Jay Carney on Obama's Job Speech...The Economy Matters...The American People Matter...I Can Assure You He Will Be Done Before Kickoff

"The sideshows don't matter," Carney said.

"The economy matters.

The American people matter. Jobs matter."

Hey Jay, on behalf of all grandchildren, grandpa

wants to know just how much jobs for the next

generation matter compared to the

NFL season opener?

"I can assure all you football fans

that he will be completed before kick-off,"

USA Today
By David Jackson
September 1, 2011

We have a date for President Obama's speech on joblessness -- Thursday, Sept. 8.

What we don't have is a specific time -- though we know he will be done by 8:30 p.m., which happens to be the start time for the season-opening pro football game between the Green Bay Packers and the New Orleans Saints.

"I can assure all you football fans that he will be completed before kick-off," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

Carney said Obama and aides are looking forward to speaking directly to Congress, and not rehashing the remarkable political flap that preceded the scheduling of the speech.

Obama initially asked to speak to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday. Some Republicans objected, noting their presidential candidates have a debate that same night; House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, suggested the president move the speech to Thursday, citing logistical concerns.

After talks between the White House and Boehner's office, Obama opted for Thursday.
"The sideshows don't matter," Carney said. "The economy matters. The American people matter. Jobs matter."

"It is irrelevant," Carney later said. "It really is."

It also didn't bother the president, Carney said.

"I spent a great deal of time with him this morning and it never came up," Carney said. "Honestly."

Carney said Obama wanted to speak to Congress about about as soon as lawmakers got back from August recess. "Wednesday seemed to be the best option," he said. "When that seemed to be a problem, Thursday was fine with us."

The White House has long been mindful that Thursday night also features the season opener for the National Football League, New Orleans at Green Bay.

When a reporter asked Carney if the speech will constitute a "pre-game show," the spokesman said: "It means he will have the opportunity to watch the game, like millions of other Americans."

With ample time until the debt ceiling is breached, House delays debt ceiling vote to rename a Post Office

Los Angeles Times
By Nichael A. Memoli and
Kathleen Hennessey
July 28, 2011

House leaders have delayed a scheduled vote on the debt ceiling plan offered by House Speaker John A. Boehner, a possible acknowledgement that Republicans lacked the votes to ensure passage.

The postponement was announced just minutes before the planned 6 p.m. vote. The House instead moved to consider a far less controversial measure -- to rename a post office in Peoria, Ill.

Republicans had been working throughout the day Thursday to lock down support for their plan to raise the nation's debt ceiling, even as Senate Democrats vowed to swiftly kill it if passed.

"We're not there yet; we don't have the votes yet. But today is the day," Boehner had told members at a morning meeting, according to a GOP source who was not authorized to publicly discuss the private conversation.

Aides to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor insisted that a vote could still take place Thursday. A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid posted on Twitter that the body was "ready to defeat the Boehner plan whenever House Republicans can get their act together."

Lawmakers are working to meet the Aug. 2 deadline for extending the nation's borrowing capacity, or administration officials warn of a chain reaction of potentially disastrous economic consequences.

Boehner's bill would raise the debt limit in two stages -- one that could cover borrowing through the end of the year and another to cover 2012. The first increase is paired with $915 billion in spending cuts over 10 years. The second would be contingent on passage of a larger deficit-reduction package crafted by a new congressional committee.

Rather than promising passage of a balanced-budget amendment -- a top priority for conservatives -- the bill only ensures a vote in both chambers. Such a vote would be largely symbolic. The GOP-preferred version of the amendment is widely rejected by Democrats and would fall well short of the two-thirds vote needed to pass.

Mr. "I reject the word compromise" Boehner's budget reduces debt on our grandchildrens' back by a pathetic $850 billion over 10 years

Yes grandchildren, the same man who rejects the word compromise, yet voted yes to an Iraq Shock and Awe (while voting yes to make the Bush tax cuts permanent), will not let his buddies to pay for Shock and Awe (a.k.a. pass it along to the grandchildren), is tightly bound to his lobbyist friends, votes yes to bail out banks via TARP,  and then drafts a budget that removes $850 billion (6% of our current deficit) off your back over 10 years. This is the same Mr. "reject compromise" that grew up in a family of 12 children (including sisters) with one bathroom.

Grandpa remains party agnostic. Take Harry Reid's budget for example...smoke and mirrors and he too does not care about what debt ultimately ends up on the backs of our grandchildren. Grandpa's bottom line (no pun intended): you can wrap a box full of dog poo in Red State paper or Blue State paper and it does not change the gooey mess in the box let alone the stench.

