Republican budget cuts would cut GDP growth and cost jobs

March 1, 2011 | By | 6 Replies More

The Republican budget cuts would cut GDP growth by 2% and cost 800,000 jobs.

The federal budget cuts supported by the US House Republicans will stifle US economic growth by some 2% of the GDP and cost some 800,000 jobs. The state budgets cuts by Republican and other governors have caused .5% less growth in the US GDP in the 4th Quarter of 2011. It is apparent that Republicans are cutting spending at federal and state levels so they can defeat President Obama in 2012 because the worse the economy is, the better chances Republicans will defeat President Obama and make him a “one term president.”

The US House Speaker, John Boehner (R-OH) says; “So be it!”

Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN), mentioned as a future GOP presidential nominee, told Meet The Press said; “…yes” to state budget cuts even if they would result in fewer jobs and less economic growth.

I guess the 2010 mid-term voters who voted for Republicans all thought that it would be a good thing for their Republican office holders to stall economic growth by 2% of GDP and cost some 800,000 jobs.

Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?


Category: Politics

About the Author ()

imothy E. Hogan is a trial attorney, a husband, a father of two awesome children and a practicing Roman Catholic in St. Louis, Missouri. Mr. Hogan has done legal and political work in Jefferson City, Missouri for partisan and non-partisan social change, environmental and consumer protection groups. Mr. Hogan has also worked for consumer advocate Ralph Nader in Washington, DC and the members of the trial bar in the State of New York. Mr. Hogan’s current interests involve remaining a full time solo practitioner pioneer on the frontiers of justice in America, a good husband and a good father to his awesome children.

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jim Razinha says:

    They're also saving money by going with cheaper, unsustainable, polluting, and nearly indestructible styrofoam cups in the House coffee shops. Something Mr. Boehner apparently tweeted joyfully about on Monday –

    "The new majority – plasticware is back"

  2. Jim Razinha says:

    So, 300+ economists say Goldman-Sachs is right; Boehner's got 46 that disagree. Tim, want to take a stab at playing oddsmaker? What's the over/under on:

    1) this will happen

    2) the prediction will be forgotten and the Dems will not use it to their advantage

    3) the Repubs will find some other "reason" should the prediction come true

    4) even if the prediction is not forgotten, Fox will make up whatever spin they want anyway

  3. Jim Razinha says:

    According to a WP article from 2006 I found, we paid $1.3B for farmers not to grow crops. I don't know what that number is now, but I'm pretty sure it still has a "B" in it. I understand some of the recipients only own land that used to be farms and some of the so-called "farms" never were nor could ever be used for such, slipping under the radar. But then, reducing oversight to the funds we do dole out has been a mainstay in the Elephant world. TARP anyone?

  4. Brynn Jacobs says:

    Speaking of cuts that they could be making, how about cutting oil subsidies? Near-record high oil prices should mean that the big oil companies don't need subsidies (did they ever?). ThinkProgress reports:

    House Republicans voted in lockstep this afternoon to protect corporate welfare for Big Oil, even as they call for draconian cuts to programs that everyday Americans depend on each day. As the House of Representatives moved toward approving a stopgap resolution to avert a government shutdown for another two weeks, Democrats offered a motion to recommit that would have stripped the five largest oil companies of taxpayer subsidies, saving tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer funds. The motion failed on a vote of 176-249, with all Republicans voting against (approximately a dozen Democrats joined the GOP). A similar vote two weeks ago to recoup $53 billion in taxpayer funds from Big Oil was also voted down, largely along party lines. The former CEO of Shell Oil, John Hoffmeister, recently said Big Oil doesn’t need subsidies “in face of sustained high oil prices.” From 2005 to 2009, the largest oil companies have made a combined $485 billion in profits.

  5. Jim Razinha says:

    On the oversight tangent I introduced, OSHA is a target ( – saftey is apparently not a good thing for businesses. I do question the ergonomic "standards" though.

Leave a Reply