CBO Figures Cast Doubt On Budget Compromise


CBO figures cast doubt on budget compromiseAs lawmakers prepared to vote on the Federal budget for the remainder of fiscal year 2011, new data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has raised some doubts regarding the bill's immediate impact on the national deficit.

According to an analysis by Politico.com, the proposed $38 billion cuts would reduce direct spending this year by approximately $352 million, compared to the FY2010 rates. This information may irk conservative lawmakers who have already argued that the compromise failed to meet the GOP's campaign pledge to cut $100 billion.

However, the CBO figures take into account an increase in Pentagon appropriations. If non-military spending is cast aside, the rest of the government's budget will be $42 billion less than the level when John Boehner (R-Ohio) became Speaker of the House.

The deal passed in the House Thursday afternoon and was supposed to go before the Senate later in the evening. If a deal was not reached by midnight, the government would shut down.

A total of 28 House Republicans voted against the stopgap bill on April 9 that kept the government funded for an extra week. Representative Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) voted against the continuing measure and said he planned to vote against the final package, claiming that the budget is built on "phantom savings," according to FOX News.

Personal Liberty

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.