well, it is a big day so next week is the anniversaries of five-year anniversary of when the republicans took the majority and when john boehner became speaker of the house and we we have a lot to celebrate because of his leadership in the house and you think about the path that we were on before he was speaker and the important reforms and legislation that he has led on for people across this country. it s quite an impressive record. he s always been committed to fiscal responsibility and since he s been speaker we have reduced spending overall spending by over $2 trillion. most significant spending reductions in modern history. we passed the first ten-year house senate balanced budget plan since 2001. and there s the opportunity scholarship. he s led on so many issues. it was under his leadership that
for long-term spending reductions but the long term never arrives. i have friends and allies like jason and paul ryan in whom i have enormous respect. jason highlighted some good measures. increased military spending and the contributions from federal civilian employees. overall the increase in short-term spending as well as, in my opinion, the unfair way military retirees were treated versus civilian retirees meant the cost of the package outweighed benefits. the real problem lies in the senate, not the house. that s why i m running for the senate so we can have bugs that balance that control spending. we can send them to the president and force tough decisions. i don t think this president there is no evidence in the five years he s been president he has any desire to move away from his rigid
now the earliest we can deal with record deficits, $25 trillion in debt. $90 trillion in unfunded liabilities is, what, january of 2017? remember the budget is a ceiling. now we get to have the 13 appropriation bills. doesn t mean we have to go up to the budget. we will be offering striking amendments on the floor of the house and i hope we come in under budget. when does that happen? we never had a budget framework that we could get the democrats to agree to. just the way the bureaucracy is working it seems to me the same old, same old. maybe what i m looking for is a republican party to offer a plan to balance the budget and be bold and explain to the american people how dire things can be in the future. congressman cotton, you voted against the deal. why did you vote against it? well, sean, like you i have skepticism that the long term will ever arrive in washington. we see more short-term spending for long-term spending
and policies that you say are better for the long-term solven solvency. i think she could run on an agenda for the future. it ought to be grounded in the third way policies and the policies, what are basically what i call the core democratic principles. opportunity for all. that s andrew jackson s credo. we all have an obligation to take advantage of those opportunities to give back to the community, and particularly in the modern context, the context of the day, what i call his thirst for innovation, constantly reforming government. let s put some details on that. you have written such a plan for growth would require spending reductions, modernizing entitlements, and increasing revenue by reforming the tax code. do you think that you can sell that in a democratic primary
this. so on that level, it is a little better for the economy. definitely a smarter, more gradual, less disruptive way of gifting savings. the difference is not huge. $45 billion is significant. not a dramatic difference. we are actually at levels that look similar to where paul ryan s budget put us a couple years ago. obviously since then the political dynamic has changed. where the budget actually is, for sequestration, has changed. and so, this is, i think about as good a deal on spending as democrats are likely to get. in fact. i think we are below where paul ryan s original budget had us for fy 2014. ezra hits important points. sequestration relief, $63 billion. out of $180 billion. you are going to have 1/3 of sequestration relief in the next two years. a victory, not a major one for democrats. i thought the key word from paul ryan at least was these were permanent spending reductions. we look at budgets in ten year windows. some what arbitrary.