Randy's Blog

RSS Feed
Question of the Week: Do you support the President's budget request for Fiscal Year 2013?
Posted by Randy | February 16, 2012
On Monday, the President unveiled his $3.8 trillion budget plan for Fiscal Year 2013.  The Washington Post reports that the budgets calls for "$350 billion in new stimulus to maintain lower payroll taxes, bolster domestic manufacturing, lure jobs back from overseas, hire teachers, retrain workers and fix the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. There would be only modest trims to federal health-care programs and no changes to Social Security, the biggest drivers of future borrowing, despite last year’s raucous political debate over the federal debt."  According to the Associated Press, "By the administration's reckoning, the deficit would drop to $901 billion next year — still requiring the government to borrow 24 cents of every dollar it spends — and would settle in the $600 billion-plus range by 2015.The deficit for the current budget year, which ends Sept. 30, would hit $1.3 trillion, a near record and the fourth straight year of trillion-plus red ink."  Despite these increases in stimulus-type spending, the Administration is also advocating for cuts to national defense by $32 billion from last year's overall defense spending.  As Mackenzie Eaglen, an analyst for AEI noted, "This budget will shrink the size of the U.S. Navy and Air Force even though the emphasis on Asia is supposedly one of air and naval power. The President is proposing to retire massive numbers of ships and aircraft before the end of their service lives at a time when numbers matter because the demand for U.S. presence abroad is not declining."

The President's budget is available here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/appendix.pdf 

 

Question of the Week: Do you support the President's budget request for Fiscal Year 2013?

(  ) Yes, I support the budget request.
(  ) No, I oppose the budget request.
(  ) Other (leave your comment below)
(  ) I am unsure.

Take the poll here.

Find the results of last week's instaPoll here.

Learn more about Randy's positions on the budget and spending issues here.

 

