‘The buck shrinks here’: Democrats seek 5 percent cut in Senate’s office funds

Democratic leaders plan to slash budgets in the Senate by 5 percent to demonstrate they’re serious about spending cu­­­ts.

Republicans axed 7 percent from lawmakers’ personal expenses in the House.

{mosads}Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Legislative Branch subcommittee, announced Monday that he would seek the 5 percent cut for the remainder of the year.

 “I cut spending for Congress last year. I’m pushing for further cuts this year in Congress’s budgets, and will be back at it again next year,” Nelson said. “There will be cuts and while some will be painful, it’s important to lead by example. I hope others will join me in cutting spending all across the government.

“Because Washington surely needs more fiscal accountability these days, we should adapt Harry Truman’s well-known phrase and say, ‘The Buck Shrinks Here,’ ” he said.

Nelson will have a tough race for reelection next year, and Democratic strategists believe this proposal will help strengthen his bona fides as a budget hawk. 

Senate Democrats decided at a retreat last month in Charlottesville, Va., that they need to squeeze the budgets, even though it might mean sacking staff.

“We’ve got to lead by example,” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who is in the midst of talks to reduce federal spending.

“That means our budgets, congressional budgets. That means every part of federal spending has to be reviewed and nothing can be sacrosanct.”

A Senate Democratic aide said the cut would hit junior lawmakers most severely.

“When you cut personal office budgets, it really hurts freshmen and sophomores,” the aide said. “Senior guys own several million in committee budgets. These kind of cuts fall disproportionately on freshman guys.”

Rumors had swirled among Senate aides that the cuts could be as high as  8 percent.

Anticipating cuts, some lawmakers were cautious about hiring staff at the beginning of the year.

“Offices are concerned about potential cuts, and what impact they’ll have will vary from office [to office],” said another Senate Democratic aide. “It’s going to be really hard to do the legislative business if they go hog wild on cuts.”

Democratic leaders worry that incumbents fighting tough reelection battles could suffer if party members seem to disregard public concern over spending and the deficit, which is projected to be $1.6 trillion this year.

Some vulnerable Democratic senators have criticized their leaders for cutting too little.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) declared after the State of the Union address that President Obama’s proposal to freeze non-security domestic spending for five years did not go far enough.

McCaskill has joined Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) to introduce legislation to cap federal spending at 20.6 percent of gross domestic product after 10 years. 

The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) last week challenged Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), who also faces a tough election in 2012, to fight his party leaders over spending.

“Sen. Tester has told Montanans time and again that he supports reining in government spending and forcing the federal government to operate more efficiently, yet under his watch the federal debt has grown by almost $6 trillion,” said NRSC spokesman Chris Bond.

Tester on Monday unveiled a proposal to ensure that members of Congress and the president would not receive paychecks if the government shuts down because the parties cannot agree on spending levels.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last month blasted a House Republican stopgap measure that would cut $61 billion from 2011 spending as “unworkable” and “draconian.”

Congress appropriated $926 million for Senate operations in fiscal 2010.

A 5 percent cut would save about $46 million. It’s less than a rounding error compared to the $1.6 trillion deficit, but Democratic lawmakers have become increasingly persuaded that they need to make personal sacrifices when the rest of the nation is tightening belts.

The House voted overwhelmingly in January to cut the budgets of leadership, committee and personal offices by 5 percent or $35 million, according to a House Republican aide.

House lawmakers voted for another $46 million in reductions to House budgets proposed in H.R. 1, the continuing resolution to fund the government through the end of 2011. The second round of cuts included $21 million in reductions to members’ representational allowances, pushing the cut felt by average House offices to 7 percent, according to the GOP aide.

Summary documents posted by the House Appropriations Committee last month showed the House cut its operational expenses by $81 million in the continuing resolution for 2011.

Senate Democratic leaders vowed to oppose that bill in the upper chamber.