The decision of House Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, R-Ohio, to drop a controversial list of illustrative cuts from his budget Thursday failed to soothe the concerns of some critics, while others approached the change with caution.
Democrats said the move proves that the Kasich plan is not politically viable, while at least one moderate Republican said the impact remains to be seen.
Kasich announced that he wants to provide appropriators and authorizers with as much flexibility as possible, adding that while he will share his suggestions with those panels, his budget plan simply will reflect funding levels.
"I would not anticipate going to the [Budget] Committee with anything but the numbers," he said. A House Republican leadership aide said the Kasich decision represents a unanimous decision among GOP leaders.
Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del., a moderate who had said he would oppose the Kasich plan, called the decision a "positive move," adding that "it allows more flexibility to decide specific spending cuts, but members still need to fully understand the impact of the overall numbers before they can commit to this plan."
But Democrats blasted the move.
Dropping the cuts "makes the effort all the more pathetic," said OMB Director Raines, who charged Kasich wasted time circulating a list of cuts and then deciding to "kick the ball down the field."
House Budget ranking member John Spratt, D-S.C., asked how Republicans can pass appropriations bills that are binding if Kasich cannot pass a non-binding budget resolution that specifies cuts. "It's an admission that what they have is a non-working document," Spratt said.
Spratt also said Kasich's plan breaks the balanced budget deal reached last year. "It is literally a repudiation of what was bargained for, concessions that were made and paid for," he said.
House Appropriations Chairman Bob Livingston, R-La., said his reaction to Kasich's plan depends on how Kasich distributes the spending cuts.
"He can have illustrative cuts or not," Livingston said. "I've got to have ... bills signed into law." He said, however, that simply specifying numbers is "the right way to go."
House Treasury-Postal Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., agreed with Livingston. Having Kasich simply specify numbers "makes it a lot easier for us." He said many people have focused too much on the specific cuts that Kasich has included in budgets in the past.
Democrats blasted Kasich for his overall plan, accusing him of turning his back on last year's budget deal.
"The administration has remained faithful to the agreement," Raines told reporters. "The administration expects the House of Representatives to remain faithful to the agreement."
Spratt said Kasich had "missing pieces" in his budget plan, adding that many of the savings specified would not be available if the reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act is passed.
He said the plan is full of ideas that have failed, while others are "just plain cockamamie."
Referring to Kasich's proposal to sell power marketing administrations, Spratt said, "It's never made it out of committee."
House Ways and Means member Benjamin Cardin, D-Md., said the Medicare provisions of the balanced budget deal, for example, were "carefully negotiated," while charging that the Kasich plan "is really irresponsible."
The House Budget Committee Democratic staff also released an analysis of the Kasich plan. The Democrats said it contains $5 billion in unspecified entitlement cuts and does not fund the transportation bill.
It also either freezes discretionary spending at current levels or cuts them below current levels, they said. And the Democrats charged it would destroy the Title I compensatory education program by converting it to a voucher program.
NEXT STORY: Agencies ordered to protect privacy