Scher 11 (Bill, executive director of Campaign for America’s Future, Huffington Post, 1/3, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-scher/house-gop-will-obliterate_b_803805.html, accessed 7-3-11, CH)
The House Republican leadership has announced it will enact two things immediately upon taking control of the House this week: a new "CutGo" rule to require revenue offsets for any increases in spending, and the repeal of the Affordable Care Act health reform law. The Republicans might want to pass health reform repeal first. Because if they install "CutGo" rules first, they won't be able to repeal health reform without also finding $1 trillion in spending cuts over the next two decades to make up for the taxpayer savings they'll be throwing away. At minimum, if the House GOP doesn't feel bound by the Congressional Budget Office's nontraditional long-range forecast -- which was provided because the bulk of the estimated deficit reduction would occur in the second decade of implementation -- it would at least need to offset the $143 billion that the traditional CBO estimates would be saved by health reform in this decade. As the conservative Daily Caller reported last month, "The rule will require that any legislation that seeks to increase mandatory spending (which is spending that once added to the federal budget recurs year after year and is thus permanent) cuts spending by a similar amount." Repealing health reform, according to the CBO, will "increase mandatory spending," and therefore would be subject to the proposed "CutGo" rule. Throughout the last year, Republicans who had previously equated CBO with "God" suddenly trashed the agency once it found that Democratic reforms for both health care and capping carbon emissions would save taxpayers money. But now that Republicans will be controlling one body of Congress, they are going to have the deal with the fact that the Congressional Budget Office estimates are the basis for congressional budget rules. I suppose that if this little wrinkle comes to their attention, House Republican could create an additional "CutGo" loophole (beyond the giant loophole that exempts all tax cuts from requiring offsets.) Maybe they'd say the scrapping of cost saving reforms also doesn't count. Maybe they'd say cost estimates must be based on Heritage Foundation projections instead of the CBO. I'm sure they can come up with something that would pass muster for the editors at Fox News.
GOP ignores CutGo—new spending and health care reform Demas 11 (Susan, political analyst, Huffington Post, 1/8, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-j-demas/the-gops-fiscally-conserv_b_805877.html, accessed 7-3-11, CH)
The GOP also has dumped the fiscally responsible policy of "paygo" under the Democratic House, whereby any new spending had to be paid for. The GOP has introduced "cutgo," requiring any new spending with budget cuts somewhere else. That sounds reasonable enough on the surface, but it's actually a recipe for deficit padding. That's because there's a mighty big loophole in that no tax cuts need to be paid for. That means that Republicans have conveniently exempted some of their top priorities, like proposals to permanently extend the Bush tax cuts and keep low estate tax rates. Now Republicans can make the argument that tax cuts spur economic activity. But they still take a big bite out of federal (and state) budgets and magnify the deficit. This isn't propaganda from Chairman Mao. Former John McCain financial adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin and former Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson have both stated that tax cuts don't pay for themselves. Adding insult to injury, the new GOP House majority went on a spending spree. Repealing the new national health care reform law will explode the national deficit by $230 billion by 2021, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. (Republican whining about the CBO's analysis is the equivalent of yelling at the ump for your sucky pitching)
No Link – Spending Climate
Despite strong rhetoric, Republicans not committed to spending cuts Khimm 11 (Suzy, staff, Washington Bureau of Mother Jones, 1/6, http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/cutgo-deficit-boehner, accessed 6-29-11, CH)
While Democrats scoff at this logic, Republicans insist that they'll be able to hold themselves back from exploding the budget with tax breaks, largely because of the spending cuts they'll deliver at the same time. When asked whether tax breaks would decrease government revenue, freshman Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) responded: "I guess you could argue that philosophically, but from a practical standpoint in two years, we as Republicans will either have delivered spending cuts or we will not have." Another frosh—tea party firebrand Rep. Alan West (R-Fla.)—claimed the Republicans would be able to hold themselves back. "We should be able to police ourselves and be a lot more fiscally responsible the way we've seen previously." But the Republicans have already backed off their promises to slash spending to help cut the deficit. Having originally vowed to cut $100 billion in federal spending in the first year, the GOP leadership has since scaled back its proposed budget cuts. "I think there's going to be a national drinking game every time the GOP fails to live up to one of their promises...sooner or later, it comes into collision with reality," quipped Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY). West insisted that the Republicans could still find $100 billion to cut from government. "We could find it...If we really peel the onion back, we could find some place in this huge bureaucracy." But when pressed to provide a single expenditure that he would like to see cut, he demurred. West, a military veteran, also insisted that military spending should be sacrosanct. Tea party-backed freshmen are also racheting back their campaign promises to slash and burn government agencies to reduce spending. In a tea party questionnaire, freshman Rep. Steve Stivers (R-Ohio) proposed privatizing the entire Interior Department and claimed only four departments were constitutional. But when asked about his position on his first day of Congress, Stivers immediately backpedaled. "What I said in that questionnaire is that we need to take a look at everything. That's what we need to do, is to look at everything and see what works," he said. When asked for specifics, he responded: "We've got to look everywhere—we've got committees of jurisdiction to look at this." The tea party right could ramp up the pressure on the GOP to make good on its promises to slash spending. And there are a few areas—such as health care funding—that could prove especially vulnerable, with some chance of such cuts passing the Senate and becoming law. But the political reality is that cutting spending is always hard, while making tax cuts is easy—and Republicans have made it all the easier.
Public opposes cuts—they’re key to motivating Congress Cohen & Balz 4/19 (Jon & Dan, staff, Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-shows-americans-oppose-entitlement-cuts-to-deal-with-debt-problem/2011/04/19/AFoiAH9D_story.html, accessed 6-29-11, CH)
Despite growing concerns about the country’s long-term fiscal problems and an intensifying debate in Washington about how to deal with them, Americans strongly oppose some of the major remedies under consideration, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. The survey finds that Americans prefer to keep Medicare just the way it is. Most also oppose cuts inMedicaid and the defense budget. More than half say they are against small, across-the-board tax increases combined with modest reductions in Medicare and Social Security benefits. Only President Obama’s call to raise tax rates on the wealthiest Americans enjoys solid support. On Monday, Standard & Poor’s, for the first time, shifted its outlook on U.S. creditworthiness to “negative” because of the nation’s accumulating debt. The announcement rattled investors and could increase pressure on both sides in Washington to work out a broader deal as part of the upcoming vote over increasing the government’s borrowing authority. The president and congressional Republicans have set out sharply differing blueprints to deal with the looming problem. Obama has called for agreement on at least a framework by early summer, which roughly coincides with the deadline for raising the nation’s debt ceiling. Public resistance to many proposals in the competing plans could greatly complicate those discussions. Altering entitlement programs still involves political risk, the poll shows, and proponents of such changes face a substantial challenge in persuading the public that they are needed.