It is amazing how many just enjoy jumping into conclusion about anything that this President is doing or not doing with their eyes blindfolded.
What I have seen in the comments of the rec list diary Obama: A Spending Freeze? Are you kidding? this evening is a rush to judgment to crucify the POTUS and the Administration into little shreds regarding the proposed plan to implement freeze on select federal programs. Is that what we have become? demonizing this Administration without a single analysis on what the freeze entails. Is these the trajectory of what the next 3 years is going to be?
I hope not!
Well, I would like to set the record straight here from little information I have researched on this proposed freeze on non security discretionary spending the WH has announced early this evening.
Follow me below the fold...
Being one of the participant in the White House conference call this evening,Matthew Yglesias at thinkprogress.org writes:
On an exciting phone call with progressive internet writers earlier this evening, a senior administration official outlined the Obama administration’s plan to call for a freeze in non-security discretionary spending spending starting with the Fiscal Year 2011 budget.
He goes on explaining specific programs that will not be affected by this freeze stating:
The freeze would not apply to the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Homeland Security, or to the foreign operations budget of the State Department. The official emphasized that the freeze is not the only element of the administration’s plans for deficit reduction, just the only element he was prepared to discuss on this particular call. "This is only one component of an overall budget," he said, "you’ll see other components on Monday."
Yes, Republicans who we should spend our energy rebuking are high fiving by trying to spin this as an across the board freeze and how wrong it is during recession time the Administration is doing freezing budgets from federal programs. Mark goes on to debunk that Republican talking point noting...
So is this an across-the-board freeze like we’ve heard Republicans call for? No, it’s "not a blunt across the board freeze." Rather, some agencies will see their budgets go up and others will go down, producing an overall freeze effect. The senior official sought to portray this as not just a question of spending less money, but of getting our money’s worth—cutting (unspecified) ineffective programs and spending more on programs that work.
From what we know, the freeze is very limited to select programs that will not boost the economy or creating jobs. Further, it will help save $250 Billion over ten years. So, let's do the math...that is about $25 Billion a year in savings. Is that savings from this proposed freeze so crazy we have to make the idea of freeze so dramatic? I don't think so.
Here is a different source by Christina Bellantoni on TPM who wrote:
"This is not a blunt, across-the-board freeze," the official said, adding that some agencies will see spending increases while some will see spending cuts as the total remains constant.
sinp...
"We do need to reflect the fact that we remain at war," the official said, noting the president was able to win several battles on cutting Pentagon spending.
snip...
If the changes are passed, the non-security discretionary spending will be at its lowest level in 50 years. It currently is $447 billion for fiscal year 2010, and the administration wants it kept at or below that level through 2013, the official said.
The official said the budget to be released Monday will reflect the proposal but still would invest in Obama's priorities.
It sounds like the President is going to do what he said he would on November 25, 2008.
Obama said: "Budget reform is not an option. It is an imperative."
We sure don't know all the details of the proposal so let's hold off the temptations to throw mud on the Administration for the sake of keeping this community sane. I would wait until the SOTU address and see the details in the budget before we hit him below the waist.
Thank you!