In the wee hours of Saturday morning, the U.S. Senate finally passed a budget by the narrowest of margins, 50-49.  Four Democratic Senators jumped ship to side with Republicans, probably because they are facing tough election fights in Republican leaning states.  Still, it was great to see some vision from this Senate, which called for a $1 trillion in tax increases and $875 billion in program cuts.  Unlike proposals presented by the likes of Paul Ryan, who would eviscerate social programs, the Senate offers a budget that cuts social and other programs more carefully and thoughtfully.  Since this is the first budget the Senate has passed in four years, one might think that they should be congratulated.  But the passage of a Senate budget is only the first step.  Now, the Senate and the House of Representatives have to find some common ground.

Former Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) chairs the House Budget Committee and he chairs it like he thinks he is still running for office.  He claims that he can save $4 trillion more than Democrats by turning Medicare into a voucher program and slashing Medicaid, SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly Food Stamps), and other safety net programs.   How will the Senate and House resolve their differences when Republicans basically refuse to bargain, and Democrats will give away the store if given an opportunity?  If half of the Democrats in the Senate had the backbone of House Republican Majority Leader John Boehner, the people of the United States would be in a better position.

We can't get along if we go along with nonsense such as a voucher program for senior health.  As it is, some hospitals are closing or consolidating, largely because of the number of poor and elderly people who use those facilities.  While Ryan is talking slash and burn, Obamacare, albeit  imperfect, expands health care possibilities for everyone.  We can't get along with cuts in SNAP that leave more people hungry.  The average monthly income for those who receive SNAP assistance is less than $700.  That means families who receive this benefit are working part-time or not at all, not an unusual occurrence when the unemployment rate remains higher than 7 percent overall and 13 percent for African Americans.  We can't get along with proposals to cut educational funding, knowing education opens doors for generations to come.

How, then, will they fill the gap between the lean budget passed by Senate Democrats, and the austerity budget passed by Republicans?  It is up to we, the people.   A few weeks ago, a friend proposed organizing a March that would bring thousands to Washington as these budget deliberations continue to remind the Senate and the House that we are watching them.  As this is the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington, many marches are being planned to commemorate that critical date.  But it might also be meaningful if Dr. King's Poor People's Campaign were also reenacted.  Dr. King's vision of bringing thousands to occupy government offices to highlight the needs of the poor was never fully realized, and the current gap between the House and Senate suggests that the poor will be more harshly treated now than they were two generations ago.

When one contrasts the House Budget with the one that comes from the Senate, one realizes that there are two starkly different visions of our country.  We were presented with these stark choices when Mr. 47 Percent Romney faced off against President Obama.  One could hardly call our president a flaming liberal.  People chose the humanitarian Obama vision of the world instead of the elitist austerity that Romney exemplified.  The people have spoken, but the politicians can't hear.

The people are talking, the politicians are posturing, and millions are wondering how they will survive if a Ryan budget passes.  Why can't we all get along?

 

Julianne Malveaux is a Washington, D.C.-based economist and writer.  She is President Emerita of Bennett College for Women in Greensboro, N.C.