FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W886884559> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W886884559 startingPage "23" @default.
• W886884559 abstract "On March 18, 1993, 132 Republicans and three Democrats did something unusual for members of Congress: they voted to shrink the size of the government. The vote was for a budget resolution, offered on the floor of the House of Representatives by Republicans on the House Budget Committee, to reduce federal spending by $430 billion over five years. This GOP budget achieved the same amount of deficit reduction promised by President Clinton's budget. But unlike the president's plan, the Republican budget achieved all of its savings through spending restraint. It did not raise any taxes and did not disturb the government's Social Security contract with the American people. Many Republicans initially believed it was a mistake to put forth such a budget of their own. However, as the new ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, I believed it was absolutely necessary for the GOP to develop a bold, serious budget alternative to the president's economic plan. My GOP Budget Committee colleagues and I convinced most members of our party in the House that a detailed budget was essential in distinguishing the Republicans' intent to control the growth of the federal government from the Democrats' desire to expand it. No Hot Air, Show Me Where When President Clinton presented his budget strategy on February 17, in what he called his Vision of Change for America, he asked critics of his plan to be as specific and thorough as he was in developing their alternatives, and precisely identify where they would allocate resources differently. His demand: No hot air, show me where. Leon Panetta, the new director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), repeated the challenge in testimony to the House Budget Committee. Committee Republicans already had decided that any alternative they produced would be substantive and specific - it was not enough to call for a spending freeze or spending caps. Such mechanisms only determine limits on aggregate spending amounts; they do not face up to the kinds of program changes needed to achieve the savings. They also ignore the different impact that the same level of spending cuts will have on individual programs and departments. Control of federal dollars can only come by confronting particular programs line by line. Republicans needed to show precisely how and where they would achieve the savings they claimed. A Clinton Trap? Republicans who were reluctant to go forward with an alternative had understandable concerns. They saw the Clinton challenge as a trap. A GOP budget alternative would draw attention away from the Clinton budget and its numerous flaws, while asking Republican members to support spending cuts that could be unpopular with many constituents. It could draw the opposition of various interest groups, focusing attention on what they disliked in the Republican plan and away from everything that was wrong with the Clinton plan. Despite these hazards, Budget Committee Republicans were convinced that, without a credible alternative to the president's budget, Republicans would come off as petty naysayers whose criticisms would not be taken seriously. Even more important was the future impact of such an approach. If Republican policies were to succeed in the long run, they would have to be formulated, explained, and advanced at every opportunity. If Republicans wanted to govern again, they had to show they knew what role the federal government should play in the life of the nation and that process had to start now, with the budget resolution. The zeal and commitment of the committee's Republicans became apparent early. They quickly agreed on certain demanding criteria for their budget: Credibility. Every spending reduction, every program termination, every government reform had to be based on sound and defensible analysis. There could be no gimmicks. Specifics. …" @default.
• W886884559 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W886884559 creator A5066965712 @default.
• W886884559 date "1993-06-22" @default.
• W886884559 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W886884559 title "On the Cutting Edge: The House GOP Alternative to Clinton's Budget" @default.
• W886884559 hasPublicationYear "1993" @default.
• W886884559 type Work @default.
• W886884559 sameAs 886884559 @default.
• W886884559 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W886884559 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W886884559 hasAuthorship W886884559A5066965712 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C120527767 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C2777179996 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C2779931205 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C2779999868 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C2780822617 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C2780849931 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C3116431 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C45619296 @default.
• W886884559 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C10138342 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C120527767 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C138885662 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C162324750 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C17744445 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C199539241 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C2777179996 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C2778137410 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C2779931205 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C2779999868 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C2780822617 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C2780849931 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C3116431 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C41895202 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C45619296 @default.
• W886884559 hasConceptScore W886884559C94625758 @default.
• W886884559 hasIssue "65" @default.
• W886884559 hasLocation W8868845591 @default.
• W886884559 hasOpenAccess W886884559 @default.
• W886884559 hasPrimaryLocation W8868845591 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W1529329341 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W173610440 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W1974459953 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W1983317029 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W201899855 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2032810390 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2052187381 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W226721895 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2314693606 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2316594475 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2318166594 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2330255180 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2467173950 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W271058078 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W349746420 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W747894229 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W84048199 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W855648161 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W212480534 @default.
• W886884559 hasRelatedWork W2947826612 @default.
• W886884559 isParatext "false" @default.
• W886884559 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W886884559 magId "886884559" @default.
• W886884559 workType "article" @default.