Skip to main content

View Diary: Benghazi, again, again, again. Republicans running new hearing to prove it worse than Watergate (150 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  there were no gop "budget slashes" (0+ / 0-)

    as their budget was never taken up by the Senate.

    •  Wrong. The budget was part of the ... (10+ / 0-)

      ...Continuing Resolution for fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2012. The House forced a cut in the president's proposal for embassy security $296 million over both years.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Mon May 06, 2013 at 04:19:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It was the CR and ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Meteor Blades

        not a 'budget" and the Senate is as responsible as the House. Also, note that the amount that the House passed for two accounts that pay for embassy security in 2012 ($2.311 billion) was $330 million less than the Obama administration had requested ($2.641 billion).

        However, the final bill, after being worked on by the Democratic-led Senate, put in more money than what had passed in the House. The final bill, which passed with bipartisan support, gave a total of $2.37 billion to these accounts for fiscal 2012 -- about $270 million less than what the administration had requested. It was still an increase over the previous budget year however.

        And recall that Charlene Lamb testified that budgetary matters had no effect on the level of security provided for the outpost.

        •  WP's Dana Milbank broke it down: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Just Bob

          For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department’s Worldwide Security Protection program — well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration’s request.) Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected.

          GOP vice presidential nominee Paul] Ryan, [Rep. Darrell] Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan’s budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security.

          The Republican appropriation in Congress gave the administration $300 million less than it asked for for the State Department, including funding for security.

          Your dog won't hunt.

    •  Wrong. (0+ / 0-)

      When Secretary Clinton and the State Department asked for additional funding for embassy security, Republicans all voted no.

      Republicans who voted against funding have tried to claim that the Department of Defense was responsible for security, not the State Department. However, a State Department review of the attacks emphasized the need for more funding to prevent new security threats.

      Clinton repeated her call for more funding during Benghazi hearings in January. Belatedly, House Republicans announced support for restored embassy security funding in order to off-set sequestration budget cuts.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site