A variety of adjectives come to mind when evaluating congressional Republicans’ plans for the year, including obvious descriptions such as “regressive” and “misguided.”
But it is equally remarkable to see the extent to which the Republican Party’s program is Dear. Tax breaks for the wealthy and big corporations won’t pay off — despite partisan claims to the contrary — and the party’s border policies also come with a hefty price tag.
With this in mind, the first question facing Republicans is whether they should pay for their priorities. The answer may seem obvious given that the Republican Party at least claims to take fiscal responsibility seriously, but over the past few decades, Republican administrations and their allies on Capitol Hill have generally been quite comfortable endorsing their policy goals and charge the costs to the national burden. card, causing deficits to explode and adding billions of dollars to the national debt.
But if the party answers the first question by deciding to at least make an effort, a second question quickly follows: How, exactly, will GOP officials pay for their projects? According to a report from PoliticoHouse Republicans are considering a “menu” circulating on the Hill.
House Republicans are circulating a ‘menu’ of cuts worth more than $5 trillion that they could use to fund President-elect Donald Trump’s top priorities this year, including tax cuts and security borders. The first list of potential spending offsets obtained by POLITICO includes changes to Medicare and an end to the Biden administration’s climate programs, as well as a drastic reduction in welfare and a “reimagining” of the state welfare law. affordable care.
Although the information has not been independently verified by MSNBC or NBC News, Politico published a copy of the online “menu”.
The Politico report adds:
Five people familiar with the document said the provisions were options for funding the massive GOP reconciliation bill or other spending reform efforts, including those led by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. government.
The people, who were granted anonymity to discuss the closed-door negotiations, said the list came from the House Budget Committee, chaired by Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas).
It’s quite a list, according to the Republican Party’s own estimates: If Republicans approved all of the proposed cuts, that would amount to savings of between $5.3 trillion and $5.7 trillion over the next decade—and that’s quite a list, in turn, would help fund many tax breaks for people and businesses who don’t need them.
The document obtained by Politico effectively offers a model for a party determined to redistribute wealth – in the wrong direction. To help finance tax cuts, for example, the congressional Republicans’ “menu” includes drastic cuts to Medicaid, Medicare reimbursement policies, the Affordable Care Act, food stamps, and efforts to combat the climate crisis.
Adding insult to injury, the authors of the Republican Party document offered a series of Orwellian phrases to help frame possible cuts. Bullet points related to cutting Medicaid, for example, appear under a heading that reads: “Making Medicaid Work for the Most Vulnerable.” Food stamp cuts are described as “ending addiction from the cradle to the grave.” The cuts to the ACA are being billed as “Reinventing the Affordable Care Act.”
Clearly, the party believes that agreeable wording will make these regressive policies more politically palatable. Of course, this is a familiar tactic that invariably fails.
The big question, however, is not whether the public will be fooled by tedious manipulation, but rather whether congressional Republicans will remain fully united in supporting these unpopular and unnecessary measures.
It’s a familiar detail, but it bears repeating: the Republican majority in the House of Representatives in the last Congress was tiny, and in the new Congress, it’s even smaller. In the weeks and months to come, even if a few House Republicans balk at their party’s legislative plans, those bills will fail.
If you’re a Republican congressman in a competitive district — or worse, a district that supported Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 cycle — and your party asks you to support a program that uses health benefits from poor families to finance taxes. breaks for billionaires, will you think twice? The question answers itself.
When Politico asked a top Republican lawmaker whether there were any particularly controversial spending offsets that divided Republicans, the member responded“They all seem pretty controversial.” Given the size of the party’s margins on the Hill, Republican Party leaders have reason to worry.
