According to the CBO (PDF) it would:

…reduce budget deficits by $915 billion between 2012 and 2021 relative to CBO’s March 2011 baseline adjusted for subsequent appropriations action…

Not much, but it is a genuine reduction in spending and of nearly a trillion dollars.

Boys and girls, fellow conservatives and allied libertarians, this is the best we’re going to get while Reid runs the Senate and Obama wields the veto pen.  We’ve won – we’ve forced the GOP to stand firm against tax hikes and hold out for genuine reductions in spending.  If Boehner can get this through the House, then our duty will be to put as much pressure as we can on the Senate to pass it.  That done, it doesn’t matter what Obama does – sign or veto, it still works out to a victory for us.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.  Sure, I’d like to lop off a trillion from the 2012 budget, but that just isn’t going to happen. No matter how annoying it is, we still have to abide by the results of the 2008 election in the White House and the Senate.  So, accept this deal – and then let’s get in to 2012 where we’ll fight to get a White House and a Senate which will cut a trillion out of the 2013 budget.

Instapundit has an excellent tool where you can fiddle around with spending and taxes and figure out how to balance our budget.  I came up with my plan:

A 20% reduction in military spending.

A 20% reduction in Medicaid spending.

A 74% reduction in non-defense, discretionary spending.

A 10% increase in payroll taxes.

Income and corporate taxes remain as they are, as do Social Security and Medicare spending.

Under this plan, the budget goes in to surplus in 2014 – but has the drawback of going back in to deficit in 2018.  But not nearly as much as we are now – in the $200 billion range.

To me, though, it shows that it can be done – and done by the crucial 2014-15 time frame when we are currently at risk of real default.  Of real national bankruptcy.

The drawback of the tool is that it isn’t finely tuned enough – I’m sure I could find things to significantly cut the Social Security/Medicare budget without lowering benefits.  Essentially, that is why I had to cut non-defense, discretionary spending so much.  I cut defense on the rock-solid theory that there is a lot which can be cut there without affecting readiness.  As for my cuts to Medicaid, I am certain that if we block granted out funds to charitable hospitals and medical facilities, we can provide superior care to the poor at lower cost – the huge bureaucracy we use now to do it is likely eating up a huge amount of money, mis-allocating resources and generally screwing things up.  People who actually do health care can likely do it better than the bureaucrats in charge.  I don’t think we’d actually go back in to deficit under a plan really crafted by me, down to the penny (and what we really need for this discussion is a line by line list of budget items…give us the dollars and cents spent on each department and bureau along with the subsidiary organizations, all grants, all scheduled payments to contractors as well as how much we pay each employee and a description of what they do…then we can really figure out what to cut).

In reality, I think we can get to a surplus by 2015 – and keep up a $500 billion a year surplus for as long as we need to pay off our debts for good (and, remember, even if we’re even – no surplus, no deficit – we’re paying off debt…the big surplus devoted to debt repayment means we’d be out of debt by 2015 or so; and then we can slash taxes like no tomorrow). And that must be the goal – followed by a constitutional amendment prohibiting the government from issuing bonds except during a declared state of war.

Anyways, play around with it, yourselves – see what you can come up with.

The man is rising in my estimation by the day:

…What we told the president in January was this: the American people will not accept an increase in the debt limit without significant spending cuts and reforms.

And over the last six months, we’ve done our best to convince the president to partner with us to do something dramatic to change the fiscal trajectory of our country. . .something that will boost confidence in our economy, renew a measure of faith in our government, and help small businesses get back on track.

Last week, the House passed such a plan, and with bipartisan support. It’s called the ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance’ Act. It CUTS and CAPS government spending and paves the way for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, which we believe is the best way to stop Washington from spending money it doesn’t have. Before we even passed the bill in the House, the President said he would veto it.

I want you to know I made a sincere effort to work with the president to identify a path forward that would implement the principles of Cut, Cap, & Balance in a manner that could secure bipartisan support and be signed into law. I gave it my all.

