friday why wasn t that offered as a back-up plan when you were agreeing to this sequestration. when that was out there or did you just discover it? we offered this last year, as well. this is the kind of money that senator coburn has been talking about the past couple of years and talking about duplication but this is called rescission money, money that has been appropriated hasn t been spent and time to bring that home so we can work on balancing the budget. neil: congressman, thanks very much. now to fox business network, luz beds mcdonald, it s costing us. what do you got? we have data from personnel and management the federal agency, also americans for limited government.
changing the proverbial goal posts. this is the case, i don t know some in the establishment now questioning whether the president has gone too far or scaring too much? i hope so. i fervently hope that the american people don t fall for this melodrama that somehow cutting to two-or 3 percent out of it is going to cause armageddon. if we can t cut $60 billion out of budget how in the world are we going to get a balanced budget. we have a trillion dollars in debt. how could we get near there if we can t make a first baby step. by the way, i saw you had bernie marcus last night.let s bring h. there is a guy that knows how to run a business. neil: you are right. steve, always a pleasure. best selling author and steve
than five times the cuts they are screaming about taking effect. first, tom on the unspent dough. congressman, i was surprised to see how much we re talking about? yeah, it s remarkable and the american people know this. we have a budget of $3.6 trillion. we ve identified $45 billion that is what is called rescission money, that is money been appropriated along with senator rubio and it s sending in pots in different agencies, energy, education and transportation, unused money. what we ought to do is take that back and allow it to buy down part of the deficit. these are kinds of common sense things, common ground issues we ought to be working on doing the things the president says we can t get it done. neil: what amazes me washington would be having the
this was originally his idea. neil: the runway thing. the thinking if you lay off or even brief period of time a number of union runway operators by definition you shut down those runways? that is up to the president. there is no budget, congress hasn t given him a budget. he has dollars to spend in each department as he sees fit. neil: without giving the discretion to see what he thinks. so, mr. president you have x billions of dollars running the tsa are you going to make people wait in line for five hours and shut down the runs ways or some other ways to nip and tuck. the nimg and ticking is not into the budget it s in the increase of the budget. if for example he has to cut 2%. instead of hiring hundred more soldiers or hundred more tfs a agents he hires 98.
moore. i just wanted to be clear. what we re talking about armageddon is not the way on friday leaving aside these cuts, it s fraction of a percent when you come to think of it $3.8 trillion budget, but half of those cuts are in outer years. then i wanted to think about the latitude that that has been given the president of united states to not enact the onerous cuts. he has much broader powers to make them a little less sensitive. don t go after the beef inspectors, maybe the department of agriculture, go in those installing picket fences on federal lands. you get my point. these are numbers. sadly, my friends, i want to remind you despite what you see in the media, these are the facts. forget about them being illegal. is it more illegal to spring them citing sequestration cuts