TPMDC
« Franken Lawyer: Did Coleman Campaign Steal Ballots? | Home | Coburn Trying to Strip FutureGen Earmark »

The Centrist Cut List: What It Means

The working draft of proposed spending cuts to the Senate stimulus bill, obtained by TPMDC, offers a valuable guide to the agencies and programs that are in line for a trim by the time the legislative process is concluded.

The list is constantly changing -- and as an aide to Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) told me, now comes closer to $100 billion in cuts. Senate Democratic leaders suggested during a press briefing this afternoon that they were open to making targeted cuts, although Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) opened his remarks by saying that every $100 billion "we lop off" the bill represents jobs left un-created and un-filled.

Among the areas being eyed for cuts by the centrists, here are the most notable and/or controversial:

- Byrne Justice Assistance Grants are being considered for cuts as high as $1.2 billion, or 60% of the funding included in the stimulus. These grants are intended to help localities with law enforcement expenses that range from hiring to equipment buying. The National Criminal Justice Association estimates that 75% of the stimulus cash for Byrne would go to job creation, but the program has been plagued by scandal in the past; most notably in Tulia, Texas, where an ACLU investigation found Byrne money being used to keep dozens of African-American residents in jail based on the testimony of a single racist officer.

- A $5.5 billion surface transportation grant program that could provide sorely needed help to local mass transit programs would be eliminated entirely, according to the working draft of Senate centrist cuts. More on the potential value of that grant program can be found here.

- A $5.2 billion cut in prevention and wellness aid is being discussed, including trims in HIV testing and smoking cessation. The direct economic effect of this spending is debatable, but one thing isn't: cutting these programs would mean that Democrats are getting rid of the exact items that Republicans have harped on as wasteful spending -- even as they criticize the GOP for making a mountain out of a stimulus molehill. Still, as Senate Democratic Vice Chairman Chuck Schumer (NY) acknowledged to reporters this afternoon about the spending items being blasted by Republicans: "Many of them I'd support, and many of them I'd take out."

- IDEA and Title I education funding are in line for cuts that could exceed $13 billion, or more than 50% of the levels in the original stimulus bill. IDEA is the federal system of funding special education, and Title I money would go partly to economically disadvantaged areas where education aid is needed to prevent teacher layoffs that Education Secretary Arne Duncan has said could reach into the hundreds of thousands. Two good articles on the local impact of that aid can be found here as well as here. The House education committee also has a helpful site that allows you to check how the potentially sliced education aid could benefit your own local school district.


48 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

So what's left? I'm not bothered by the size of the bill as much as it seems intent on cutting every looking program on it and shoveling good money after bad into programs that perpetuate our fossil fuel dependence. It's really quite sad. This bill had the opportunity to be a transformative bill increasing our energy independence and laying the groundwork for healthcare reform, but now it's filled with tax cuts aimed at prolonging the inevitable slide in housing prices and encouraging the buying of gas guzzlers costing upwards of $50,000.

Really disappointing to see a promising bill turn into such a crummy piece of legislation.

user-pic

The cut list gives the lie to the idea that the stimulus bill is a "Christmas Tree" of wasteful spending.

In fact, the vast majority of spending in the bill goes to items that are well thought out and meet the President's most basic test: that they stimulate the economy now and invest in the future.

user-pic

If Democrats can't explain what's wrong with cutting 6.5b from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, they should just go home now.

Well, immediately after appointing Gingrich to head HHS. First things first.

user-pic

They aren't cutting money from IDEA. They are cutting additional stimulus money on top of the existing budget.

user-pic

OK, so that cut isn't a cut from 13b to 6.5b. The glass is actually half full!

Um do you have any idea how badly underfunded IDEA is?

user-pic

Co-sign. IDEA is an unfunded mandate - the underfunding is slowly killing us at the local district level. Adding some money is another one of those downpayments on rebuilding where we need to be to have a strong economy, education system, and everything else going forward.