Unfortunately, the president would not take yes for an answer. Even when we thought we might be close on an agreement, the president’s demands changed.

The president has often said we need a ‘balanced’ approach — which in Washington means: we spend more. . .you pay more. Having run a small business, I know those tax increases will destroy jobs.

The president is adamant that we cannot make fundamental changes to our entitlement programs. As the father of two daughters, I know these programs won’t be there for them and their kids unless significant action is taken now.

The sad truth is that the president wanted a blank check six months ago, and he wants a blank check today. That is just not going to happen.

Because there is no stalemate in Congress. The House has passed a bill to raise the debt limit with bipartisan support. And this week, while the Senate is struggling to pass a bill filled with phony accounting and Washington gimmicks, we will pass another bill – one that was developed with the support of the bipartisan leadership of the U.S. Senate.

I expect that bill can and will pass the Senate, and be sent to the President for his signature. If the President signs it, the ‘crisis’ atmosphere he has created will simply disappear. The debt limit will be raised. Spending will be cut by more than one trillion dollars, and a serious, bipartisan committee of the Congress will begin the hard but necessary work of dealing with the tough challenges our nation faces.

Not much else needs to be said – this is the common sense, rational approach to our problem.  It is the statement of a man sincerely trying to do best by the people of the United States of America.  Not a man who is 100% right; not a man who must get 100% of his way…simply a man who wants to do what is right and is willing to compromise.

Trouble is, Obama and his Democrats don’t want compromise – the reason we have a “crisis” right now is because that is what Obama intended.  He (and his Democrats) kept putting off any action until we got close to a false dead line…they trusted that the phonied up crisis atmosphere would get the GOP to cave in.  In Speaker Boehner and the House GOP, they found people who will not cave.

Truth be told, even if they wanted to cave, they really can’t.  Obama and his Democrats refuse to see it, but we have reached journey’s end for Big Government.  There is no more money to spend – we can, perhaps, keep going as we are for three or four more years, but even that is dicey.  It might only be a year or two.  Regardless, we can’t go on – we have bankrupted ourselves.  It isn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, just the fault of Obama and the current crop of Democrats.  This is a bi-partisan bankruptcy that really got on track 40 years ago…with a few temporary halts under Reagan and (GOP-dominated) Clinton, we’ve been careening down this road to insolvency for decades.  But what is Obama’s fault is the failure to see things as they are – either out of complete blindness, or a simple lack of concern for the fate of the American people, Obama and his Democrats refuse to face facts.

But the facts must, at the end of the day, be faced.  Boehner sees this – sees that even if he caves for the sake of political peace, the price to be paid will be gigantic.  It simply isn’t worth it – at the cost of hostile MSM commentary; at the cost of even losing the 2012 election, we GOPers simply cannot agree to anything which puts the United States at risk.  If we get punished by the American people for this stance, then so be it – if, in the end, they choose to re-elect Obama next year and complete the process of bankruptcy, then that is their right…but we on our side will not participate in it.  Folly with majority votes does not become wisdom.

But, also, I think the American people see it our way.  We know we spend too much and that spending must be cut.  Sure you can find support for higher taxes out there, but the primary culprit in out problem is not lack of revenues, but surfeit of spending.  No one trusts a Democrat who says give me tax hikes now and I promise to cut spending  over ten years…we know we’ll get the hikes all right, but we’re sure to be screwed out of the spending cuts.  Cut now, and then we’ll talk about revenues…until Obama and his Democrats agree to this, there is really nothing to discuss.  And on this issue, if the Democrats want, we’ll fight in 2012 – and I believe we will win, and win very big.

UPDATE:  Obama still refuses to release any written plan – grossly irresponsible of our President, but entirely in character.

UPDATE II:  A lot of House GOPers are showing resistance to the Boehner plan…the MSM will play this up as a problem, but it is actually a strength.  I means that Boehner will have the power to back up his position.

