More spending for all? Hey, supporting that is all about being a team player!
After sharply criticizing how it came together, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan announced he would support the budget deal Wednesday.
“What I’ve heard from members over the last two weeks is a desire to wipe the slate clean, put in place a process that builds trust, and start focusing on big ideas,” Ryan said in a statement. “What has been produced will go a long way toward relieving the uncertainty hanging over us, and that’s why I intend to support it. It’s time for us to turn the page on the last few years and get to work on a bold agenda that we can take to the American people.”
Look for more of this “bold agenda” of business as usual going forward.
UPDATE: The New York Times says the budget deal is a win for Obama, since the tiny sequestration caps are history:
The deal is the policy equivalent of keeping the lights on — hardly the stuff of a bold fiscal legacy. But it achieves the main objective of his 2016 budget: to break free of the spending shackles he agreed to when he signed the Budget Control Act of 2011, an outcome, the president allowed Tuesday, that he could be “pretty happy” about. . . . The result was a deal that would raise spending $80 billion, or about 1 percent, over the next two years while enacting an array of cuts that Democrats found palatable.
. . . .
“This shouldn’t be mistaken for some overarching grand bargain, but there’s a lot in here the White House likes and not much they don’t,” said Jared Bernstein, a former economic adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and now a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington. “Most importantly, if the deal prevails, they won’t have to deal with budget nonsense for the rest of the term, which has got to look pretty sweet.”
I think our new Speaker should definitely be on board for something the Democrats think is “pretty sweet.” As long as Barack Obama is “pretty happy” then what more can we ask for?