What gets me even more, though, is the 100% cut to the state stabilization funding, which literally is going to be a survival lifeline for state budgets and thus for schools, health services, roads, and everything else that states do. Jobs, infrastructure, building a green economy- all down the tubes if these idiots in the Senate let states go down the tubes. We are facing cuts in THIS year's budget and need the money now!!

user-pic

Well, at least we got a faith-based Pentecostal to help keep us on the right and I do mean right road to the Lord.

Why do I have this overwhelmimg feeling that we lost the election?

user-pic

Word.

That "bipartisanship" thang shuuure be workin' out great, eh? ;)

user-pic

Most of these seem like qualitatively evaluate cuts, but cutting the surface transportation grant program is unnacceptable. Time to send Grandpa Lautenberg another email.

user-pic

Keep this in perspective, folks.

There were, essentially, two starting points here. The main Democratic bill and the DeMented Republican bill with NO spending and ALL tax cuts. Subtract the Collins-Nelson cuts from the Democratic bill. Is the final result closer to the original Democratic bill or the Demented GOP bill?

This is not capitulation as some people say. Yes, I wish the money for education and green energy would stay there. But those can come through in a later bill.

This will end up as a powerful $800 billion stimulus bill.

user-pic

Subtract the Collins-Nelson cuts from the Democratic bill. Is the final result closer to the original Democratic bill or the Demented GOP bill?

OK, so if we split the difference between a good Democratic bill and a completely batguano insane Republican bill, we can come up with a compromise. Sounds good to me, if half-insane.

user-pic

Sounds like sausage making.

user-pic

The question is not whether the final bill is closer to the Democratic or the Republican bill. The question is how close the bill is to being the proper size and with the money spent on the right things. Nelson's cuts would move the bill farther from where it needs to be. It could be the difference between the stimulus failing or succeeding. $800 billion is probably too small.

You also have to keep in mind what effect this debate will have on future debates. If the Republicans are allowed to damage this bill, they will come back harder next time. We need to defeat them badly enough for it to hurt.

user-pic

The bill also has to pass and become law. Since Reid is unwilling to demand a real filibuster, we need 60 votes for passage. With Ted Kennedy ill, we have only 58 Democratic Senators present and need two Republicans. That gives Snowe, Collins and Specter a LOT of power.

user-pic

Yes, and? So because of this we should roll over and let these so-called moderates do harm to the country? Cooperation with these people is the same as failure. They must be attacked relentlessly.

user-pic

Oddly enough, the things slated for cutting seem to be the ones that involve money that will actually be spent as soon as it's delivered, i.e. the funds with the most stimulating effect. Oh, yeah, and the funds that will prevent a lot of states from simply letting all their local services go bellyup. Once the state government infrastructure crashes, the rest of the stimulus money becomes very nearly pointless. Way to go.

user-pic

Well the plot thickens. The draft that everybody is up in arms about is several days old and was, surprise, surprise, leaked by a house republican staffer. We are arguing over speculation at this point.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/05/dem-senator-proposes-majo_n_164323.html

Fascinating how this is playing out. Politics in a new age of politics. Republicans better look out or they will get obama'd. I still see 50% of republicans on board with the final product.

user-pic

They should completely zero out the Byrne Grant program -- this is a corruption- and abuse-ridden disaster.

But mass transit, wellness and education? Cutting those is outrageous. Bad for the economy, bad for the environment, bad for people's health.


user-pic

Actually, I love the title "Centrist Cut List." I hope the right-wing media picks up on that one. That will be huge and republicans that vote against the final product will be in deep sh*t. Love it.

user-pic

WTF let's just cut it all and pull a Hoover. The repugnants and their blue-balled democrats know that if they turn Obama into Hoover, then the repugnants are in for the next 40 years. It's what happend in 29.

Crash and burn, USA. I'll be working in Switzerland.

user-pic

Which political party won the elections last November, and thus had the permission from the voters to give their best effort to govern our country? November was ages ago, but as bad as my memory is, I can't recall that party being the Republican party. Also, to the best of my knowledge, Barrack Obama ran as a Democrat, with the full support of the party and the voters. Again, my feeble memory aside, I don't recall that he was listed as a Republocrat on my ballot.

