomplished many wonderful things which I am sure you are aware of but if we went over them your head would explode; republicans do not like truth.

 

Greece, Spain, and Portugal had problems because they have poor tax enforcement systems. Consequently too many people were evading even the low taxes and the governments had to boorow money for daily operations. When the bills came due the governments didn't have the cash to pay. And, because the people have gotten by for years without paying taxes they don't want to do it now. Their national econoies were strong enough to afford the programs that they wanted but the idiots never wanted to pay for anything (just like the tea party group).

 

ROFL! "the people have gotten by for years without paying taxes they don't want to do it now"...

Do you really believe the crap you type?

Why was it not a problem until now? Because the bill came due for all the Socialist programs... that's why.

Sorry... we are not going to let you leftists destroy the U.S. After November of this year. We are tossing Barack Obama from the White House and will take the Senate too.

The insane SPENDING has to stop... and by the way... back to your ridiculous statement... DO YOU THINK THE U.S. HAS A PROBLEM COLLECTING TAXES? You offered such a lame response.

 

1. The Romney/Ryan plan does not effect seniors. They will get standard Medicare for life, unlike Obama's plan, which changes Medicare financing from fee for service to capitation. This means the amount of Medicare spending per patient will be capped under Obamacare. It's basically a form of healthcare rationing.

As for everyone else, we're going to have to accept the fact that our entitlements need serious reforms and that more responsibility will have to be placed on the patient. Ryan's voucher program is progressive, so poor people will get bigger vouchers, but the important thing is that they'll be more empowered. They will get to decide how their healthcare dollars are spent instead of a rationing board. It's the same with education. Vouchers will allow poor families to send their children to the school of their choice instead of being forced into a failed public school system. Under the Romney/Ryan plan, poor families will be able to send their children to private schools, just like Obama does.

2. And of course Obama failed. He and the Democrats had complete control of government and they accomplished nothing during that time. Americans will remember the squandered stimulus, the unconstitutional healthcare bill, and the green energy kickbacks come election day.

 

The US has a good tax collection system for beating up on low income people. It tends to let the wealthy evade paying taxes.

If the Repubs do win big in November and carry through on their scheme to screw the poor and enrich the wealthy I wonder how long it will take you to turn against them after you end up in the poor house. I'm assuming that you aren't a millionaire or a billionaire.

 

That's what libs always say.

Whether the economy is good or bad.

For big spenders now is never the right time to reduce federal spending and balance the budget.

Which of course is how we got into the mess we're in today.

 

The Romney/Ryan budget cuts will have major consequences - - for moochers and the American nomenklatura.

The consequences for everyone else will be quite beneficial.

 

I'm not a fan of either Mitt Romney or President Obama but here is a simple fact.

Whatever the government spends we need to pay for it! Currently neither Romney or Obama is proposing nearly enough in spending reductions to balance the budget so it's time for us to start paying for those expendatures. That means tax increases, PERIOD! Obama has proposed an insignificant tax on millionaire that wouldn't make a dent in the annual deficits and Republicans, including Romney, haven't proposed any tax increase which means neither of them are willing to balance to budget and pay for the expendatures of government.

If Democrats want these programs then they have to step up to the plate and demand tax increase to pay for them.

If Republicans don't want to raise taxes then they have to propose a balanced budget for 2013 that reduces expendatures to the point that it doesn't require any tax increases.

There is obviously a place where a combination of tax increases as well as spending reductions can result in a balanced budget and that is what we elect members of Congress to compromise on. If neither side is willing to do what we elect them to do then we shouldn't vote for them which is why I refuse to vote for either a Democrat or a Republican.

What we currently have is both Republicans and Democrats driving the United States into the toilet and anyone that votes for members of these parties is voting against American. It's really that simple.

 

There is no doubt that there is a need to raise taxes irrespective oh how much expenditure can be decreased. The Buffett rule is a step in the right direction but on its own will not make much of a difference. There is a need for major reform in the tax system in order to broaden the base. Around 46% do not pay any federal taxes and no matter how you look at it, its too huge to be acceptable. In an election year however, pointing this out would be akin to political suicde. One can only hope (faint as that might be) that once elected Obama would seek to address it. The GOP has not proposed any significant reduction yet want to decrease taxes even further which would be suicidal for the overall economy. Some one needs to step up and make the necessary decisions.

