Congress approves FY 2011 appropriations - Finally!
Apr 15, 2011
Speaker John Boehner
The deed is done.
More than six months after the beginning of Fiscal Year 2011, Congress has finally approved funding for the government through September 30.
It took an 11th hour agreement this past Friday and then it took bi-partisan votes in the House and Senate yesterday to make it happen.
It was a messy process, and remained messy yesterday.
While the compromise agreement was touted as $38 billion in cuts, there were, as usual, some squirrely cuts to smooth the deal.
It turns out that the hard-won deal included about $13 - $18 billion of cuts that were kind of smoke and mirror reductions, cuts of money that would not have been spent in any case.
In addition, the Congressional Budget Office analyzed the agreement, and concluded and the net effect of the reductions in this fiscal year is $352 million in outlays. There the problem is that the agreement covered budget authority (the authority to spend money) while the money actually spent each fiscal year is called outlays.
The Continuing Resolution Saga Continues
Mar 15, 2011
(http://livableworld.org/calendar/)
The Continuing Resolution saga continues. Last week, the Senate rejected both the House and the Senate Appropriations Committee versions of a bill to fund the government for the rest of Fiscal Year 2011.
On March 9, the Senate rejected the House-passed Continuing Resolution that would have cut the President's budget by $100 billion by a vote of 44 - 56 and a Senate Appropriations Committee version that would cut $51 billion from the President's request by a vote of 42 - 58.
On Friday, March 11, the House Appropriations Committee proposed another short-term Continuing Resolution to fund the government until April 8.
The House is expected to vote on the bill on March 15 -- beware of the ides of March. The Senate should vote later this week.
New House Republicans on Defense Spending: Not Your Father’s GOP
Feb 28, 2011
A number of tea party leaders and newly elected Republican Members of Congress have indicated that any package of deficit reductions should target defense spending as well as domestic. Some Republicans have stated that no program should be off the table when dealing with the U.S. budget deficit.
The recently concluded House of Representatives consideration of the Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Resolution funding the entire federal government was a good test of that sentiment.
While it is important to avoid going overboard in discussing GOP freshmen’s willingness to cut the military budget, it is clear that this is not your father’s Republican Party – at least in the House.
Franks Missile Defense Amendment Defeated
Jul 01, 2009
Rep. Franks (R-AZ) proposed amendment H.AMDT.266 to the FY 2010 Defense Authorization bill, which increased funding for missile defense by $1.2 billion which was subsequently defeated on June 25th. There were a number of Representatives that defected from their party lines, as shown below, but the general effect was awash.
Money for Pentagon programs that even the Pentagon doesn't want?
Jun 23, 2009
Last week, the House Armed Services Committee approved the 2010 Defense Authorization bill. As Travis mentioned in the Center blog, a number of proposed amendments to the 2010 Defense Authorization bill have been submitted to Congress - and unfortunately some of them show a dangerous lack of priorities when it comes to our national security.
In the next few days, some very important amendments affecting missile defense and non-proliferation issues will likely be coming to a vote. Missile defense proponents are launching amendments to reverse Pentagon-requested cuts in missile defense programs.
Yes, that's right. The Pentagon has asked for less funding for several missile defense programs that it finds wasteful and unworkable, but some Members of Congress are trying to waste taxpayer money on them anyway. Agreeing with the Pentagon's request to end funding for these wasteful programs that prohibit funds from going to national security and other programs that we do need, are the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Director of the Missile Defense Agency.
One of these missile defense amendments would add $80 million to missile defense spending by taking funds from international materials protection and cooperation, the global threat reduction initiative, and North Korean anti-nuclear program initiatives. The Global Threat Reduction Initiative is a significant non-proliferation program in the Department of Energy, which tracks down and secures loose nuclear material around the globe. Given that everyone from Barack Obama to George W. Bush in recent years has acknowledged that terrorists obtaining loose nuclear materials would be the greatest threat to our national security, it seems like these might be programs that should receive an increase, not a decrease in funding.
This is why we just sent out an e-alert about these amendments.
Special thanks to Intern Extraordinaire, Andrew St. Denis!