So, perhaps someone can explain what is happening in Congress and the Presidency today? It almost looks like the Democratic Party looked over the election results and said "no thank you".

user-pic

Are you surprised that Congress actually gets to write legislation having to do with appropriating huge sums of money? Are you surprised that the Senate is not a majority-rules body but gives lots of power to the minority? Are you surprised that "centrists" like Ben Nelson think they owe none of their electoral futures to the president?

It's not a parliamentary system . Get over it. The last president who tried to steam roll all his policies down the throat of the political minority drove our country into ruin.

user-pic

The Blue Dogs won the election. They are far worse than Republicans because they enable the Republican agenda and so muddy up any alternative that Democrats might present that the public is left believing that Democrats believe in nothing but expedient surrender.

user-pic

The center is the center even in a two party system. It will take 4-5 more non-centrist dems to move it out of reach of Ben Nelson's hands.

I am guessing that if there isn't big movement on this bill next week, Obama may be taking his first out of DC trip to Maine.

user-pic

My prediction? The bill that passes will be such a hodge-podge that it will be worthless for stimulating the economy or anything else. The Democrats really really really need to get rid of Reid and Pelosi and then learn how to govern from scratch. They've been taking lessons from the republicans for the last 30 years and we all know where that got us.

user-pic

OK, it's annoying enough that Republicans are trying to cut spending they don't like as "wasteful", but considering the totality of the economy consists of A LOT of people doing A LOT of different types of jobs, what's the point of seemingly trying to make "stimulus" all about construction? Sure if things get bad enough people will do any job to feed themselves and their families, but isn't it smarter to keep people in the fields they know? Just another point on Republican stupidity the Democrats in DC can't seem to ball-up and express.

user-pic

I don't know if someone already said this but some of those items on that list have already been taken out I believe. The smoking secession part is one item that sticks out I believe I heard on the news it was taken out.

user-pic

My understanding is that while Nelson and Snow can propose these cuts, the full body has to approve them. So, if the body rejects the proposed changes, will Nelson and Snow vote to filibuster the bill? My hunch is "no."

The important thing is that the overall bill works. These proposals should be shot down and the overall bill should work. It's got to be close to a trillion, with the vast majority of the money going toward programs designed to build the job base.

user-pic

You know what I'm tired of? I'm tired of blogs, (especially ones like TPM) being so afraid of the T.V. pundits. Seriously, you guys are buying into their meme and it is only hurting us.

There's something that the Republicans, most democrats, and lefty blogs don't understand/don't want to face.
TV attracts older ppl. The younger generation WILL make up the largest part of the electorate by 2016. You know we don't give a crap about the talking heads on TV. You guys know a lot of ppl don't even watch TV anymore. Why do you think news media is dying? Actually, it could be a lot sooner than 2016 if we register more ppl to vote (or look at ppl 45 and younger). This young generation is already out voting those 65 and over in some states.

Yet TV, the Republicans, and even the polls still give/cater to much to the 65 and older crowd (and a little less to the 50 and over). We are a bigger generation than the boomers!

So yes change has come to America, it is a matter that most ppl (even young ppl) are ignorant of these facts.

Again, the Senate is made up of older ppl, they aren't thinking about us. They say stuff like "Well we don't want our children and grandchildren to pay this debt." STFU Their children and grandchildren are already here. I don't think these old ppl have the right to make decisions on my behalf, especially since they ignore my existence. (Oh and these are the politicians who have messed up the country).

So yea liberals are really good about running scared, and hand wringing but they aren't good about bringing the fire of the facts.

If you want to put the fear of God in all these pols then ppl should be pointing these facts out ever single day. Especially to Senators that are up for election in 2016.

user-pic

Ok, you have to stop thinking of this as a policy vehicle to right all the underfunding woes of the past. That is the problem--confusing a myriad substantive policy goals with the need for stimulus. Reps will do just fine attacking apparent policy choices that have not been justified to the American people. The rational for the whole package is economic stimulus. Dems should insist on the size of the package, e.g. no less than $850bn and feel free to trade off less money for prevention so long as it is used for some kind of spending that will be stimulative.