The Hill
By Erik Wasson
7/26/11

The Congressional Budget Office has told House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) that his debt ceiling fallback plan will reduce the deficit by about $850 billion over ten years.

House GOP rank-and-file have been waiting eagerly for the score since they are worried the bill would not measure up to claims made about it by House leadership. Leadership on Monday said the bill would reduce discretionary spending by $1.2 trillion over ten years.

The CBO revealed the score in a Tuesday letter to the speaker.

The score is against the latest CBO baseline as adjusted to reflect the 2011 spending cuts deal between Congress and the White House that cut $38 billion in budget authority. Those 2011 cuts have ripple effects over the budget window.

The CBO has also determined that taking that earlier deal into account, the spending levels in the Boehner plan is a $1.1 trillion cut in the deficit.

Most of the effects of the Boehner plan come from caps it imposes on discretionary spending. Next year the cap is $1.043 trillion, a $6 billion drop from current levels.

Actual federal spending outlays in the ten-year period would be reduced by $710 billion relative to that March baseline, CBO says, if the discretionary spending caps in the Boehner plan are instituted.

Overall, savings in discretionary spending is cut $695 billion, mandatory spending is cut by $20 billion, and the savings in interest equals $135 billion.

CBO also looked at other more minor provisions in the Boehner bill. One would provide extra funding for Pell Grants to students and this costs $17 billion, while another would limit other student loans saving over $30 billion.

The Boehner plan is a two-step process whereby the debt ceiling would be raised before Aug. 2 and then again next year.

The CBO score reflects part one of the process, which grants President Obama the right to request a $900 billion increase in the debt ceiling, slightly more than the amount CBO says the Boehner plan cuts from combined deficits compared to the March baseline.

Boehner this spring said Congress would only raise the debt ceiling if spending cuts exceed the amount by which the debt ceiling is raised.

CBO does not assign a score to the second phase of the Boehner plan which would require a joint committee to come up with a plan to cut $1.8 trillion from the deficit by Nov. 23.

Running Out of Runway...next time you fly, ask pilot if he/she rejects "compromise"

USA Watchdog
July 25, 2011
By: Greg Hunter

It looks like even the mainstream media (MSM) can see a calamity if we are right on top of one. Finally, the dire debt ceiling negotiations between Congress and the White House were covered wall-to-wall on all the major media outlets yesterday. No comment better describes the frightful situation America faces over its debt problem than what Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said yesterday on FOX, “. . . we’re running out of runway. I never thought they would take it this close to the edge and let politics get in the way of demonstrating we will pay our bills on time.” To extend that metaphor, even if the debt ceiling is reached just before the August 2^nd deadline, doesn’t mean the government can get enough altitude to clear the trees. It will take some time to implement the new bill, and time is very short.

Meetings in the nation’s capital yesterday did not produce a bill that can garner approval of the House, Senate and President. At the open of the Asian markets overseas, gold was up $20 an ounce in the first hour of trading. It hit another record high (with many more to come.) Who knows if the yellow metal will hold onto the gains, but that amounts to a giant vote of no confidence from overseas consumers of our dollar and debt. 

Remember, there are $12 trillion in liquid assets (treasury bonds and dollars) held outside the country. A panic over the stalled debt talks in the United States could cause massive selling of those assets. Interest rates would spike and the value of the dollar would plunge. It would cause immediate pain for U.S. consumers and could disrupt markets worldwide. The stakes in Washington D.C. couldn’t be higher. What has been called a “cloud of default” could start hurling thunder bolts and producing torrential rain in the global economy.

To say the Democrats and Republicans are not on the same page is an understatement—they’re not on the same planet. The argument between raising taxes and cutting spending has morphed. It now includes a “must do” deal to take negotiations on raising the debt ceiling out of 2012 elections. When the idea of a short-term debt increase was posed to White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley on “Meet the Press” yesterday, it was soundly shot down. Host David Gregory asked, if “The President would veto a plan if it does not extend the debt ceiling into 2013?” Daley quickly said, “Yes.”

Meanwhile, over on FOX, Speaker of the House John Boehner said, “I think the better path forward at this moment will be … to put together a process that’s doable.” He’s basically talking about a short-term Republican plan that cuts some spending and pushes the debt ceiling up enough to pay the nations bills until the end of this year. I don’t think the President will think that is “doable.” That means no so-called “grand plan” and more debt ceiling debates in 2012. Mr. Boehner says he will announce details of that plan on Monday. On the other hand, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is getting a different plan together on the Democratic side. It will reportedly cut the budget and raise the debt ceiling until after the 2012 November elections. Does it sound like a deal is coming together to you? Not to me.

