Some key excerpts:
"Members of the conservative Republican Study Committee said the GOP must keep its campaign pledge to immediately slice at least $100 billion from non-defense programs, "
The Tea Party people have put out a $100B number. But then we have:
"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who is empowered by new House rules to unilaterally set a limit on spending, has said he plans to direct appropriators to slice only about $60 billion from this year's budget. The House Appropriations Committee is identifying cuts at that level."
So the mainstream GOP House leadership is only looking at $60B immediately. But overall the GOP House leadership is committed to further cuts:
"Our immediate goal is to cut spending to pre-bailout, pre-stimulus levels. That's what we pledged, and that's what we'll fight for," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. "But that will be the beginning, not the end, of our efforts to cut spending and create jobs (Ed: Huh?) - and we appreciate every member's input."
Top level, it looks like the GOP House would like to roll back the 2008 "stimulus" levels of Federal expenditures, which are probably running off anyway without reauthorization. The $100B cuts that the Tea Party people desire (worst case scenario), would represent about one months worth of Federal deficit levels the US economy has been enjoying over the last two years, the pace of these cuts will probably be more important than the magnitude.
Looking at this FY, through 1Q FY 2011, net spending (gross Treasury account withdrawals minus Treasury Security redemptions) was $1.012T, a projected annual rate of over $4T in net Federal spending. The Tea Party $100B cuts would represent about 2.5% of this projected 2011 Federal spending on an annual basis, and less than 1% of current US GDP. Consensus GDP growth forecasts seem to be running just above 2% for this year. It is not clear to me whether those consensus forecast models take into account these types of fiscal issues.