Congress people, especially Democrats are so stupid sometimes.

user-pic

Oh, Economides?

Money spent on goods and services: stimulative. Money spent on tax cuts: Not stimulative. Money spent on goods and services that reduce deadweight costs to the economy in future years (like smoking cessation): even more stimulative.

So you're right about the size, but wrong about the composition.

user-pic

I never said the composition does not matter, but the dimension it matters on is whether it creates stimulus not whether it fully funds program X, Y, or Z that accomplished long cherished policy goals that in and of themselves have nothing to do with expansion of economic activity. We should deal with policy in due course, but right now it would be so much easier if Congress had the discipline to set out criteria and actually follow it. You know most of these folks are just going after stuff that benefits them in their districts.

Also, the idea that money spent on any tax cut is not stimulative is sort of daft. If you want to be able to draw distinctions about different types of spending then you should be able to do so for different kinds of tax cuts as well. Much of spending may be superior to most tax cuts, but the categorical version of the same statement is surely incorrect.


user-pic

Seconded.

All spending is stimulative. All of it. The question is which spending gives you the most bang for the buck? Education is one of the best investments - period. You spare layoffs, which keeps people off of unemployment. (Would you rather pay people to do nothing, or teach, or deliver lunches, or process applications, etc.) Plus, you help children. If children are better educated through this, then that too becomes a long-term stimulus to our nation, both economically and otherwise.

THIS is the problem: short-sighted political posturing.

user-pic

If I use tax dollar to buy bombs from say Germany that I keep in a warehouse, how is that stimulative? Similarly spending in the form of higher benefits to those already receiving them can very well be saved and not spent, as with a tax break. Also you could buy something that has negative value, like say a bomb that goes off accidentally and blows up a bridge while being transported up the street. I mean this are silly but categorical statements are just as silly.

And then there is the question of distribution. you wouldn't want to spend all of the money in just one state.

Education maybe the investment with the longest term return, but it is not the most stimulative. I.e I can pay a teacher more, but that is not the same as hiring two new teachers. They key is to re-employ otherwise idle resources. If there is a great reservoir of unemployed teachers out thee i'd be surprised. Funding education is an excellent policy. It is not be the biggest short term bang for the buck which is very much the major goal of stimulus.

user-pic

Actually, paying any relatively low paid person more is very stimulative. That person will spend the extra pay, and that is what ends up stimulating the economy. When people have more to spend and do so, the people employed where they spend it also end up with more money, which they spend, etc.

The only non-stimulative spending is that which goes into the bank account of someone who is already spending all they want to. That is why tax cuts for the wealthy are not stimulative. Also, there is sort of a quantum effect involved - a tax cut which gives the average worker $10 more take home pay per pay check is not stimulative, but one that gives him $100 more take home pay per pay check most likely is. But, no tax cut being considered approaches the $100 per pay check level.

user-pic

Susan Collins wants to make sure that poor kids in Maine get no benefits from this bill. Billions for Halliburton but not one cent for a disabled kid in a leaking trailer in Maine. That's how she rolls.

user-pic

Well when a bill pases, she won't be rolling anymore.

user-pic

What is cut today could resurface in a new bill tomorrow. The President has said there will be more.

Right now, we need a stimulus bill. With some Republican support.

user-pic

Umm ... that sort of has nothing to do with the point.

The point is that Collins/Nelson cannot articulate a reason why these items should be cut and others should not.


user-pic

My concern is the massive cuts to funding for victims of crime. The stimulus funding for VOCA (Victims of Crime Act) and VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) were both cut by 50%. The Bush administration has been trying for years to reduce their funding; I had hoped that the new administration would reverse the trend.

VOCA funds pay for programs that help victims survive the often brutalizing criminal justice process. VAWA and VOCA both fund programs for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. Too often, women and their children who are fleeing abusers must be turned away from already over-full shelters. Victims of rape and child abuse suffer long-term harm that can be mitigated by treatment from specialized counselors. All of the programs do community outreach. The cuts, as always, hurt primarily the vulnerable populations, with the hope that they will continue to suffer in silence.

