The party of austerity has a problem—their defense hawks need money for war. So even as GOP congressional leaders labor to complete a "budget blueprint" that cuts spending to the bone, other Republicans want to scrap it.
Rachael Bade reports:
[S]ome rank-and-file Republicans are already expressing interest in a much bigger deal that would adjust those caps, sweep away the still-developing blueprint and ease the budgetary pressure on the Pentagon — and, grudgingly, domestic programs if necessary.
Some staff on the Hill are already calling it Ryan-Murray 2.0. That’s a nod to the 2-year-old deal struck by then-Budget chairs Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) that temporarily loosened some of the fiscal restraints imposed under a 2011 budget law by funding key priorities like defense and offering modest increases for a handful of Democratic favorites.
Egad—modest increases for "Democratic favorites"? What might they do? House the homeless, feed undernourished kids, maybe provide a little breathing room to a single mom or dad who's working multiple jobs? Terrible stuff.
House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers of Kentucky is trying to avoid all that nonsense by sticking to the spending caps Republicans helped institute when they seized control of the House in 2011. But he added that all might be lost as "pressure" mounts.
“The defense hawks are unhappy; nondefense supporters are not happy with the numbers — so I think the pressure is going to build at some point in time to try to do something” about the 2011 spending caps, Rogers said.
And once again, House Speaker John Boehner is in the hot seat, according to fiscal hawks.
“Folks know where leadership is trying to drive the train,” said Dan Holler of Heritage Action, which opposed Ryan-Murray and hopes to scuttle a repeat. “Members are frustrated because they’ve been asked to take a lot of bad votes already.”
Will Boehner finally flip fiscal hawks the bird? Don't touch that dial.