Beltway Inebriation

Congress just doesn't get it. It's times like these that remind me of the famous opening lines of the movie 1776:

"I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace; that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God, I have had this Congress!..."--John Adams

BREITBART.COM covers our contemporary Congress at work here.

The short end of it? They'll make budget cuts--as long as they spend on goodies elsewhere:

Like fussy children, lawmakers on Capitol Hill sometimes need a spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down. This budget season, the medicine is a $39 billion-plus deficit-reduction bill. The sweetener? Lots of new spending to go along with the budget cuts.

Republicans will tout the upcoming budget bill as the first effort to cut federal benefit programs in eight years. But there's no shortage of grumbling from fiscal conservatives over the new spending padded into the Senate version of the budget heading to the Senate floor next week.

The nation's doctors would get an $11 billion reprieve next year from a scheduled cut in their Medicare payments. Dairy farmers won a $1 billion extension of milk income payments. College students would get more than $8 billion in new grants, and more disabled children would retain Medicaid health coverage.

Then there's $3 billion to help people watch TV. That money will subsidize television converter boxes for an upcoming changeover to digital broadcasts.

The flood of new spending programs is made possible by congressional budget rules that permit deficit-cutting legislation to carry new spending so long as it's paid for with new receipts or spending cuts elsewhere.

Fiscal conservatives are less than thrilled. They're pushing to limit spending add-ons so Congress will be able to make net spending cuts that exceed those called for under the budget plan passed earlier this year. The spate of new spending makes that a lot more difficult.

"My concern with the current (bill) is that it's going to be packed with more goodies that are going to chip away at the effectiveness of it," said Stephen Slivinski, director of budget studies for the conservative CATO Institute.

All told, Senate committees would add more than $30 billion in new spending, offset by cuts elsewhere and some new revenues. House GOP leaders vow to limit the amount of new spending in an attempt to cut spending by $50 billion. Still, the House version of the budget plan will include at least some new spending, though not as much as the Senate.

The Senate measure is designed to save $35 billion, but the Congressional Budget Office calculates it would actually reduce net spending by $39 billion. Some of the unexpected bonus may be claimed for Katrina relief.

Senate conservatives such as John Ensign, R-Nev., vow to knock some spending out of the bill during floor debate next week.

For many lawmakers, though, the spending add-ons are critical to winning their votes. In the Senate Agriculture Committee, for example, extending the Milk Income Loss Contract program helped secure the vote of Rick Santorum, R-Pa., for the overall package of farm cuts. The MILC program pays farmers when milk prices are low and its benefits are especially popular in states with smaller dairy herds, like Pennsylvania.

"Some of those spending items are in there, quite frankly, to grease the skids for other stuff," said G. William Hoagland, top budget aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. "If you start taking pieces out, you will jeopardize the final vote."

$3 billion to subsidize television viewing? I wasn't aware the state had a vested interest in propping up a multi-million dollar industry that operates just fine on advertizing revenue. And the great Rick Santorum needs $1 billion in milk income payments in order to support a package of farm cuts. The Fed will pay dairy farmers when milk prices are low; why don't dairy farmers rely on speculators to control the risk for them?

Fiscal responsibility means prioritizing spending and making touch decisions. That requires leadership. Little comes from the White House on fiscal matters these days. Congress is proving incapable of providing it as well. Their ATM-esque manner of fiscal management comes up wanting. And we all get to pay for it!

Este Disgratzia!