The really sad thing about these cuts is that help for victims has substantial long-term benefits. Victims with support are more likely to stay with the criminal justice system and less likely to suffer long-term harm. Penny wise and pound foolish, as usual in U.S. policy.


user-pic

I lost track of all the TAX CUTS getting lopped. Could you repeat those for me?

user-pic

I was going to say the SAME FUCKING THING! Why in the HELL is there no talk of cutting off those 30 billion dollars worth of WASTEFUL BUSINESS TAX CUTS. My goodness it is pissing me off.

user-pic

We're not seeing it on the new, improved, "Obama is screwing everything up by acting the way Broder wants" TPM, but Harry Reid says he has the votes and is pooh-poohing the cuts that are being treated here as a done deal.

"Do we have the votes? We believe we do," said Reid, who expects a final vote on the package will be held on Thursday.

It appears the stimulus would attract only a few GOP votes, however, and Senate Democratic leaders distanced themselves from earlier hopes that the economic recovery could draw more Republican support.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), vice chairman of the Democratic Conference, said the notion of attracting 80 votes for the package in the Senate is a "distant memory."

"We'd rather pass a good bill with 65 votes," said Schumer.

Democratic leaders also cast doubt on an effort negotiated by centrists such as Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to strip as much as $200 billion from the bill.

Schumer said a price tag of $650 billion, which Collins supports for the package, is inadequate.

"If they think they're going to rewrite this bill, President Obama is going to walk away," said Reid, when asked about efforts by about 20 centrists to lop off $100 billion to $200 billion from the cost of the package.

user-pic

People better figure out quick that unless progressives come up with a means of punishing Blue Dogs we won't see a progressive bill out of Congress till hell freezes over.

I predict the next thing they do is so screw up any health bill that it emerges providing no benefit whatever to the people who actually need it.

user-pic

It was a nice experiment -- inviting the foxes into the hen-house thinking they would "play nice" if politely invited. Time to ask them to leave, if politely.

...36 out of 41 Republican senators who voted to scrap all spending in the Stimulus Bill.
Are you kidding me? Now that we are in the situation we are in they have the audacity to seek a tax cut that was beyond Bush/Cheney's wildest dreams? The very thing the Democratic minority fought against? What happened to "lead, follow or get out of the way"? Indeed, push them out of the way!
user-pic

It's easy.

The Dems asked $825 or so in the House.
The House Repos said No Way Jose.
The Senate Dems asked $900.
Collins is bidding $800.

So the final price in the Senate is likely between $800 and $900 unless someone gets fancy or rude and decides to up the ante (on either bid or ask).

Split the difference says $850, but there isn't really a principle behind that, just illustrating things... Could go up or down from there. It looks like it's down to fine tuning now, esp. after Obama's good speech Thursday.

I think there are things which could come out, and maybe some small things taken out could go back in.


user-pic

Good for Obama. Next we need the liberal Senators to put aside their clubby politeness and deal with these "centrists". What is a Democatic "centrist"? A useful fool for the failed consevative agenda. Call them what they are and stop allowing them to do more damage.
Who the hell cares what Ben Nelson thinks? He's been a supporter of the Republican policies that created this uneccessary disaster. Olympia Snow? Another Bush hack pretending to be a moderate. They come from states representing a total of 1% of the nations poulation, which is fine. But why are they being given so much say in a stimulus bill affecting the other 99%?
This is no time for business as usual politics.

user-pic

Democrats in the Senate would accomplish a great deal if they would "allow" the Repubs to filibuster a bill of this nature. Then the news is about the stalling tactics of the Repubs, trying to avoid correcting the economic disaster awaiting us. Right now, and as things are likely to continue, the news is about the inability of the Democrats to come up with the 60% majority needed to pass any bill in the Senate. Of course the news media never bother to acknowledge that bills require a 51% majority, not a 60% majority. Eventually news reporting of this type gets us a Republican Congress again.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Matt
Cooper

Bio

Eric
Kleefeld

Bio

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address