On Sunday, politicians from both sides of the aisle in Congress criticized a variety of provisions sprinkled throughout Obama’s budget that would put key investments in for several campaign promises, such as healthcare reform. Some even questioned using the budget reconciliation process for achieving such complex policy goals.
Senator Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Obama’s former Commerce Secretary nominee who withdrew his name from nomination, because he wasn't on board with Obama's plans, offered the sharpest criticism.
“The practical implications of this is bankruptcy for the United States,” Gregg said Sunday on CNN’s "State of the Union" about the budget. “There's no other way around it.”
Calling the Obama administration’s explanations for the budget proposal “unconscionable,” Gregg also said the potential that the deficit could rise to 4 or 5 percent of the national gross domestic product was “staggering.”
After getting a look at the plan the Congressional Budget Office estimated that Obama's plan would leave a national deficit averaging $1 trillion over the next 10 years.
Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, is also presenting a roadblock to certain aspects:
A greater obstacle for Obama, though, than both Gregg and the CBO could be a member of his own party: Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.
Conrad said that he would not use the budget reconciliation process to push through substantial changes to health and energy policy. Using reconciliation would avoid a Senate filibuster and instead require just a simple majority in the upper chamber of Congress.
“It is not included in the budget I will put to my colleagues,” Conrad said on ABC’s “This Week.” “It just doesn’t work very well.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has started an active campaign against Obama's budget plan, which sets them on the same side as other groups who were already opposing, such as the Tax Reform Coalition.
.
