In the run-up to the 2010 elections, congressional Republicans promised to cut spending by $100 billion as a first step toward controlling deficits. Conservative voters loved it, and a whole group of GOP congresspeople were swept into office with those words on their lips. Of course, when it came time to actually write a budget, Republicans were a little more modest in their goals, pushing instead for a $35 billion cut in federal spending, which Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan called a "downpayment" on the party's promise to cut the budget.
Unfortunately for Republican leadership, House conservatives don't want to put their cuts on layaway:
Piling cuts on top of cuts, House Republican leaders outlined an additional $26 billion in spending reductions on Thursday in hopes of placating conservatives who rejected an initial draft as too timid. [...]
[R[ank-and-file Republicans, many of whom have little hands-on knowledge of the budget and the impact the cuts will have on programs popular with their constituents, insisted on keeping the $100 billion promise, forcing Boehner and the appropriations panel to go back to the drawing board.
"It's important to do what we said we were going to do," said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.
I don't want to understate the conservative radicalism of the current GOP majority, but it seems that this has less to do with ideology, and more to do with the business of representation. Spending cuts are a high priority for conservative voters, and with a slanted perception of the federal budget -- bloated, full of waste -- Republican candidates were more than willing to make the pledge to cut $100 billion. I'm speculating, but my guess is that GOP members still understand this as true, and don't want to alienate supporters with a less than full commitment to the original promise. If the issue were less salient, they might have gone along with the revised plan. But it isn't, so members are left pushing for cuts that are as unrealistic as they are draconian.