Comments
Users are solely responsible for the opinions they post here and their comments do not necessarily reflect the views of Congressman Forbes.
  • Allan Weese commented on 2/16/2012
    Please tell me the purpose of the President issuing a budget request (other than by law) when the U.S. Senate has not passed a budget in well over 1000 days. It just seems duplicitous for a democratic president to waste so much paper on printing documents the Senate Democratic will put before their body for a vote. In general, as long as the money presses are printing, the Federal Government will keep on over spending.
  • charles wood commented on 2/16/2012
    i really do not like negativity as a whole BUT, i cant recall anything that this (MAN ? OBAMA ) has proposed or suggested in his entire tenure with which i agree ! certainly hope he is unable to fool so many people this time around !!! charles
  • Larry Hopkins commented on 2/16/2012
    Budget not intended to be passed. just going through the motions required and will use it to political advantage. between double counting phantom savings from military non involvement he will claim republicans not in favor of saving his phantom trillions. what do they teach in journalism schools in this country? how to be democrat facilitators of half truths spin and corruption. none of what is happening in this country would be possible if democrat politicians were not able to step up to any microphone and spew such crap and not be questioned in any way. Disgust does not even begin to describe my contempt for the majority of the media in America. the President continues to push for higher and higher taxes claiming this will improve the prospects for jobs and the absolute total lack of logic for this position is unquestioned in the media. Now we find out just by being born female you are entitled to free stuff provided by all taxpayers. we are so broke as a nation it is a joke and we are starting more and more government give away programs. logic requires us to consider that democrats and the media intend to bring our country to its knees and completely destroy the foundations of our society
  • Harry Harrington commented on 2/16/2012
    I believe fixing our infastructure is necessary. The payroll tax cut is wrong. We can not afford this. I believe if we fund infastructure repair it will go a long way towards helping reduce unemployment, which will help spending, and decrease unemployment further.
  • Stephen Dexter commented on 2/16/2012
    The comments on the reasons for deficit spending lack completeness. The greatest contributor to the deficit AND the tremendous increase in the National Debt since 2001 has been the Bush/Obama tax cuts. Americans simply cannot have both ways; social welfare, defense, corporate welfare and subsidy spending AND tax cuts. Other additions to the debt have been the two wars (now declining in both their financial and manpower costs) and Medicare Part D. For those of you who speak to Socialism please understand its definition: ownership and planning control over the means of production (i.e. manufacturing) by the gov't. That does not exist in the United States. We do have, however, Social Welfare spending - that is similar but by no means as comprehensive as many nations in Europe.
  • Mark Cernak commented on 2/16/2012
    Two things you need to know about President Obama’s nearly $4 trillion budget for fiscal 2013: It will likely add another $1 trillion to a $15.3 trillion debt, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he will not act on any full budget plan this year. The first tells us that Mr. Obama’s recklessly irresponsible tax, spend and borrow policies will push the U.S. dangerously closer to the brink of fiscal insolvency. The second is proof positive that the highest-ranking Democrat in Congress is blocking any action on its No. 1 fiscal responsibility under the United States Constitution. In other words, Mr. Obama’s budget is dead on arrival, not at the hands of the Republicans, but as a result of his own party, which has not passed a budget in three straight years and won’t pass this one, either. I thought the media and the Democrats always talk about the Republicans should comprimise but when do they comprimise! In the Senate they will not bring up a budget (over 1000 days now) and numerous bills passed by the House have not and will not be brought up in the Senate REid will not allow a vote and how is that comprimse. They mean comprimse when Republicans go along with them that is their definition of comprimise. Why does not the President us the bully seat for this budget becouse its just for show and he is too busy having fund raisers (average 3 a day).
  • Thomas G commented on 2/16/2012
    Of course the congress should move to implement this budget request. The congress failed the public miserably by not acting last year and they harmed this nation in that failure. By refusing to increase taxes on millionaires and billionaires before, when by overwhelming majority the public wants this done, even millionaires and billionaires want this done, the most obvious problem is our legislators themselves, and this includes Congressman Forbes, who refused to even show up to vote for the middle class tax cut extension. Our representative acted 3 times last year to shut down the government. Our representative voted to shove our great nation into default, shocking this constituency and the entire country. During congressman Forbes tenure in congress he has participated in policy decisions, and votes, that added an incredible 7.5 TRILLION dollars in new debt even BEFORE those same policies caused the financial collapse in the fall of 2008. We sent the congressman to Washington with a balanced budget, and he has failed to offer up one ever since. The record is so astonishingly bad it becomes impossible to have confidence in congressman Forbes capacity to weigh in on these crucial issues. The Bush tax cuts created this mess Mr. Forbes, and you can produce no evidence whatsoever that the policy advanced the interests of the nation and did not lead directly to the catastrophe, none whatsoever. What we need, in my view, is a resignation for the good of the country, or an immediate action to rescind the commitment to the Grover Norquist blackmail pledge that has prevented Mr. Forbes from wise stewardship of the nation's business as he was elected to do. To refuse to change posture when the facts have so dramatically changed is the epitome of failure. I see no evidence of a commitment to the middle class, no evidence that the effect of regulations has anywhere near the impact claimed, and this has also been reported to be the case by the CBO, and no evidence whatsoever that repealing the Dodd-Frank reforms will do anything but restore the dangerous environment that ushered in widespread abuse in the first place. This financial collapse has done enormous damage to a middle class that cannot recover, and you congressman Forbes, frankly owe the constituency an apology for failing to act and for the harm your positions have wrought. That said, I truly hope that with the evidence so overwhelmingly discrediting the positions you took that you will respond to actually help the middle class you abandoned on theory that failed.
  • David Saunders commented on 2/16/2012
    Do I support Mr Obummer's budget? No! No! No! More red ink to the end of the ages. The Mr Speaker needs to dry his eyes and inform BHO that any budget that guts the military, pumps billions of dollars into the pockets of his campaign buddy's pockets and raises ANY taxes, fees, etc is DOA (dead on arrival) in the House of Representatives. There can be no compromise with the radical in the white house. David Saunders
  • John Parker commented on 2/17/2012
