Republican senator sees Obama budget offer as positive

WASHINGTON Mon Apr 8, 2013 10:24am EDT

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks to the press following his private meeting with United States U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about the attack on U.S. diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, on Capitol Hill in Washington, November 27, 2012. REUTERS/Jason Reed

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks to the press following his private meeting with United States U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about the attack on U.S. diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, on Capitol Hill in Washington, November 27, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Jason Reed

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday became the first prominent Republican to publicly praise, however lukewarmly, the budget proposal the White House outlined last week.

Graham said that while he believes President Barack Obama's plan is overall bad for the economy, "there are nuggets of his budget that I think are optimistic," and that could set the stage for a broad bargain to put the nation's finances on a stronger footing. He was speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press" program.

Graham, a conservative who has deviated from party positions in the past, and has said he would consider raising up to $600 billion in new tax revenue if Democrats accept significant changes to Medicare, the government health program for elderly Americans, and Medicaid, the health safety net for low-income people.

The White House on Friday said the president would propose a budget that would offer cuts to so-called entitlement programs such as Social Security, a retirement program, and Medicare in exchange for increased tax revenues and a commitment to spend money on education and infrastructure repair.

Obama's proposal, which will formally be made public on Wednesday, is a symbolic document, and both the Senate and House of Representatives have already passed their own budget resolutions.

The president's aides have said he hopes to use the offer to appeal to enough middle-of-the-road lawmakers of both parties to pass a broad deal to reduce the budget deficit.

Obama also hopes to reverse the deep spending cuts that automatically kicked in March 1 as a result of the failure of the White House and Congress to reach an agreement on replacing them.

Graham's reception of the president's budget proposal is warmer than his fellow Republicans and some of the president's own allies have accorded it so far.

House Speaker John Boehner said last week the president was ignoring Republicans' staunch opposition to any tax hikes. And independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who votes with the Democrats, said he would oppose any efforts to lower payments to Social Security beneficiaries.

In an illustration of the difficulty the president will have retaining support among his fellow party members, a House Democrat said the president's plan risks splintering the party's loyalties.

"We need to be solid. We need to indicate to the administration this is a non-starter in the House," Representative Raul Grijalva of Arizona said on MSNBC.

Graham said that the president's offer contained approaches to cutting spending that he supports. One is the proposal to index cost-of-living increases for government program benefits to a less-generous measure of inflation.

"The president is showing a little bit of leg here, this is somewhat encouraging," Graham said. "His overall budget's not going to make it, but he has sort of made a step forward in the entitlement-reform process that would allow a guy like me to begin to talk about flattening the tax code and generating more revenue."

Obama has invited 12 Republican senators for dinner on the day of the budget release as part of an effort to soften resistance among the opposition political party.

"The president's focus, in addition to the regular order process that members of Congress say they want, is to try to find a caucus of common sense, folks who are willing to compromise, that don't think compromise is a dirty word, and try to get something done," White House senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer said on ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" program.

(This story corrects paragraph 11 to show that Grijalva represents a district in Arizona instead of New Mexico)

(Reporting by Aruna Viswanatha and Philip Barbara; writing by Mark Felsenthal)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (3)
bobber1956 wrote:
“there are nuggets of his budget that I think are optimistic,”

Problem there is the WH said it was a packaged deal not a piecemill-take it all or leave it. We will leave it-right on obama’s desk. Try again without any more tax increases you already got those. If you want a deal cut the entitlements that give away all the free ride money with nothing back. THATS the entitlements that need to be cut-or eliminated all to gether, I’m for that.

Apr 08, 2013 11:24am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Republicans hate welfare and want to cut spending. Yet they refuse to cut corporate welfare. That doesn’t make any sense. Do they want to cut spending for the sake of fixing the deficit or for the explicit purpose of punishing the poor, elderly and disabled for being… well, poor, elderly or disabled?

Republicans rejected an Obama proposal in December, saying that they wanted “chained CPI”. Now he offers them chained CPI and they reject it. That doesn’t make any sense either. Do they really want chained CPI or do they merely want to continue to obstruct EVERYTHING this president does?

These are rhetorical questions, of course. The answer to both questions is obviously the latter.

Apr 08, 2013 1:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
bobber1956 wrote:

Conservatives don’t “hate” anyone or anything. Libs like to lie and try to convince each other they do. Conservatives see the futility of, in obama’s words “investing”, or in reality throwing away money by creating generations of VICTIMS that will STAY on federal assistance from cradle to grave instead of lifting them to their potential as free, independent, and productive members of society. No? Easy to prove…what happened to Work First. A program started by Clinton the WORKED and obama pretty much eliminated-it got people off of welfare and on their own feet. The problem with that is obama could no longer OWN them. Talk about chains. Republicans do not “hate” welfare or want to git rid of it. They just don’t want it to be a way of life-obama does. I guess you do too.

Apr 08, 2013 3:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.