UPDATE III:  Obama will veto the Boehner plan.  This is called “balance” by liberals…you know, where they get everything we want while we get nothing.  Still:  go for it, Mr. President.  We’re ready for the fight.

One might think that the dueling addresses might lay out the differences – except we already know what they are, and we further know that the only reason we don’t have resolution is because Obama and the Democrats won’t give up Big Government.  Whether there will be a shift in Obama’s position remains to be seen – I highly doubt it, but I bet they’ve crafted some poll-tested sound bites to try and move the debate Obama’s way.  Trouble is, I doubt that most people are really paying attention to Obama at this point.

As for Boehner, we can expect he’ll just re-state the obvious:  the GOP won’t go for tax hikes and insists upon real spending reductions.  This is core, GOP belief and it is backed by the majority of the American people.

How does this end?  Beats me – but unless the GOP caves, we’re going to come out on top.

UPDATE: Allen West backs Boehner:

I will support the new debt deal- it has enough of what I need including no tax hikes, spending caps and a step toward a balanced budget.

That should help Boehner with the TEA Party wing.

UPDATE II:  And we’ll see if Obama’s speech changes this…

From CNBC:

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner told fellow Republicans on Sunday that he is considering a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution as part of a bill that would raise the debt ceiling, a source who heard his message said.

That could be a sign that the Republican-controlled House and the Democratic-controlled Senate remain far apart in tense negotiations to avoid an Aug. 2 default.

A balanced-budget amendment is popular with conservatives and was a central element of a bill that failed in the Senate after passing the House last week…

The bottom line here is that Boehner must bring home something in the nature of genuine cuts and/or a reform in spending which promises to balance the budget in a realistic amount of time.  Failure to carry at least this minimum risks a wipe out of the GOP in 2012 – not that GOPers would vote Democrat, but it would almost ensure a third party emerging to carry the fiscally conservative banner in to 2012.  This is key – this is central; this is the non-negotiable thing.

On the other side are the Democrats.  For them it is a matter of preserving the spending they enacted 2009-10.  This must become the “new normal”.  They know full well that they won’t regain the House in 2012 and stand to lose control of the Senate – the loss of the White House must also be envisioned but for the Democrats this is a secondary thing.  Keeping the spending is vital – because it is only via government spending that they retain any power.  Only, that is, if they can keep dispensing lavish amounts of taxpayer dollars on favored groups can the Democrat coalition sustain itself.  Even if they lose in 2012, if they can retain the 2010 level of spending, Democrats feel confident that by 2014 or 2016 they can regain power…and then expand their power via spending from today’s current levels.  Whatever Democrats do, they won’t agree to any substantial cuts in spending.  Not for real – promises of trillions in cuts over the years they’ll give with wild abandon…counting on never having to actually produce the cuts.  We can debate whether they don’t care we’re going broke, or don’t realize it – but the effect is the same:  come what may, they are determined to preserve their spending (my view is that they don’t care – if we do eventually default, they’ll have no problem with that, figuring it would just allow them to go on another borrowed money spending spree once the dust settles…and, of course, a default would be a strong argument for higher taxes).

So, how do we get past the impasse?  Mostly, we put it off until 2013 – hoping that in 2012 we win so big that we’ll have sufficient political power to impose a fiscally conservative settlement of the issue.  The way to get from here to there is, at the end of the day, agree to an increase in the debt ceiling (a totally un-necessary and, indeed, regressive thing to do…but Democrats have their heart set on it and as they control the White House and the Senate, we really can’t get ’round it).  But if we are to agree to increase the debt ceiling, we need something concrete out of it – some sort of real cut to spending next year, along with some real budgetary reform.  A balanced budget amendment, sent to the States, would be ideal.

We’ll see now if it can be done.  Democrats have hyped up the August 2nd deadline as if it means something…but when powerfull people start talking like that, the sheep who man the financial markets start to take it seriously.  Thus we’ve seen the tremors roiling through the global markets.  They should be worried about the fact that the global economy is heading in to recession…but what they are worried about is whether the government will approve the ability to go further in to debt (ie, further on the road to economic ruin).  Still, in all this, Democrats might have shot themselves in the foot…it is  fake crisis, but even a fake crisis can become real if enough people are suckered by it (see Global Warming for a prime example).  Democrats are behind the 8 ball – having said that something must be done by August 2nd to avoid catastrophe, they’d better come up with some thing by August 2nd.  If Boehner can craft a good bill and get it through the House, Democrats may be forced to go along with it.

It could be a very interesting week.

If Obama and his Democrats simply won’t govern, then someone has to – from Politico:

House Speaker John Boehner hopes to have a framework for a debt-limit plan in place by Sunday afternoon to avoid roiling the Asian markets, he told colleagues on a Saturday conference call.

An immediate deal would raise the debt ceiling and cut spending, Boehner said, and there are still options on the table for more comprehensive deficit reduction of $3 trillion to $5 trillion, according to GOP sources on the call. He is also aiming for a framework in the form of Cut, Cap and Balance — the plan that has failed in the Senate, Obama has threatened to veto but House Republicans passed overwhelmingly…

The linked article reports that Boehner advised the President that, at the end of the day, Congress writes the laws and the President decides to sign or veto.  As Obama keeps messing around with negotiations – probably in hopes that the GOP would just get scared and go along with a debt increase without significant spending reform – there is really no need to bring him in to the discussion.  Work out a bill which can avoid any problems starting Monday – make it something which can pass the House and Senate regardless of what Reid or Obama might want…and then just leave it up to them.  Reid, as Majority Leader, could refuse to hold a vote…or Obama can veto the result.  In either case, it would be Democrats blocking the necessary action.

Remember what we’re up against in Obama and his Democrats:  people who’s only goal is to retain power for themselves, and that means keeping Big Government alive and ever growing.  But the time for that is past – we’re broke and we’ll default in a few years if we don’t start getting our house in order.  Fundamental reforms cannot be done while Obama has the ability to obstruct, but we can get something together which bridges the gap between now and January, 2013.  At that time it is hoped we’ll have a new President and a new Senate Majority Leader…perhaps even of a type which cares more about America than personal power.

Seems that the President tried a bit of bait-and-switch in the negotiations – from NRO’s The Corner:

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) offered his side of the story Friday evening, echoing the tone of his letter to House Republicans. He said negotiations with the White House broke down for two reasons: 1) President Obama’s insistence on raising taxes, and 2) Obama’s “refusal to get serious” about spending cuts and meaningful entitlement reform.

Boehner said “an agreement had been reached” earlier in the week that included about $800 billion in new revenue (but not through raising increases). However, the White House on Thursday “moved the goal post” by insisting on an additional $400 billion in tax increases, which Boehner refused to accept. “I take the same oath of office as the president…to do what is in the best interest of our country,” Boehner said. “And it’s not in the best interest of our country to raise taxes in this economy.”…

NRO reports elsewhere that Obama also messed around with some of the proposed spending reforms as regards entitlements.  The bottom line seems to be that a deal was in the making which was acceptable to the GOP but then when it became crunch time, Obama and the Democrats slipped provisions in the GOP had not – and could not – agree to.  I don’t know if this was a poison pill to kill a deal the Democrat didn’t like, at all, or an effort to blindside the GOP (ie, at the last minute put in things that were unacceptable and count on GOP fear of busting up the deal to force them to go along).  In either case it seems to have stopped things in their tracks.  President Obama has called for a White House conference tomorrow – so we’ll see how that goes.

But the good news is that the GOP is standing firm – the revenue increases Boehner agreed to were such that even TEA Partiers could grudgingly accept:  not a rate hike, but a reform of loopholes and such to increase revenues without hiking taxes and killing jobs.  The deal is still too weak in my view – especially as I’m certain that we don’t need to raise the debt ceiling at all – but it did have a solid reduction in spending.  Not nearly enough to get us out of the debt mess, but enough to put off the day of reckoning until at least 2015 or later, thus giving us a chance to replace Obama and get someone with sense in the White House.  My congratulations to the Speaker for smoking out the attempted scam and refusing to be a sucker.

Now, we’ll just see what happens…

From Hot Air:

The Senate just voted down the House Cut Cap and Balance bill, 51-46. Reid danced on its grave, proclaiming it “over, dead, and done.” Back to the Democrat plan:

Nothing!

Which is exactly right – the thing to do, now, is to re-pass it in the House, maybe adding a few changes.  You know, deeper cuts to spending, lowering income tax rates, imposing a wealth tax on the billionaires who back liberalism.  Send it right back to the Senate and see if they keep at it…or, some day, come up with an alternative plan.  Either way, we win.

UPDATE:  Turns out this bill is not quite dead – Senator DeMint is going to try and force a vote next week.  Could be done, you know – those “2012 Democrats” don’t want to have a bunch of votes on record against a balanced budget; only need a few of them to break lose and it passes – and then it will be up to Obama to sign or veto.  So, we don’t at this point need to re-pass it in the House…but we should be prepared to do so, just in case.

Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air notes the CNN poll:

…One has to go thirteen paragraphs into the story to find CNN addressing this at all:

“Republicans like the “cut, cap, and balance” approach to the debt ceiling, as do Democrats and independents. Most Americans support a balanced budget amendment, and most, but not as many, think an amendment is necessary to get federal spending under control. A balanced budget amendment passed the House earlier this week, but a vote in the Senate is expected to fail.”

Er, yeah.  In other words, a consensus exists across all political lines that the CCB/BBA approach would be a good idea.  When one scrolls down to the crosstab sections of the raw data, the consensus becomes very, very clear.  The CCB/BBA approach wins majorities in every single demographic — including self-described liberals.  Sixty-three percent of Democrats back the House bill.  The least supportive age demographic is 50-64YOs at 62/37; the least supportive regional demographic is the Midwest at 61/39.  Even those who express opposition to the Tea Party supports it 53/47…

Naturally, CNN buried the story – they don’t really want to broadcast widely a poll of their own showing that Obama and his Congressional Democrats are out of step with the mainstream.  But, it is there – and it is clear:  the people want the government to cut spending, cap it and balance the budget.

The compromise, if the Democrats are at all interested, is to add a mix of tax hikes to CCB.  I know, I know, fellow Republicans – might as well ask us to have our finger nails ripped off.  But, seriously, we do have a liberal, Democrat President and a liberal, Democrat controlled Senate.  While we are clearly winning the debate on what needs to be done, we can’t ignore the will of the people as expressed in 2008 – elections do have consequences and we’ve got Barry and the (liberal) Boys until at least January 20th, 2013.  So, let’s talk compromise – my preference would be to insert my “wealth tax” proposal in to the mix (ie, a tax on wealth in excess of $5 million), but given the realities of the situation, we’d probably have to go along with some sort of income tax hike, though we would want to work it to be least damaging to small and mid-sized businesses.

But that, of course, would be if the Democrats were interested in compromise – or, indeed, if they even knew what compromise is.  They don’t – liberals are entirely “my way or the highway”.  And, in truth, they are rather stuck – if the budget is balanced and government stops growing, there ceases to be a reason for liberalism – as they have constructed it – to exist.  Real liberalism – even though still fundamentally wrong – could continue to exist; but this quasi-socialist, racialist, neo-fascist liberalism of modern America has no place in an America where the era of big government is really over.

For us it is just a matter of holding firm – do not give in.  Just keep insisting on CCB.  The Democrats will either be dragged kicking and screaming to it, or they’ll blow the whole thing wide open and be forced to carry a defense of Big Government in to 2012.  There is no way for us to lose unless we give in.