By Cong. Mac Thornberry
Texas Insider Report: WASHINGTON, D.C. – I want to update you on the budget bill passed by the House last week. This bill keeps the strict spending caps set under the Budget Control Act (BCA) in place. It also achieves 100 percent of the Budget Control Act’s deficit reduction, but goes even further by reducing the deficit an additional $23 billion. The difference is that the deficit reduction is reached in a smarter, more targeted way.
This measure cuts $85 billion. Nearly all of these cuts come from mandatory spending, which accounts for nearly two-thirds of the federal budget.
- $31 billion of those savings is used to prevent further cuts to defense over the next two years.
- Defense spending will remain flat in 2014 and 2015.
- The first priority of the federal government is providing for our nation’s defense, and this budget gives the DOD a greater opportunity to do just that.
It does all of this without raising taxes.
Another $31 billion is added to domestic discretionary programs. Even so, domestic discretionary spending will be less in 2014 and 2015 than it was in 2008, before President Obama took office. The remaining $23 billion in savings is used to reduce the deficit even more than under the existing sequester.
There are some increased user fees in this bill, but even the user fees cut spending. When airline passengers pay a greater share of the costs for their security, when private companies pay more for a federal guarantee of their pensions, or when federal employees pay more of their retirement costs, the taxpayers have to pay less.
In 2014, all of the additional spending cuts under the sequester fall on the Department of Defense. This bill replaces those cuts with cuts in mandatory spending. It is not nearly enough to solve our fiscal problems, but it begins to reform that part of the budget where most of the spending is.
And by establishing spending levels for two years, this bill provides the economic certainty that our small businesses and government agencies need.
There are provisions such as modest reforms to some retired military cost of living adjustments that I prefer were not included. This agreement is far from ideal, and there is still much to be done. In many areas, it does not go as far as I would like. But on balance, it is better for defense and for the deficit than nothing, so I supported it.
You can find more details about the provisions on my website.
Have a question you would like answered? Please contact me by phone, letter, e-mail,on Facebook, or on Twitter. As always, I appreciate hearing from you.
