House GOP Committee's New Budget Plan: Faster, Deeper Cuts

The Republican Study Committee's new plan balances the federal government in just 4 years, whereas Paul Ryan’s balances it in 10.

Updated: March 18, 2013 | 9:47 p.m.
March 18, 2013 | 9:30 p.m.

Rep. Steve Scalise at CPAC in National Harbor, Md., Friday, March 15, 2013. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Anything you can cut, we can cut deeper.

That seemed to be the message Monday from the Republican Study Committee, which unveiled an alternative budget for fiscal year 2014 that Chairman Steve Scalise of Louisiana described as “fairer and simpler” than other competing versions, including the one introduced last week by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

Still, Scalise was careful to emphasize his support for Ryan’s budget and to discourage any internal “division” over the two documents.

Flanked by Rep. Rob Woodall, R-Ga., a member of the House Budget Committee who helped draft the RSC version, Scalise addressed perhaps the biggest difference between the two proposals: The RSC budget balances in four years, whereas Ryan’s balances in 10 years.

“We do the same thing; we just do it a little quicker,” Scalise explained.

Scalise said the RSC proposal strikes “a really good contrast” to the Senate Democratic budget introduced last week, but it also highlights some critical contrasts with Ryan’s version. Policy-wise, the RSC budget, titled “Back to the Basics,” goes much further in cutting entitlement programs and in balancing the budget over the next few years than Ryan’s most recent plan.

The RSC blueprint seeks to freeze all discretionary spending through 2017. It proposes turning Medicare into a voucher program by the year 2019, whereas Ryan’s latest budget did not touch Medicare within the next decade. And it targets the political sacred cow of Social Security. The RSC budget calls for a change in the way benefits are calculated—a change that President Obama supports as part of a grand budget deal—as well as an increase in the eligibility age for anyone born in 1979 or later.

Scalise and Woodall said their conservative subgroup of the House Republican Conference has traditionally released an alternative budget in an attempt to pull the conference ideologically rightward. Scalise noted that the last time the RSC did not release an alternative version was in 2008—and that’s because the House GOP budget balanced in four years. “That’s been kind of the sweet spot,” he said.

Part of the goal of this year’s Republican Study Committee budget, much like the Ryan plan, is to establish a standard for balancing the federal budget in a short time period and make that the rhetoric against which all budget documents are measured in the coming years.

“I serve on the Budget Committee, and I believe in what Paul is doing there,” Woodall said. “Having sat in those discussions for two years, I saw how the RSC budget in 2011 ... laid the framework for principles that could pass the House in 2012. And laying out those RSC principles in 2012, now we have a framework for things that can pass the House in 2013. It’s a process.”

Scalise stressed that the contrast conservatives are drawing is not with the House Republican budget, but with the document produced by Senate Democrats—and with the one they’re still waiting for from the president. “We will see his Final Four picks before we see his budget,” Scalise predicted.

This article appears in the March 19, 2013, edition of National Journal Daily as Republican Study Committee Offers Alternative Budget.

Get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox. Sign up for National Journal's morning alert, Wake-Up Call, and afternoon newsletter, The Edge. Subscribe here.


Leave A Comment
The National Journal Group has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.
Comments powered by Disqus
Follow National Journal
Latest Edition
SUBSCRIPTION ONLY

Today's cover story: "Both Parties Face Tricky Balancing Act at IRS Hearings" -- Even amid crisis and scandal, the two parties remain as divided as ever—especially when it comes to finding solutions.That much should be evident on Friday morning when the top Democratic and Republican tax writers gather for the first in a series of hearings about problems with the Internal Revenue Service’s screenings of tax-exempt advocacy groups.

Read this and all of the stories in the latest digital edition of National Journal Daily.

National Journal Daily
Columns
Charlie Cook: The Cook Report

Republicans Should Go Easy on Obama, At Least in Public

May 16, 2013
As a tactical matter, a subterranean campaign will score more direct hits on the president.
Ronald Brownstein: Political Connections

How the White House Scandals Could Hurt Republicans, Too

May 16, 2013
By enraging the base and strengthening the faction least willing to compromise with Obama, the IRS and Benghazi affairs could hurt a GOP shot at the presidency.
Norm Ornstein: Washington Inside Out

Eric Cantor’s Caucus Thwarts His Push for an Alternative Agenda

May 16, 2013
Cantor has learned that the tea-party movement he helped foster won’t fall in line behind his efforts to push an alternative conservative agenda.
More Columns »
Expert Opinions
Transportation Experts

Oops! Judge Slams Local Public-Private Deal

May 17, 2013

Latest Response by Robert L. Darbelnet: Public Scrutiny Essential

Energy Experts

Should Washington Go Small on Energy and Climate Policy?

May 17, 2013

Latest Response by Jack Gerard: Minor Policies, Major Consequences

Energy Experts

Should Washington Go Small on Energy and Climate Policy?

May 16, 2013

Latest Response by Jonathan Silver: Woefully Little, Better Than Nothing

More Expert Opinions »