Obama's Budget: But How Do the GOP Three Feel?
The story of centrist Democratic opposition to President Obama's budget, which began to trickle into view this morning, will unfold gradually over this month and next. Democrats won't be fully challenged to embrace Obama's vision for a remodeling of tax and health care policy until April, when the full details of the White House budget emerge.
Congress will then craft its own budget blueprint, taking some cues from Obama but potentially abandoning some of the White House's proposals. The 28% taxation limit on itemized deductions is already taking bipartisan fire and looks like a good bet to be jettisoned, despite uncertain evidence that it would have a negative effect on charitable giving.
So we know already that more than a dozen centrist Dems are meeting to weigh their concerns about the White House budget, while Republicans lick their chops in glee at the brewing rebellion.
But what about the three GOPers whose votes helped put the stimulus bill over the top? In their responses to the budget last week, Sens. Arlen Specter (PA), Olympia Snowe (ME), and Susan Collins (ME) offered one palpable clue about their opinion ...
... that they won't reveal it until the full Obama budget comes out in April. From Specter's statement:
It is impossible to evaluate adequately the President's ten-year budget until the release of the full documents.
Here's how Collins put it:
I will closely examine the full budget proposal when the details become available in the coming weeks.
Snowe was less direct in her response to the budget, remarking that the budget outline was "bold with its intention" but "scarce on details." Still, don't look for these three to get out too far in front of the budget this month -- despite Snowe and Specter's admirable climate change advocacy. They're likely to be watching how centrist Democratic critics air their grievances before making their opinions known.
But keep in mind that the budget will be immune to a filibuster, meaning that Democrats can afford to lose eight of their own members (assuming the Minnesota race remains unresolved) without the need to gain a GOP vote.


















To be honest, their responses are promising. My guess is they already know the party hates them so who knows, they might actually vote on how their constituents want them to vote, whom happened to vote overwhelmingly for Obama and his agenda.
March 4, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I think we might gain Snowe and conceivably even Collins (though not Specter- UNLESS he decides to retire) while losing a few Blue Dog DINOs. And only 51 votes are needed for the budget. Plus I think Obama leaned from the stimulus negotiations and went a little bit "long", so he has some room for bargaining without seriously compromising his priorities. I'm feeling fairly sanguine at this point.
March 4, 2009 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually am very surprised by these statements. Have they gone that far off the reservation? Maybe they are contemplating a switch to indie status or dem.
March 4, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
51 votes will be a bad strategy for this budget. I think he should use the fact that he could get it to give some concessions in return for GOP votes.
March 4, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
No strategy that gets the budget passed with Obama's priorities reasonably intact can possibly be a bad strategy.
March 4, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you ever wondered why the House GOP Stimulus thing was a problem, it's here.
Why should Obama concede when he doesn't have to when he won't get any votes for it anyway?
Conceding to the GOP when you only need 51 votes in the Senate is like giving a hen a banjo
March 4, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
like giving a hen a banjo
Or a fish a bicycle.
March 4, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, guys, half of the earmarks are going to Republicans! Someone has bought in.
March 4, 2009 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see what the big deal is, it's obvious to anyone with a brain why the President wants this as is and the political posturing by blue dogs and others is unnecessary, let's just get to something serious.
March 4, 2009 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink