Today the House will vote on a budget that delivers for hardworking taxpayers – cutting Washington spending, implementing pro-growth reforms that will boost our economy, and making the tough choices to secure our future. 

The president’s budget shirks those decisions, raises taxes, and increases ‘stimulus’ spending.  No wonder it could only muster two votes.

We can’t truly solve our jobs problem until we solve our spending problem.  Only Republicans are offering a budget to do that. 

This is the choice we face.

FY’15 Budget

House Republicans

President Obama
 

Balancing
The Budget

YES. “a balanced budget by 2024 with no new tax revenue” (Reuters)

“promising to balance the government's books” (Associated Press)
 

NO. “higher taxes every year for the next decade — though it still never reaches balance.” (Washington Times)
 

Cutting
Spending

YES. “would cut more than $5 trillion in federal spending over the next decade” (Washington Post)
 

NO. “$56 billion in new stimulus spending”  (The Hill)

Stopping
Tax Hikes

YES. “simplifies the tax code” (Washington Examiner)
 

“calls for an overhaul of the tax code” (The Hill)

NO. “relies primarily on more than $1 trillion in new taxes” (The Washington Post)

“financed by tax increases” (McClatchy)
 

Entitlement Reform

YES. “would introduce competition and innovation into Medicare, cutting costs while providing the same benefits” (National Review editorial)

NO. “abdicated what little leadership on entitlement reform he had shown” (Washington Post editorial)
 

“ducks tough choices” (USA TODAY editorial)
 

Repealing
ObamaCare

YES. “includes a full repeal of ObamaCare” (The Hill)

NO. “fully funds Obamacare” (POLITICO)
 

“additional funding to implement the health law” (Wall Street Journal)
 

Expanding
American
Energy

YES. “Republicans have been strong on expanding opportunities for domestic energy, and this budget falls in line
with that priority.” (CBS News)

NO. “Hits the oil and gas industry with tax hikes,” “taxes on offshore production” (The Hill)

Protecting
Defense

YES. “leaves the Pentagon and the Veterans Affairs Department largely untouched” (TIME)

 

NO. “shrinks the Army to a pre-World War II size.” (UPI)