Christian Coalition of America Will Score "Cut, Cap & Balance Act" on Tuesday

Christian Coalition of America was one of the first organizations, this past May, to come out in favor of legislation, now called the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011, H.R. 2560, introduced by Congressmen Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Mick Mulvaney (R-SC).  Eight of the Republican presidential candidates have endorsed their bill.  The idea for such legislation was hatched earlier this year in the 180-member conservative House Republican Study Committee, chaired by Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH).

The Cut, Cap and Balance Act of 2011 will be voted on the floor of the House of Representatives next Tuesday, July 19.  It is also expected to be voted on in the United States Senate where S.1340, the Cut, Cap and Balance Act of 2011, has been introduced by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT.) 

The Christian Coalition of America (CCA) will be scoring this very important vote  --  in both the House of Representatives and the Senate  --  in the 2011 CCA Congressional Scorecard.  Any Representative or Senator who votes AGAINST the Cut, Cap and Balance Act of 2011, H.R.2560 (House) or S.1340 (Senate) will receive a negative score. 

It goes without saying, that Christian Coalition of America will also oppose and score in the 2011 CCA Congressional Scorecard the Mitch McConnell/Harry Reid/Nancy Pelosi "Plan B" bill, which will allow the president to raise the debt limit by $2.5 trillion.  These 3 Members of Congress have obviously concluded that neither the Cut, Cap and Balance legislation nor a Balanced Budget Amendment to the United States Constitution has the votes to pass the Senate.

Since most Republicans and some conservative Democrats will disagree with Obama's suggested particular budget cuts required by the McConnell/Reid/Pelosi bill, passage of their bill --  which does not force the president to make cuts  --  will result in no spending cuts whatsoever, BUT will allow a huge $2.5 trillion increase in the federal debt limit. 

Any Representative or Senator who votes FOR the McConnell/Reid/Pelosi "Plan B" legislation will receive a negative score in the 2011 Christian Coalition of America Congressional Scorecard. 

Note details, directly below, of the Cut, Cap and Balance Act of 2011, H.R. 2560, in the summary sheet published by the Republican Conference in the U.S. House of Representatives:

- - -

The Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011

Next week the House is scheduled to consider the Cut, Cap and Balance Act of 2011, sponsored by Representatives Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Mick Mulvaney (R-SC), and Reid Ribble (R-WI).  The following is a summary of the legislation courtesy of Rep. Chaffetz.  

CUT

Cuts total spending by $111 billion in FY 2012.  The savings is divided as follows:

  • Reduce non-security discretionary spending below 2008 levels, which saves $76 billion. 
  • $35 billion cut to non-veterans, non-Medicare, non-Social Security mandatory spending.  
  • Defense budget at President’s level. 

CAP

Total federal spending is scaled back based on the glide path for the fiscal years below:

  • 2012, 22.5% of GDP.
  • 2013, 21.7% of GDP.
  • 2014, 20.8% of GDP.
  • 2015, 20.2% of GDP.
  • 2016, 20.2% of GDP.
  • 2017, 20.0% of GDP.
  • 2018, 19.7% of GDP. 
  • 2019, 19.9% of GDP. 
  • 2020, 19.9% of GDP.
  • 2021, 19.9% of GDP.

BALANCE

Requires the passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment before raising the nation’s debt limit.

DEBT CEILING INCREASE CONTINGENT ON BBA

Provides for the President’s request for a debt ceiling increase if a qualifying Balanced Budget Amendment passes Congress and is sent to the states for ratification. 

Q&A: The Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011

How much is the first year spending cut in the “cut” portion of the bill?

  • The legislation reduces spending by $111 billion in FY 2012.

Why $111 billion?

  • This savings total meets the promise to enact immediate spending cuts as part of any debt ceiling bill, and would cause the deficit to finally get back down below $1 trillion next year (a reduction to the previous year’s deficit of more than $400 billion).

Does the legislation make any changes to Social Security or Medicare? 

  • No. 

Does the legislation make any changes to veterans spending? 

  • No. 

What does the legislation mean for defense spending?

  • It is at the same level as the House-passed FY 2012 budget.

Why cap spending at 19.9% of GDP?

  • This would place spending in line with average spending over the last 30 years. 

What are the details of the Balanced Budget Amendment?

  • The legislation would require that any Balanced Budget Amendment include the following: 
  1. A balanced budget component;
  2. A super-majority requirement to raise taxes; and
  3. A limit on spending as a percentage of GDP. 

What is the process for the debt ceiling being increased? 

  • Provides for the President’s request for a debt ceiling increase if a Balanced Budget Amendment passes Congress and is sent to the states for ratification. 

Why $2.4 trillion debt ceiling increase? 

  • The President has requested that the debt limit increase by this amount.  This amount is less than the amount of the spending cuts in this bill.  A debt limit increase of this magnitude is a major sacrifice on the part of House Republicans, which is why it is made contingent on measures to ensure that the federal budget is permanently under control. 

Responces

Comments

 

What am I missing here?   We are going to increase our debt another $2.4 trillion but cut spending only $111 billion? How is that cutting anything? $2,400,000,000,000 - $111,000,000,000 = $2,299,000,000,000 increase in spending.  This a 5% reduction in spending money we want to barrow, not money we have. This percentage is not even large enough to qualify as a tip. Five percent would be an insult to any self respecting waitress. I would bet there is a law that allows congress to overspend by more than 5% of any year’s budget without taking any formal action. And what is this linking the annual budgets to a percent of GDP? What are we trying to do here make the annual budget a guessing game? Here is a novel approach, how about limiting the annual budget to the prior year’s revenues? I think it is time to throw the “smart guys” out of government and find some “common sense guys” to run the show.

 

Syndicate content