Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Republicans attack Obama for spending too much, cutting too close to home

By Michael D. Shear
Republican lawmakers continue to bash President Obama's budget for failing to effectively control spending and adding to the nation's long-term debt.

But many of the same lawmakers are complaining about the spending cuts that affect their own communities, often aiming those comments at their constituents back home.

Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), for example, lashed out at Obama for "the same old big government budget that will spend too much, borrow too much, and tax too much." He said: "I'm feeling a lot like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day."

But at the same time, Bond issued a statement criticizing Obama's proposed cuts in the military's C-17 aircraft program -- cuts that happen to affect thousands of jobs in Missouri.

"Despite the need for the proven, on-time, and on-budget workhorse, the President once again wants to shut down our nation's only large airlift line in production," Bond said in a statement.

Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), called Obama's budget "another massive budget filled with even more spending than last year's record totals."

But in the Lexington Herald-Leader back home, a McConnell spokesman made it clear that the senator opposes Obama's proposal to slash coal subsidies by $2.3 billion over 10 years as part of his climate change legislation.

"Senator McConnell opposes both the president's proposed new national energy tax and the tax on coal included in his budget outline unveiled today,' spokesman Robert Steurer said in the paper. "Both would hurt Kentucky families who are dependent on coal for their livelihood."

McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said by e-mail that what Democrats consider an end to subsidies is the equivalent of tax increases on the coal industry.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) slams Obama, saying that "instead of reigning in this out-of-control spending, the President has proposed a budget that would increase deficit spending by 35 percent over the next five years."

But like other members of the Texas delegation, Cornyn takes exception to the spending cuts Obama has proposed to the NASA space program, which would affect jobs in Texas.

"I will work with my colleagues in Congress to ensure the budget funds Constellation, and I look forward to Congress' taking up NASA's reauthorization to ensure the agency, and the tens of thousands of men and women who compose our space program, finally receive a clear and bold vision for the future," Cornyn wrote in a statement.

The lawmakers in question defend their positions, saying that there is nothing wrong with being critical of the overall size of Obama's budget while criticizing individual proposals.

"There's no inconsistency in saying $3.8 trillion is too much spending overall, but that America's human space flight program is the wrong place to cut," Cornyn said in a statement released by his office. "Budgeting is about priorities: if we ended TARP and returned unspent stimulus funds, then the Constellation program wouldn't be on the
chopping block."

A McConnell aide said the senator does not apologize for his position relating to coal.

"As you know, there is currently a corporate tax rate for manufacturers (to encourage domestic manufacturing and JOBS)," the aide wrote. "The administration's budget proposes RAISING that rate for coal--but not for other manufacturers. Sen. McConnell opposes tax hikes; the administration does not."

By Michael D. Shear  |  February 4, 2010; 3:02 PM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency , Barack Obama  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: John Boehner greets Obama overtures with skepticism, wants to 'trust but verify' moves toward bipartisanship
Next: White House demands apology from GOP senator over national security briefing


The attack is hallow.
They criticize for spending too much, however emphasize --keep the cuts out of their districts/states. The President is playing the cards the way it should. When he we cut all shares the burden. Way to go!

Posted by: Victoria5 | February 5, 2010 4:42 AM | Report abuse

What I would like to see is Obama's budget printed in THE POST and THE NEW YORK TIMES side by side next to the Republican budget. Then all Americans can make comparisons and decide which budget is actually better. This assumes that the Republicans have a budget. If they do not have one they should be prohibited from criticism until they have one.

As a sidebar can someone, anyone, explain why we have budgeted 139 BILLION dollars for Iraq and another 30 BILLION for Afghanistan for next year WITHOUT DEBATE? The Health Care Bill was to cost 900 Billion or so over ten years. Well right here is almost a quarter of that total. Why no debate?

Posted by: nyrunner101 | February 4, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are such freaking hypocrites. Obama offers them a role in taming the budget, but they say no because it might help things in the country, which is bad for them of course. Their only hope for a ticket back from the wilderness is if they gum up the works and prevent any progress they can, making the electorate more desperate and angry.

Party over country, as usual. Just like in 2003 with Iraq.

Posted by: B2O2 | February 4, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

The new Republican battle cry, "He isn't cutting spending enough and too much of what he cuts is MINE!!!"

IF C17's were such great airplanes their civilian versions would keep selling, like C130 Hercules, still in production in Georgia after more than 40 years.

But credibility is the other commodity, like truth, that Republicans are content to do without.

Posted by: ceflynline | February 4, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Fiscal restraint didn't seem to be a problem for these dooshbags when that piece of soiled toilet paper George W. Bush was spending more money than a drunken sailor in a house of ill repute.

Posted by: VeloStrummer | February 4, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Is that hispocracy I smell, or just someone's pants of fire?

Posted by: EricS2 | February 4, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company