On The Budget Compromise

My initial inclination last week was to support Speaker Boehner’s compromise efforts to gain passage of the continuing resolution. As I’ve written before, my interests are much less in making a political statement than they are in what kind of country my kids will inherit. At first blush, I was willing to accept the compromise as a way of moving the the ball forward to the debates on the debt ceiling and the 2012 budget.

I was, I might add, part of a minority of the contributors who did so, so it isn’t like site opposition to the deal is Johnny-come-lately. RedState opposition was early, deep, and as it has turned out to my chagrin, correct.

That confidence was misplaced. If we were not lied to by the House leadership we were certainly allowed to believe something that was not the case. What we got was a paper reduction of $38 billion that was not going to be spent and a pittance of actual cuts. As the editors of National Review say tonight:

There’s realism and then there’s cynicism. This deal — oversold and dependent on classic Washington budget trickery — comes too close to the latter.

It’s really a shame as it didn’t have to be this way. This failed sleight of hand will cost Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor — and all of us — dearly in the coming months as they have burned a bridge not only with their freshman members but with those of us who do our best to help them daily.

We have a chance to rectify this tomorrow. This deal should be rejected for the travesty it is.