 

Ronald0 posted:
"There is no doubt that there is a need to raise taxes irrespective oh how much expenditure can be decreased."

Taxcutter says:
Clearly false. It is entirely possible to balance (and more important generate a surplus to pay down the Obama-debt) by reduction of spending and not raising taxation by a dime. It just requires the political will to do so.



Ronald0 posted:
"There is a need for major reform in the tax system in order to broaden the base."

Taxcutter says:
I concur.

Obviously, far too many people get a free ride, and have come to the conclusion that government is run on "other people's money." Moving away from an income-based taxation system and back to the consumption-based taxation system favored by the Framers of the Constitution would broaden out the tax base and disabuse people of the notion that somebody else is paying for it.

 

There needs to be a little honesty. While over 40% of families do not pay any federal income taxes they do pay FICA taxes as well as other federal taxes such as fuel taxes.

Some say that for a politican to be honest about taxes and spending is political suicide but I propose that not being honest about taxes and spending should be political suicide. Why do the voters continue to vote that we know are being dishonest with us? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Are Americans really that stupid? Perhaps so but that would reflect that the "American Experiment" is a failure and I refuse to admit that.

Someone pointed out that raising taxes would adversely effect employment and the economy. I cannot disagree with that but who should we hold accountable? The Democrats and Republicans of course. If their actions have destroyed the US economy then throw them out of office. It's that simple. So stop voting for Republicans and Democrats and stop being stupid is the position I advocate. To vote for either is to vote to destroy America so why do the people keep voting for the self-destruction of America? I would suggest that everyone that is a Democrat or a Republican face that simple fact. They are voting to destroy America.

 

There is nobody else to vote for.

 

Sorry about the mistake. I did mean federal income taxes.

As regards the honesty, if only politicians had that much integrity. The economy is in the tank (GOP / Dems I blame them both) and is the main concern for voters everywhere. If we have one party telling us that its the existing Govt's fault and if they are ushered in, they will decrease taxes on everyone since the problem is merely Govt overspending and we will fix that and everything will be hunky dory without really specifying how its gonna achieve it. On the other hand we have the party with the President and who is supposedly responsible for all of the world's problems and every word out of his mouth is supposed to be an insult to the people. When the economy is down, no matter what the facts, Presidents rarely win elections. To top it off, if that President says we need to raise taxes, what do you think his chances remain. It might not force many people to change their vote but probably at least enough to swing the election. Most voters don't understand the intricasies of the economic system and will believe whatever the TV guy tells them to and even economists rarely agree on anything. For every economist saying something, there are 10 others ready to say the opposite. We know from Ron Paul that blunt honesty does not work in politics. You might have major disagreements with him on some issues but in many respects he was spot on, yet all he recieved was ridicule even from his own party and ignored by the media and consequently the votes.

I can't say about stupidity but what other option does the common voter have when most don't even know who the third party candidate is. In the short term, voting for the third part is a lost vote and we want everything now. Forget about the furture. Its not just the politicians but the media is also to blame for it. The American Experiment may not have failed yet but it is slowly and gradually weakening until it might one day fail. The super PACs and big money is a major culprit in this. If you can buy the air time and bombard your views on the people long and hard enough, eventually they are gonna stary believing it. And corporate America can do just that. You can see what Fox news has done. Their coverage is so biased but conservatives have come to believe it as the truth and even a neutral news piece by any other channel looks to them a biased piece of liberalism. I can see many people here on the forums still believe that the Iraq war was justified because Iraq "possessed" WMDs. If you have enough money, you CAN buy the election. Maybe not yet the Presidential election but certainly most other elections. Many judges are also appointed by election and you can see even there a similar trend where corporations fund those campaigns with bundles to get a judge in who is office who will be on their side.

 

You left out growing the economy, putting people back to work and broadening the tax base, what has increased revenues in the past and brought about surpluses and lower deficits.