Maybe that’s why the host of “FOX News Sunday,” Chris Wallace, asked Secretary Geithner yesterday, “What’s your plan for default?” Geithner has already admitted he recently had meetings about this very subject with Fed Chief Ben Bernanke and others. Mr. Geithner responded, “Our plan is to get Congress to raise the debt ceiling on time . . . we do not have the ability to protect the American people from the consequences of Congress not taking action.” According to Geithner, 80 million checks a month are sent out by the government. The U.S. borrows 42% of every dollar it spends, and a short-term default to some will happen. Geithner repeatedly sidestepped the question of who will get paid and who will not. I think Treasury debt, Social Security and the military will all get paid, but plenty of other commitments will not be.

I do not see how you tackle a debt problem by adding trillions of new debt. I do not mean to sound like a Republican, but spending is the problem. So where can you make some big cuts? Neither party is talking about cutting spending for the military. The U.S. spends more on defense than all other countries—combined. I am not anti-military, but do we really need to start another war in Libya? Do we really need to have bases in Korea and Europe? Both parties are also mum on the continuing banker bailouts through Fannie and Freddie. Why do taxpayers get the bill for $trillions in sour mortgage debt pumped into the failed mortgage giants by the big Wall Street banks? Not a word about that by either party, let alone prosecutions. To top it off, the big banks are in the process of negotiating immunity for their crimes! You think I am kidding? (Click Here)  Literally trillions could be cut in both areas, but that’s not what the debate is about. Don’t expect the MSM to point that out because they all will get big bucks in political advertising for the 2012 election.

Most people are living like they are in the “blue pill” world of a Matrix movie. I keep having this vision of a slow motion crash, and then, all of a sudden, someone flips a switch and bam!–we are at the speed of real life. It’s sure looking like that switch is going to be flipped right around the beginning of August.

The (Cuisan)art of fiscal policy (Paul Daggett)

Puréeing: Flawed ideas and denial

result in mush that no one can swallow.

StarTribune
July 24, 2011
By: Paul Daggett

The continuing stalemate over whether to raise the debt ceiling and how to control the nation's budget deficits is revealing. Politicians are unable or unwilling to acknowledge the seriousness of the U.S. fiscal position.

Consider the central disagreement between the parties: taxes. The Republican Party opposes increases of any kind, saying that taxes on "job creators" are exactly the wrong policy at a time of high unemployment. To reduce budget deficits without raising taxes, Republicans propose major cuts in government spending.

Democrats contend the huge cuts required to reduce deficits without "revenue increases" would decimate the lower and middle classes, which are more dependent than ever on government's safety-net programs. They argue that higher taxes on the wealthy are a fair way to balance government budgets.

Unfortunately, both parties' positions are fundamentally flawed.

The Republican position that tax increases would destroy jobs fails to acknowledge that spending cuts would also destroy jobs. Cutting government spending destroys the jobs of government employees as well as the jobs of those who sell goods and services to the government and to the recipients of government benefits.

Many Democrats insist that everything was fine with the budget under President Bill Clinton -- the federal government ran a budget surplus in the final three years of Clinton's second term. Undo the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and end his expensive wars, and everything should be fine, they say.

Clinton's surpluses, however, were the result of a temporary surge in tax revenue as the Internet bubble inflated, not fiscal responsibility.

More important, these arguments both miss the larger point -- the financial/housing crisis and the Great Recession have changed everything.

The crisis has had enormous impact on the federal budget. The various stimulus plans, bailouts, tax incentives, etc., passed in response to the Great Recession cost far more than the Afghanistan and Iraq wars combined. And while federal spending surged at an unprecedented rate, government revenue was collapsing. Federal tax revenues plunged $400 billion from 2008 to 2009 and failed to recover, remaining level in 2010. Federal government revenues were lower in 2010 than they were in 2000!

Prior to the Great Recession, maybe the government's debt problem could have been solved with some reductions in the major entitlement programs, cuts in war spending and tax increases on the wealthy. But now, even the most "austere" proposals for dealing with the budget crisis (such as those from Rep. Paul Ryan or Obama's deficit commission) do not come close to balancing the budget. They simply slow the pace at which the nation hurtles into debt.

