Skip to comments.VP debate: Did Paul Ryan want $300 million embassy security cut? [The facts are more nuanced]
Posted on 10/13/2012 1:45:30 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
......did Ryan really propose slashing embassy security spending by $300 million?
This came up when the men were dealing with the issue of the tragic attack on the US consulate in Benghazi,Libya,in which USAmbassadorChrisStevens and three other men were killed.
The Romney/Ryan ticket has accused the administration of stinting on embassy security prior to these attacks. In reply, VicePresidentBiden said the charge was malarkey.
This congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, No. 1. So much for the embassy security piece, said Biden.
The nugget of fact behind this charge is that as chairman of the HouseBudgetCommittee,Ryan has submitted a budget blueprint that proposes cutting all nondefense discretionary spending by 19 percent in fiscal 2014. This category includes everything UncleSam does that is not an entitlement program,like SocialSecurity,or run by the Pentagon,or interest on the debt.
Taking almost 1 of every 5 dollars away from programs in this area means something that many voters think is important is likely to get hit hard. But Ryans budget was an overall plan. It didnt allocate that cut line item by line item. Its possible that embassy security might have been saved at the expense of something else,like Environmental ProtectionAgency enforcement.
So Ryan didnt propose cutting embassy security spending,literally (and we do mean literally,Mr.VicePresident) speaking. Appropriations committee staff members would have had the hard task of carving up the budget bit by bit. Or they would have if Ryans proposal had become law, which it didnt.
So to sum up,this charge involves extrapolating otherwise-unprovided details from a larger number that itself doesnt have the force of law. But its underlying truth is that it is impossible to substantially reduce the federal deficit without cutting out stuff thats important to the functions of the US government,if entitlements and defense are left untouched.
Where’s the link?
Some embassies need less funding than others.. and much less protection..
Some embassies should be closed.. just being there is an effort in FUBAR..
Can’t afford a bottle of Seagrams in the Obama recession/depression, I have to settle for just a beer.
Here is the LINK!
...By my math, it's 2.5% lower than 2010, and was set to rise about 10% for 2013. I think we probably could have skipped the Chevy Volt and 100,000$ electric car charging station for Vienna, and perhaps the Marines in Barbados could have been tasked to Lybia.
There was no shortage of funds ... and anyway these cuts were part of across the board cuts, no one targeted State Dept security.
The government spent $2.43 billion on diplomatic security in the 2010 fiscal year, when Democrats last controlled both houses of Congress. The figure then fell to $2.29 billion in 2011 before rising to $2.37 billion in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. The administration asked for $2.84 billion for 2013, but House Republicans whittled that down to $2.62 billion. A State Department official testified that the budget played no role in deciding on security in Libya.
I listened to testimony of State Dept. Career officials - they stated that budget cuts were not responsible, they were able to cut in other areas.
Besides, how can a proposal that was never adopted be blamed? Senate did not even vote on the plan and has not passed a budget in over 3 years.
The article dispels Biden’s spin.
The facts remain the same:
Men died and Biden lies.....
Simply spreading the Solyndra investment across our embassy protection needs would have solved the “problem”. Or shifting US Marines from the French or Barbados embassies to Bengazi.
I wonder what the $500 million a pop taxpayer funded pay-outs (-offs) to "green" start-ups would add up to.
That was my thinking. How could the State Department have Less money? I would think, with no budget, all these Federal Agencies have a "blank check" on spending. It sure appears that way.
I wish he’d been specific and asked to cut the hundreds of millions we’re spending on mosque construction and maintenance in the region instead.
This issue cuts right to the heart of the Obama-Biden problem and why people are getting turned off by them, and why we are seeing them fall behind in the polls. It would have been a good opportunity to remind everyone of that...They do not know how to govern or lead; they are central command and are not willing to play ball with others. The Ryan budget wasn't perfect but it was an example of Congress doing its job-- putting numbers on the table for discussion so that the Congress and the Administration could sit down and have honest conversations about the details, and hash something out that made sense. It is how any household budgets as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.