Arizona Congressman Trent Franks was a “no” vote on the Ryan/Murray budget proposal. The House passed the budget deal 332-94.
“It is important to recognize that there are many very positive aspects of this proposal. My colleague, Representative Paul Ryan, did a masterful job of negotiating for many very good provisions with a group — Congressional Democrats — that have very rarely shown even the slightest willingness to work with their Republican counterparts towards serious solutions to our fiscal problem. For starters, alleviating the shameful effects of sequestration on our Military is its best provision,” said Franks in a statement released Thursday.
“Unfortunately, while the proposal features a number of small steps in the right direction, the overall effect is still one of increased spending for the next two years, raising user fees, and again delaying the difficult, but necessary decisions we will ultimately need to make to save our nation from the budgetary issues that threaten to destroy our nation from within unlike any military force could do. Any savings as a result of this proposal are based on the assumption that, “We will continue to overspend for only a few more years. THEN we’ll really get serious.” The unfortunate reality, as we all know, is that the overspending continues, but the agreed upon belt-tightening never seems to occur,” concluded Franks.
Arizona Congressman Ron Barber was a “yes” vote. Barber said in a statement released immediately after the vote, “Today was a step forward, but we must continue the fight to end sequestration permanently.”
While Barber applauded the reductions in sequestration contained in today’s budget agreement, he vowed to continue working to end sequestration completely. Barber was not in Congress when the budget deal that led to sequestration was approved – but since he was sworn in 1½ years ago, he has strenuously opposed the unspecific, across-the-board sequestration budget cuts the Obama administration devised.
Congressman Matt Salmon applauded “Chairman Ryan and our Republican Budget Conferees for working under difficult circumstances to negotiate a compromise with Senate Democrats,” and said he appreciated that “this deal offers some positive items, such as helping to bring back regular order for the appropriations process, approving the Transboundary Hydrocarbon Agreement, restoring badly needed resources for our military, and making small changes to some mandatory spending programs.”
“However, for me and most of the constituents I have heard from in my district, this deal falls short of something I could support,” said Salmon. “Unfortunately, this deal fails to even make modest reforms to our nearly bankrupted entitlement programs and it, once again, increases government spending in the short-term with only a promise to make spending cuts in the long-term. If we are not willing to make tough choices now, then how can we expect future Congresses to stop kicking the can down the road?”
Salmon concluded, “This was a grand opportunity for our nation’s leaders to reform and preserve the fiscal longevity of our entitlement programs, and this deal does not rise to that challenge.