The most interesting things about the GOP budget is not what’s in it but what’s not?

According to Dana Bash, Alan Silverleib and Deirdre Walsh of CNN in an article titled GOP budget chief calls for $6.2 trillion spending cut this “2012 budget proposal would cut $6.2 trillion in federal spending over the next decade while radically overhauling Medicare and Medicaid.  The proposal, drafted by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, would also overhaul key portions of the tax code, dropping the top rate for individuals and businesses to 25% while eliminating a number of loopholes” but what was not mentioned was what was left out of it, so I decided to take at look at the entire plan myself.  I found it in adobe form at www.budget.house.gov. 

The plan does mention those things written about in the article above and some other items I thought readers would be interested in knowing which follows.  They call it THE PATH TO PROSPERITY.

Streamlining Other Government Agencies (pg 29)

• Boost private-sector employment by slowing the explosive growth of the public sector,

achieving a 10 percent reduction over the next three years in the federal workforce through

attrition, coupled with a pay freeze for the next five years and reforms to government workers’

generous benefit packages.

Eliminating welfare for energy companies (pg 35)

Aligning agricultural programs with economic reality (pg 36)

Against the backdrop of an overall economy that is recovering slowly, the American agricultural sector is racing ahead. The record-breaking prosperity of American farmers and farm communities is to be celebrated. But it also calls for a re-examination of federal agricultural programs that spend billions each year, to ensure that taxpayers aren’t funding support for a sector that is more than capable of thriving on its own.

Protecting Assistance for Those in Need (pg 41)

• Convert the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) into a block grant tailored

for each state’s low-income population, indexed for inflation and eligibility beginning in 2015 –

after employment has recovered. Make aid contingent on work or job training.

Preparing the Workforce for a 21st Century Economy (pg 42)

• Return Pell grants to their pre-stimulus levels to curb rising tuition inflation and make sure aid

is targeted to the truly needy.

• Consolidate dozens of overlapping job-training programs into more accountable career

scholarships to improve access to career development assistance and strengthen the first rung

on the ladder out of poverty.

Saving Medicare (pg 44)

• Save Medicare for current and future generations while making no changes for those in and

near retirement. For younger workers, when they reach eligibility, Medicare will provide a

Medicare payment and a list of guaranteed coverage options from which recipients can

choose a plan that best suits their needs. These future Medicare beneficiaries will be able to

choose a plan the same way members of Congress do. Medicare will provide additional

assistance for lower-income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks.

• Ensure that the cost of frivolous litigation is not passed on to consumers in the form of

higher health-care premiums by capping non-economic damages in medical liability

lawsuits.

These were just a few of the juicy morsels and if you really read what is proposed, you can not help but see exactly where this budget and whom it is targeted towards.  I was a little surprised that they say what this budget would do and stand behind its validity based on the findings of the Heritage Foundations’ Center for Data Analysis.  Those who have been paying close attention are aware of the slant normally given to conservatives by Heritage.   Also quite prevalent in this budget was the constant mention of repealing “Obamacare” as seen on pages 30, 40, 46 and 52.  What were not in this budget were cuts to defense spending, any mention of capital gains or estate taxes as well as a decision on what to do about the unpaid for Bush tax cuts for the wealth.  There were no mention of the unpaid for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or what the findings were from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  This budget read more like a thesis on what has occurred since 2008 to justify the cuts vice showing exactly how it was supposed to accomplish the findings as explained by the Heritage Foundation. 

Failure to address those things mentioned above and compose this budget more like a plan to help this country recover leads me to believe that the intentions was never to offer a plan to provide solutions at all.  It was designed to hide behind the President’s bipartisan Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform who had proposed huge cuts and was not demonized by the American public.  This exercise does not punt the ball; it removes it from the field all together.