In a clear contrast with a House Republican budget plan, Democrats in the Senate set out their own ideas on how best to run the government, proposing $975 billion in tax increases over the next ten years in a spending blueprint that held no hint of a balanced budget.
And there were no apologies for that from Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), Chair of the Senate Budget Committee.
"Despite some of the rhetoric you may hear from my Republican colleagues, the Great Recession didn’t start the day President Obama was elected, and the federal budget didn’t tip into deficit the day he was sworn in," Murray said as she unveiled the Democratic plan.
About the same time that Murray was giving those remarks, President Obama was engaging in Q&A with House Republicans, who pestered him about the budget and more.
"Republicans want to balance the budget; the President doesn't," Speaker John Boehner said after the meeting, labeling it a frank exchange of views.
At one point, Mr. Obama told GOP lawmakers that balancing the budget was not one of his goals.
"He's never introduced a budget that pays down a penny of debt and he won't introduce a budget this year that pays down a penny of debt," said Rep. Rob Woodall (R-GA).
At one point, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) was asking the President a question about why his budget had not been delivered yet to the Congress, when by law it is supposed to be in the hands of lawmakers by the first Monday in February.
"At which time he chimed in, 'We're late,'" Price recounted after the meeting.
As for the numbers, let's take a look at discretionary spending levels - the first figure is from the Senate Democratic plan, then the House Republican plan and the final column shows the original spending caps under the Budget Control Act (before the sequester).
One of the more interesting lines in the Senate Democratic budget outline is a mention of the Postal Service, as the plan includes an undetermined amount for "Postal Service disrectionary administrative expenses."
I am almost tempted to label this a Postal Service "bailout," but we should wait to see what the final number is for that category, before using that term.
As of now, the federal government does not contribute any money to Postal Service operating expenses; Murray's plan though clearly sets out the possibility of ten years of appropriations for that purpose.
The Democratic plan would replace the sequester cuts, using $480 billion "in new revenue raised by closing loopholes and ending wasteful deductions that benefit the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations."
The Democratic plan also envisiones "$240 billion in responsible savings across domestic spending; and $240 billion from reductions to defense spending that coincide with the drawdown of troops from Afghanistan."
It wasn't immediately clear if that $480 billion in new tax revenue was part of the overall $975 billion in tax revenues trumpeted by Democrats, or in addition to that number.
Republicans say the Democratic plan raises over $1.5 trillion in new taxes, but Democratic budget documents show the total to be $975 billion.
Regardless, there is a great divide between these budgets in terms of tax policy, with Republicans raising no taxes at all.
The closest that Democrats get to a balanced budget would be in 2016, when the estimated deficit is $407 billion. Republicans would balance the budget in 2023, though they would have deficits under $100 billion in some years.
Both parties will now move these budget outlines through the House and Senate Budget panels, and then likely approve them on the floor before leaving for an Easter break.
That would send the plans to House-Senate negotiations - but it is unclear where a deal might exist between the Red and Blue teams.
