{"id":9644,"date":"2014-04-09T18:26:51","date_gmt":"2014-04-09T18:26:51","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2014-04-09T18:26:51","modified_gmt":"2014-04-09T18:26:51","slug":"louie_gohmert_a_fearless_fighter","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2014\/04\/09\/louie_gohmert_a_fearless_fighter\/","title":{"rendered":"Louie Gohmert: A Fearless Fighter"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Listen<\/a><\/p>\n

RUSH: Louie Gohmert, one of our all-time favorite members of the House of Representatives.<\/a> He\u2019s from Texas, and Louie… I have to say this. Louie is a judge. He\u2019s a former judge. One of the reasons that he wanted to get elected to Congress is he was driving around one day between cases, and he heard me explain baseline budgeting, and it infuriated him. It literally infuriated him. Of course I explained it in such a way to make it simple.<\/p>\n

It was easy to understand, and he didn\u2019t have to call me and say, “What do you mean? What is it?” He understood it, and so he\u2019s been in Congress for awhile. There were hearings yesterday on the budget and number of other things, and this was also hearing where Eric Holder, the AG, came up, and Louie went after him on Fast and Furious. <\/p>\n

<\/a>The attorney general, Eric Holder, said, “I\u2019d be very careful. You don\u2019t want to go there, buddy. You don\u2019t want to go there, buddy.” In Holder\u2019s mind, he\u2019s untouchable. You can\u2019t get anywhere near him. He\u2019s the attorney general, and you\u2019re just human debris. “You\u2019re just a gnat. I\u2019m the attorney general! You\u2019re asking me Fast and Furious? You don\u2019t want to go there, buddy!” But you can\u2019t scare Louie Gohmert. <\/p>\n

So let\u2019s go to the first of the floor of the House yesterday afternoon where Louie Gohmert from Texas is speaking about the federal budget…<\/p>\n

GOHMERT: In the 1990s, I heard what apparently was a “lovable little fuzzball” that turned out to be Rush Limbaugh, talking about the absurd of the United States government doing something that no person, no family, no business, no charity in all of America could do. Show me a business, show me a family, show me an individual, show me a charity that has an automatic increase in every year\u2019s budget! ‘Cause America can\u2019t do that, and I was shocked that this was going on.<\/p>\n

RUSH: So was everybody else. (chuckling) The baseline budgeting technique goes back to the Watergate era or thereabouts. It\u2019s not tied to Watergate, it was something else that happened, but that\u2019s how fairly recently it is. Baseline budgeting is the baseline every year is what the government spends that year. Every department gets an automatic, depending on the department, eight to 10% increase, no matter what. <\/p>\n

<\/a>Anything that expands that baseline therefore expands government spending. It\u2019s a dream come true. This is why the agriculture department advertises at the end of the year for more food stamp. They want the money spent because that way eight to 10% of that baseline, what was spent, bam! It just keeps growing and growing. Whether it\u2019s needed or not, whether the previous year\u2019s budget was spent, whether it was too much or not enough, it doesn\u2019t matter. <\/p>\n

Baseline budgeting is just an automatic increase, without any other factor. The budget is never put together in such a way to say, “Let\u2019s take agriculture. Okay, what did we spend last year? Did we need all that? No? Okay, well, we can cut it by X.” Unh-uh. And baseline budgeting is actually how a “cut” is actually an “increase.” Here\u2019s how that works. <\/p>\n

If your department is scheduled for an 8% increase in spending from one year to the next and then when the new budget comes out you\u2019re only given 4%, you run around like a chicken with your head cut off and you start complaining that your budget\u2019s been cut 4%. But it hasn\u2019t. Your budget is going up 4%, in the example I\u2019ve given you. But since it was supposed to go up 8%, it\u2019s a cut. <\/p>\n

That\u2019s how everything in Washington is a “cut,” when it isn\u2019t. There are no cuts. But yet Democrats run around every day talking about Draconian budget cuts that the Republicans want. There aren\u2019t any. Have you ever seen the budget get smaller? Is the national debt going down? Is the deficit going down? Are we spending less? No. So how could there be any cuts? There aren\u2019t any. <\/p>\n

There are only reductions in the rate of growth, which the Democrats now are permitted to call “cuts.” Now, the Democrats for the longest time didn\u2019t have a response to this. Their strategy was, “Leave it alone. It\u2019s too complicated. Nobody\u2019s gonna understand it. As long as it\u2019s people like Limbaugh, we can deal with it.” But now they\u2019ve had to come up with an answer to it. <\/p>\n

Chris Van Hollen responded to Louie yesterday on the floor of the House. If I have this right, the Democrats\u2019 response and defense of baseline budget is that baseline budgeting — these automatic increases — protect the government from inflation so that the value of government benefit dollars remains constant or increases to the recipient. “So if we guarantee an eight to 10% increase every year, Mr. Limbaugh, we are protecting the people from inflation.” <\/p>\n

That\u2019s how they\u2019ve structured their response or their defense to baseline budgeting. Now, Louie then said that when he got to Congress, he found out it was hard to change. ‘Cause he thought listening to this, “It\u2019s gonna be easy. This is so stupid. This is simple common sense. We can\u2019t budget this way!” He thought it would be not easy, but he thought he would have an easy time explain this to people and changing it. <\/p>\n

He found out the opposite. <\/p>\n

He found out how hard it was.<\/p>\n

GOHMERT: In \u201905 and \u201906 the Republican chair of the Budget Committee said, “We have to do the automatic increases,” and I said, “Why?” He said, “‘Cause it\u2019s the law.” I was shocked. We make the law; we can change the law. And then of course our friends across the aisle took the majority, and for four years there was no chance of eliminating the automatic increase in every federal department\u2019s budgets. But then we got the majority back. Speaker Boehner agreed that if Paul Ryan passed a zero-baseline budget ending the automatic increases out of committee, then he would bring it to the floor.<\/p>\n

RUSH: They\u2019re trying to get this done. Now, they know Obama would veto it, they know current Senate would never pass it, but they\u2019re making a statement. The House Republicans are actually doing it. Louie\u2019s leading the effort here to actually do something about this, which is more than anybody else has ever done on this besides talk about it. Now, I mentioned Louie had his run-in with his buddy Eric Holder yesterday.<\/p>\n

Now, this is during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Department of Justice. Holder testified, and here it is with Louie Gohmert…<\/p>\n

GOHMERT: I\u2019ve read you what your department promised, and it is inadequate. And I realize that contempt is not a big deal to our attorney general, but it is important that we have proper oversight.<\/p>\n

HOLDER: You don\u2019t want to go there, buddy. You don\u2019t want to go there, okay?<\/p>\n

GOHMERT: I don\u2019t want to go there?<\/p>\n

HOLDER: No.<\/p>\n

GOHMERT: About the contempt?<\/p>\n

HOLDER: You should not assume that, uh, that is not a big deal to me. I think that it was inappropriate and it was unjust. But never think that that was not a big deal to me. Don\u2019t ever think that!<\/p>\n

GOHMERT: There have been no indications that it was a big deal, because your department has still not been forthcoming in producing the documents that were the subject of the contempt.<\/p>\n