It seems unlikely, in the current political climate, that the United States will take the necessary steps to restrain its profligate ways voluntarily, but at least the country still has the time and resources to do so. Greece, Ireland, Portugal (and now likely Italy) failed to get their budgets under control fast enough and effectively went bankrupt. Now the budget decisions for those countries are dictated by their financial patrons, the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.

So while parties wrangle over whether the wealthy should endure a small tax increase or federal spending should actually be reduced for the first time in most Americans' lifetimes, soon enough the topics of debate will be far more serious:

Should Social Security and Medicare be drastically reformed or eliminated? Should taxes be raised significantly -- and on everyone? How should the United States adapt, geopolitically, to a dramatically downsized military?

The nation's debt will require real sacrifice and tough decisions. America can make those decisions itself or, like Greece, Ireland, and Portugal, leave them to foreign creditors.

Isn't it time the nation's politicians

started taking this seriously?

Paul Daggett is an investment analyst in Minneapolis.

John "I reject the word compromise" Boehner Responds to Obama's Fruitless Invitation

Now Remember Grandchildren,

These Are Professionals. Do Not Attempt

Any of This At Home.

Washington (Jul 5) House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) today issued the following statement after President Obama discussed his request for an increase in the national debt limit:

“The American people are worried about our economy, and our future. More than two years after the start of Washington Democrats’ ‘stimulus’ spending spree, they’re still asking, ‘where are the jobs?’

“We’re not dealing just with talking points about corporate jets or other ‘loopholes.’ The legislation the President has asked for – which would increase taxes on small businesses and destroy more American jobs – cannot pass the House, as I have stated repeatedly. The American people simply won’t stand for it. And their elected representatives in Congress won’t vote for it. I’m happy to discuss these issues at the White House, but such discussions will be fruitless until the President recognizes economic and legislative reality.

“Our focus should be on getting our economy back on track by making the spending reductions and structural reforms necessary to address our nation’s out-of-control debt. We can do so without raising taxes on America’s small business job-creators. I’m pleased the President stated today that we need to address the big, long-term challenges facing our country. Our nation’s long-term future requires presidential leadership to address those challenges.”


The Hill 
June 29, 2011
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) called President Obama "sorely mistaken" that the House will support tax increases in a deal to raise the debt limit.

Boehner was quick to respond to remarks that Obama made in a Wednesday news conference, in which the president suggested that the House would vote for a measure to close so-called tax loopholes.

“The President is sorely mistaken if he believes a bill to raise the debt ceiling and raise taxes would pass the House. ... A debt limit increase can only pass the House if it includes spending cuts larger than the debt limit increase; includes reforms to hold down spending in the future; and is free from tax hikes," Boehner said in a written statement. Complete Article

John Boehner (I reject the word compromise) would still be paid if government shuts down

Unlike the president and legislators,

military personnel and essential federal

employees who stay on the job would

have to wait until government spending

authority is restored to get salaries and wages.

By Julianna Goldman
April 7 (Bloomberg) -- As tomorrow night’s deadline for avoiding a government shutdown nears, about 800,000 “non- essential” federal workers face the prospect of getting no pay at all for time lost to the political impasse.

Elected officials, including Republican House Speaker John Boehner, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and President Barack Obama, all would be paid as usual during a shutdown, unless Congress changes the law. Soldiers, law enforcement officers and other government employees whose jobs are deemed essential would continue to work yet wouldn’t get paychecks until the budget standoff is resolved.

Workers furloughed as non-essential, however, aren’t guaranteed that they’ll be paid at all for time off when the government closes for business. While they’ve ultimately received back pay after previous shutdowns, it’s up to Congress to “determine whether ‘non-excepted’ employees receive pay for the furlough period,” according to a U.S. Office of Personnel Management website providing guidance and information on furloughs.

“It is unknown whether legislation will ultimately be passed” to make up lost pay, says a sample letter to non- essential employees prepared by the Committee on House Administration. “We wish that we could provide you with more guidance on this issue but, due to the fluid nature of the situation, we cannot.”

A ‘Non-Starter’

The Republican-controlled U.S. House approved a stopgap spending bill today to keep the government open through next week. Obama said he’d veto the measure, which would cut an additional $12 billion in spending this year and fund the Pentagon at current levels through Sept. 30. Reid called the bill a “nonstarter.”

Boehner and Reid returned to the White House this afternoon for negotiations that didn’t produce an agreement. The government’s current spending authority is set to expire at midnight tomorrow.