    President Obama is not cutting a single dime out of the military budget. He is actually substantially increasing military spending over the next several years. Washington (and Rep. Forbes) has once again cleverly disguised a spending increase as a “cut”. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued has a baseline projection that predicts what will happen over the next decade given current projections of taxation and spending. It shows that military spending will dramatically increase over the next ten years. President Obama’s anticipated $480 million in military spending “cuts” are only from the bloated CBO baseline. This means that Obama is merely reducing projected military spending, as opposed to cutting current spending. Military spending will continue to rise under President Obama's plan, just at a slightly slower rate. Of course, lawmakers like Rep. Forbes like to call the nonexistent cuts “dangerous and irresponsible.” How much of an increase in military spending will satisfy them, since the Pentagon budget is filled with corporate welfare for the defense industries? The real question should ascertain just how many of these defense contractors lobby him for more military spending that would add to their company’s bottom line. It’s another form of checks and balances; they give him checks, which increase his campaign war chest balances. People like Rep. Forbes like to infer that those who propose reasonable military spending cuts do not support the troops. But that’s far from the truth. No one wants to jeopardize our national security or purposely put our troops in harm’s way. The reality is that more military spending does not necessarily make us safer. A lot of items in the Department of Defense budget have nothing to do with defending our nation. Current military spending is higher than at any time in our entire history. The Pentagon budget for 2010 was $693 billion, more than all other discretionary spending programs combined. That’s nearly half of all military spending on earth. Military spending has doubled over the past decade when adjusted for inflation. Under President Bush, military spending averaged 3.9 percent of Gross Domestic Product. It has increased to 4.9 percent—a full percentage point higher under President Obama. Military spending should not be a sacred cow. We cannot afford to completely avoid certain parts of the budget and fall for the self-serving machinations of military contractors and their congressional puppets. It’s time to drastically cut spending in all areas of the federal government. The ever-increasing national debt (that Rep. Forbes helped create) poses the greatest threat to our national security. That (and jobs) is what he should really be focusing on.......
  • Gary Sneed commented on 2/17/2012
    I was looking at the budget and noticed that for one the Vice President's office was being paid a very high amount along with all of the other offices. I believe we are being swindled by our on government by spending too much money that does not need to be spent. I think that everyone of our house, senate and white house staff should be paid a reasonable salary and no more. How much is the head of all of the other departments being paid--it is probably way too much. It is past time for our elected officials to get this budget passed but not the budget that I just read. Too much wasteful spending!!!
  • Richard Jelderks commented on 2/17/2012
    I am disappointed that it was not a balanced budget. I agree with the president that we need invest in our country's infrastructure to create a business friendly environment with a skilled labor force. Being an election year, I knew there would be no political will to tackle the hardest issues facing our country's fiscal health which is entitlement reform and taxes. Our elected officials all need to compromise and put the oath of their office before their pledge to their party or lobbyists. I don't vote along party lines, I vote for leadership and courage to tackle the tough issues even if it means compromise to move forward.
  • Thomas G commented on 2/17/2012
    The constituents need to know that of today's national debt well over SIXTY PERCENT...that is 60% of it came during congressman Forbes tenure in Washington. That is historic failure to manage the nation's business. We sent Mr. Forbes to congress with a balanced budget and we were paying down the national debt, debt I might add that primarily came from other republican presidents, Reagan and the first Bush. The refusal to increase taxes on millionaires and billionaires, who DID NOT CREATE JOBS with the enormous tax cuts they got...is frankly just arrogant and incompetent. There is widespread research that completely debunks all the theory the congressman tries to spin on this blog. Take your pick, past and present Treasury secretaries, past and present chairmen of the Federal Reserve, even the most famous of supply side economists Arthur Laffer, the IMF and beyond....we are being fed snake oil here, and it has to stop.
  • Henry Jones commented on 2/18/2012
    I am so frustrated as so many of my colleagues are, in numerous way, in how the Obama administration, has total disregard for the documented rule and law, that our country has been governed with for over 200 years! Isn't it a Constitutional requirement that the government put forth a budget every year? Now, in the fourth year, after unlimited spending, this administration purposes a budget, that does not address the serious debt crisis? Who in their rational mind would support that? And for those that do, it is my hope and prayer that they will be voted out of office in November, 2012!
  • Thomas G commented on 2/20/2012
    Don't you think congressman Forbes given the astonishing ignorance regarding budget issues you should clarify the difference between a budget resolution, which is not a law and the budget control act that was already passed before and received 74 Senate votes. The fact is spending has been outlined for the next 10 years, with nearly a trillion dollars in cuts. Come on Mr. Forbes...don't you feel you are being paid to TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH to the constituents when you can clearly see here a great deal of ignorance? I guess it boils down to ...you're either with the Truth Tellers...or against them huh?
  • Doug Kint commented on 1/19/2013
    I do not want to raise the debt ceiling but, I am not opposed to raising the debt ceiling to prevent failing to meet our obligations but, it needs to include meaningful bipartisan dialogue about the debt issue to develop a plan that addresses a long term resolution to the problem. Sequestration, a thoughtless blunt instrument that will seriously impact our country's defense posture, is not a prudent action. A long term solution needs to address rationale spending reductions, increased tax revenue (without crippling our economy which is already weak) and an overall of our entitlement programs. Both parties need to engage in this discussion and be willing to build off common ground and do what is in the best interest of the nation as a whole, not just individual special interest groups. I believe unless the legislative and executive branches of government are able to work together to achieve this, they are undermining the fabric of this country (and frankly, not doing the job they were elected to do).
Post a Comment
We encourage you to analyze and comment on the posts featured on this blog, but please understand that comments which include campaign content, engage in personal attacks, or include vulgar, profane, obscene, or inappropriate language will be removed from the site. Please note that there may be a brief delay in the publication of your comment.
Address (optional):

*By leaving a comment on this blog, you are subscribing to my e-mail newsletter.