Close
House conservatives are blasting the bipartisan budget deal — but not its architect, Rep. Paul Ryan.
The Wisconsin Republican, who chairs the Budget Committee and was his party’s 2012 vice presidential nominee, doesn’t seem to be losing support from the far right members of his party even as they bemoan the deal he crafted with Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) for doing too little to tame the deficit.
Continue Reading
“Because Paul comes up with that kind of plan, it does not undermine his conservative credibility bona fides,” Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) said. “I have a great deal of faith in Paul Ryan that will not be changed because of this issue.”
Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) said the only reason she remains undecided on the deal for now is because she supports Ryan.
(PHOTOS: Paul Ryan through the years)
“He has been a marvelous solider in coming to this agreement,” Lummis said.
Some simply wonder whether Ryan is putting too much faith in Democrats to be able to deliver votes. Some Democrats are just as upset about the budget deal as Republicans, frustrated that it doesn’t extend emergency unemployment benefits.
“I worry that Paul is being overly optimistic about how the Senate intends to act going forward,” Mulvaney said. “This bill is not designed to get our vote… The question is will the Democrats support it because now we’re hearing that they might not.”
Ryan’s good standing with the right wing of his party is in part because he has fought their fight for the past several years, proposing budgets full of red meat for conservatives. After the October government shutdown, they understand his task is different now.
(Also on POLITICO: Inside the budget agreement)
“I don’t think this deal enhances or diminishes the standing of Paul Ryan,” Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) said.
Still, that doesn’t mean his backers will grudgingly accept the deal.
“I haven’t decided whether I’m going to be a really strong no or just a no,”Labrador said Wednesday morning.
The deal crafted by Ryan and Murray replaces some of the sequester cuts, including the $20 billion in defense cuts set to take effect in January, by rearranging spending cuts, cutting pension benefits for future federal employees and generating new revenue from government fees.
Conservative House have joined with a handful of outside groups – Heritage Action, Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity – in criticizing the content of the deal. House Speaker John Boehner struck back at those groups on Wednesday.
(Also on POLITICO: House prepares to vote on budget deal)
“They’re using our members and they’re using the American people for their own goals,” Boehner told reporters Wednesday. “This is ridiculous. Listen, if you’re for more deficit reduction, you’re for this agreement.”
Responding to Boehner, Laborador said his opposition has nothing to do with those groups opposing the deal and pointed to his 76 percent rating with Heritage Action.
“I would ask anybody who is attacking these outside groups what is it that these outside groups said yesterday about this deal that is false today?” Labrador said. “As for myself, if anybody thinks I’m bought and paid for by an outside group, just look at my 76 percent rating with Heritage Action.”
As for the next potential fight on the debt ceiling, which must be addressed next spring and isn’t included in the budget deal, several members expressed a sense of looming defeat.
“We should just cave because that’s what Republicans do,” Labrador said. “It feels better if we fight a little and cave latter. Sorry I’m a little cynical today.”
Conservatives aren’t thrilled about the new fees but their biggest concern is that spending will increase.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said he will also oppose the budget deal because it breaks the spending caps that were put in place by the sequester. He said in January when House Republicans held their retreat in Williamsburg, Va., the entire conference agreed to continue to hold firm on the sequester.
“Everyone in the conference agreed that was the goal,” Jordan said. “It is a marked departure from what we all agreed we set out to do.”
Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) said the deal pushes deficit reduction into the future in exchange for increasing spending now, something the Republicans shouldn’t support.
“We’re still waiting on the final numbers, but the deficit reduction that would occur would perhaps occur two presidents from now,” Huelskamp said. “It could be Hillary [Clinton’s] second term before we see what was noted as a real deficit reduction.”