“A shutdown could have real effects on everyday Americans,” Obama said late last night at the White House after a meeting where Boehner and Reid failed to reach an agreement.

“It means that hundreds of thousands of workers across the country suddenly are without a paycheck. Their families are counting on them being able to go to work and do a good job.”

Docking Pay
The Senate has passed a measure to dock the pay of lawmakers for the duration of a shutdown. A House measure, part of the largely symbolic Prevention of Government Shutdown Act approved last week, would dock the pay of the president in addition to members of Congress. Neither proposal has taken effect.

Members of Congress “shouldn’t be getting paid, just like federal employees shouldn’t be getting paid” during a shutdown, Boehner said today on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Freshman Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, of West Virginia, said in a statement on his website that he would forgo his salary during a government shutdown and challenged colleagues to do the same thing.

“The bottom line is this: I can’t imagine that the president, vice president or any member of Congress -- Republican or Democrat -- thinks they should get paid when the government has shut down,” Manchin said. Complete Article

Grandpa's challenge to all Politicians:Give our children/grandchildren hope, praise and let them be little

Vigilant Grandpa challenges all politicians

and policymakers to take 3 1/2 minutes

out of your day and listen to the message

"Let Them Be Little."

Before your next lobbyist meeting, hit the play button, before your next appearance on Fox News or CNBC, hit the play button, before your next vote, hit the play button and before you kiss another baby at a fund raising event...hit the play button.

Several special challenges from Grandpa:

John Boehner: Before you weep another tear about growing up in a large family, mopping floors and the American Dream...hit the play button. You just might accept the fact that you are not the only large family sibling who worked a mop and believed in the American Dream.

Mitch McConnell: Before you cash another contribution check from your buddies on Wall Street and the Health care Industry...hit the play button.

Mary Schapiro and SEC Staff: Before you accept another settlement in any fraud case...hit the play button.

President Obama: Before you delivery another televised message, give your teleprompter writer the day off and hit the play button. You just might find speaking from the heart is both honorable and motivational.

Focusing on children and grandchildren is long overdue Mr. President...Nod if this sounds at all familiar..."We are hungry for change and we are ready to believe again."


Billy Dean with a genuinely grandchild friendly message


I can remember when you fit in the palm of my hand.
You felt so good in it; no bigger than a minute.
How it amazes me you're changin' with every blink.
Faster than a flower blooms, they grow up all too soon.

So let them be little,
'Cause they're only that way for a while.
Give 'em hope, give them praise,
Give them love every day.
Let 'em cry, let 'em giggle,
Let 'em sleep in the middle,
Oh, but let them be little.

I never felt so much in one little tender touch.
I live for those kisses, your prayers an' your wishes.
An' now you're teachin' me how only a child can see.
Tonight, while we're on our knees, all I ask is:

Please, let them be little,
'Cause they're only that way for a while.
Give them hope, give them praise,
Give them love every day.
Let 'em cry, let 'em giggle,
Let 'em sleep in the middle,
Oh, but let them be little.

The so innocent, precious soul:
You turn around, an' it's time to let them go.

So let them be little,
'Cause they're only that way for a while.
Give them hope, give 'em praise,
Give them love every day.
Let 'em cry, let 'em giggle,
Let them sleep in the middle,
Oh, but let them be little.

Let them be little.

Billy Dean

Obama proposes $7,500 electric car tax credit, a $53 Billion Train and cut $1.1 Trillion from Budget?

The administration's 10-year,

$1.1 trillion deficit reduction is less than the

total projected deficit for 2011 alone.

(Meanwhile, back at the White House Ranch, Obama

proposes a $7,500 Electric Car car tax credit and

$53 Billion High Speed Rail Project)

By Jonathan Weisman and
Naftali Bendavid
The Wall Street Journal
2/13/11

WASHINGTON – The White House's budget proposal for 2012 would shave $1.1 trillion from cumulative federal deficits over 10 years, mostly through spending cuts, a move White House officials believe would bring government spending into a healthier balance.

The cuts the administration will propose in its budget proposal Monday would hit a number of federal agencies and programs, but fall short of the spending reductions congressional Republicans will try to push through the House of Representatives this week. They also don't overhaul the major entitlement programs that are the biggest contributors to the nation's long-term fiscal woes.

Washington's focus has pivoted sharply in the last year from concerns over the financial crisis to concerns about the growth of government spending, which has joined jobs and the economy as major issues for voters. The administration's proposal will be the first time it details its vision for the economy and the role of government since Republicans won control of the House of Representatives in November.

White House officials still have not revealed some key details for Monday's budget, including total recommended spending levels and its projected deficit for 2012. The budget is in essence the White House's proposal for fiscal policy to Congress. The House and Senate must approve any changes to tax and spending policy, and their visions can contrast sharply with what the White House requests.

The administration's 10-year, $1.1 trillion deficit reduction is less than the total projected deficit for 2011 alone, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates will total $1.48 trillion. It also falls short of the $4 trillion in reductions the White House's bipartisan deficit-reduction commission proposed in December.

If enacted, the president's budget would bring the country's deficit to around 3% of the country's gross domestic product by 2017, an administration official said. This is higher than the 2.3% threshold the deficit-reduction commission proposed and short of the administration's target of 2015.

The White House plan would miss the goal administration officials had laid out of balancing the budget outside of interest payments by 2015.

Last year, the White House projected the deficit as a percent of GDP would be 4.2% at the end of 2020 and that total deficits as of that time would be $10.1 trillion. The deficit as a share of GDP in 2010 was roughly 10%. Two-thirds of the deficit reduction in the White House's budget proposal would come from spending cuts to mandatory and discretionary programs, both foreign and domestic, with the other one-third coming from changes to tax policy, although the details of that aren't yet clear.

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) launched a pre-emptive critique of Mr. Obama's budget, saying it leaves spending and debt too far out of balance. "The president's asked us to increase the debt limit, and yet he's going to present a budget tomorrow that continues to destroy jobs by spending too much, borrows too much and taxes too much," Mr. Boehner said on NBC's Meet the Press.

The budget proposal will recommend ending Bush-era tax cuts for the highest earners when they are set to expire at the end of 2012, though the White House didn't include the projected revenue from this in its budget forecasts. The budget projections are based on the administration's economic forecast which shows a recovering economy, but it was made before the December tax-cut compromise which, most private forecasters say, has boosted the near-term growth outlook. Faster growth could mean higher government tax revenues and a smaller deficit.

Many of the spending cuts or reductions in the budget are already known. It would, for example, freeze levels of domestic non-defense spending for five years, something the White House believes will save $400 billion.

The White House will also propose reductions to a number of federal programs, from the U.S. Forest Service to a program that provides heating assistance for low-income families. It will adopt previously recommended reductions in military spending that would reduce costs by $78 billion over several years. The budget proposal will also recommend targeted spending increases, particularly in education and infrastructure programs.

White House Budget director Jacob Lew said the administration is making hard choices in its budget to get the deficit under control. "There are scores of programs that are being reduced," Mr. Lew said on CNN's State of the Union. "We're beyond the easy, low-hanging fruit."

He said the budget would mix sensible spending with necessary cuts. For example, it would enable nine million people to take advantage of Pell grants, Mr. Lew said, but to pay for that, it would eliminate Pell grants during the summer, limiting them to the academic year. Similarly, the budget will help pay for 100,000 new teachers, especially in the math and sciences. But it would also begin applying interest to graduate students' loans while those students are still in school.

"The challenge we have is to live within our means but also invest in the future," Mr. Lew said. "We're doing what every family does when it sits around the table."

Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), chairman of the House Budget Committee, said the president's five-year freeze on discretionary spending simply locks the government into a high level of spending.

"This discretionary freeze is off of an extremely high base," Mr. Ryan said on Fox News Sunday. "They just blew spending off the gates in the last two years...It looks like to me that [Mr. Obama's budget] is going to be very small on spending discipline and a lot of new spending, so-called investments."

Neither party has proposed significant cuts to entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security, which make up an outsized proportion of the budget but are politically difficult to cut.

"I think it's incumbent on leaders here in Washington to help the American people understand how big the problem is," Mr. Boehner said. "Once the American people get their arms around how big the problem is, then and only then" can solutions be laid out.

Pelosi: Of Mr. Boehner it's sooo big and other Friday Funnies (Obama, Boehner, Congress, Pelosi and DOL)

Meet Obama's New Team

Sell Hello to he 112th Congress Freshman

Tim Geithner's Meeting w/John Boehner on the need

to Raise Debt Ceiling AGAIN.

Representing 46% of the New Jobs Created in December

According to the Dept. of Labor NFP Report

About 1/50th of the Dec. initial jobless claim filers

seasonally adjusted out by the Dept. of Labor

(actually sad, not funny)

Oh Mr. Boehner, it's sooo big, I needed both hands. It is so

much larger than the one Denny Hastert handed me.