NRCC Chairman Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX)

Despite House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) promised “zero-tolerance” policy on ethical scandals, Buchanan continues to serve on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee and to lead fundraising efforts for his party’s campaign committee. Watchdog groups and Democrats have called on Buchanan to resign — not just from those posts, but from his seat in Congress.

Sessions yesterday brushed aside calls for Buchanan to be removed from his NRCC post. He told the New York Times:

Vern Buchanan is entitled to have a fair hearing. At this point, there is no one that is making an accusation that he cannot sustain. And if it gets to the point where the ethics committee makes some decision, if they do, I’ll be glad to pay attention to that.

He notes that a “huge number of people that are Members of Congress, from outside groups, have been attacked for doing things. He’s not the only one.”

Watch the video.

While of course Buchanan and all politicians accused of political corruption are indeed entitled to a fair hearing, Sessions displays stunning hypocrisy on the point.

One of the most prolific of those unnamed “groups” attacking other Members of Congress is Sessions’ own NRCC. In a section of their website called “Democrats’ Dirty Laundry,” Sessions and his staff attack an array of Democratic members over allegations against them, even though they have not had a “fair hearing.”

Each post begins “SPIN CYCLE: Then-Speaker Pelosi Promised that Democrats Would ‘Demand the Highest Ethics from Every Public Servant’” and then contains an allegation against a Democrat described as “RINSE CYCLE.”

Given Cantor’s pledges of zero tolerance — and the wide array of Republicans serving in key roles under ethical investigation — perhaps Sessions should focus on washing his own dirty laundry and pay attention now.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) instead proposed a one-year, $113-billion reauthorization earlier this year — and today, Cantor and Minority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) are reportedly nearing a compromise that would reauthorize the bank, though details of the plan aren’t yet clear, The Hill reports:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) are close to striking a deal on reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, sources said Thursday.

Although the deal was not finalized as of Thursday, a House vote is considered likely next week.

Cantor has been among the GOP’s leaders in the fight against Ex-Im, pushing an agenda favored by Delta Airlines, with which he is a “close friend and supporter.” Reauthorization of Ex-Im has in the past been largely uncontroversial, and the Obama administration made lifting the loan limit a priority to help small businesses boost their exports and create jobs (Ex-Im also helps large businesses like Boeing, but it is especially crucial for small businesses that are trying to access financing in a tough economy). Cantor has also suggested reaching agreements with major trading partners to end export programs like Ex-Im, though as the Center for American Progress’ Sabina Dewan notes, that plan is hardly feasible.

Though details of the compromise aren’t yet clear, falling well short of the $140 billion target so Cantor can throw Delta another bone would, as Dewan has noted, jeopardizes Ex-Im’s expanded efforts to help America’s small businesses.

– Fatima Najiy

Today, Cantor, the only Jewish House Republican, nearly affirmed that this was the reason he fought against Manzullo’s re-election, insinuating that anti-Semitism — and racism — are lingering problems among the House GOP generally. He speaking at a breakfast event organized by Politico.

Calling it the “darker side,” Cantor responded to Politico’s Mike Allen’s question of whether there is anti-semitism in Congress by trying to avoid commenting. But eventually he let up: “I think that all of us know that in this country, we’ve not always gotten it right in terms of racial matters, religious matters, whatever. We continue to strive to provide equal treatment to everybody.”

“We’re talking about the House Republican Caucus, not America,” Allen pushed.

Cantor then sat in silence, grimmacing for several seconds before Allen changed the topic.

Watch it:

The House GOP has scheduled a vote for later today on a $46 billion tax giveaway. H.R. 9, sponsored by Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), would give a massive, deficit-financed windfall to hedge fund managers, sports team owners, celebrities and other wealthy people. It would increase tax compliance burdens on small businesses and actually incentivize businesses to put off making investments and new hires until 2013 or later. (For our full analysis, click here.) The White House has issued a veto threat.

In arguing that his bill would create jobs, Cantor is now touting an analysis by Gary Robbins of Fiscal Associates. Robbins, a leading purveyor of supply-side economics for decades, appears to be the only economist that Cantor could find to help sell his bill. Robbins was last heard from using recycled supply-side arguments to sing the praises of Herman Cain’s tremendously ill-conceived “9-9-9” tax plan as a paid consultant to the Cain campaign.

So if anyone is likely to conclude that Cantor’s tax cut is a good way to create jobs, it’s Robbins. But even his analysis finds that Cantor’s bill is a dud.

Robbins predicts that Cantor’s tax cut — a one-year, 20 percent deduction for businesses that qualify — would add $42.6 billion to the federal budget deficit. (That’s a little less than Congress’s official estimate of $46 billion because Robbins’ revenue estimates are based on his own assumptions about economic growth.) Robbins also estimates that such a one-year tax cut would create 39,000 jobs. So according to the analysis that Cantor is touting on his own website, H.R. 9 would increase the federal deficit by $1.1 million for every job created.

That number is staggering, especially considering that this is the best analysis that Cantor could find. In fact, House Republicans once took aim at President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act with the false claim that it cost $278,000 per job. And Robbins’ analysis of H.R. 9 compares terribly with estimates of other approaches to creating jobs. Policies that the House GOP held up for months, including the payroll tax holiday and extension of unemployment benefits, provide much more “bang for the buck.”

Robbins’ dim view of the Cantor bill is shared by more mainstream economists. The Congressional Budget Office estimated last year that temporary tax cuts on business income are among the least effective ways to create jobs, increasing employment in 2012 by at most one job per $1 million in budgetary cost. In its macroeconomic impact analysis, the Joint Tax Committee concluded that H.R. 9’s effects “are so small as to be incalculable.”

Former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett, who has advocated for plenty of supply-side policies over the years, adds that the Cantor bill “will do nothing whatsoever to increase employment” because it ignores the real problem facing small businesses — weak demand for their products and services. A tax windfall for wealthy people is among the worst ways to boost the economy because they are the least likely to spend the extra cash.

To be sure, Robbins predicts that if Cantor’s special tax break were made permanent, it would have wondrous economic effects. This is not surprising, given that his models predicted the same of other proposals giving massive tax cuts to the rich, such as Cain’s 9-9-9 plan and George W. Bush’s tax policies.

But Cantor’s bill is simply a one-time, one-year windfall for rich people that if repeated, would blow an even bigger hole in the budget. It’s a costly and ineffective giveaway even according to the lone analysis Cantor is touting. Bottom line: H.R. 9 is a loser no matter whom you ask. Not even voodoo economics can save it.

Rep. David Rivera (R-FL)

The report says:

Analysis of documents obtained to date supports the contention that Mr. Rivera purposely falsified his financial disclosure forms in an attempt to legitimize other source of income beyond his salary as a State Legislator. First, Mr. Rivera provided information on his initial financial disclosure submissions that wasfalse and then amended the forms to remove the information. Second, Mr. Rivera amended his financial disclosure forms claiming that $132,000 received from Millennium Marketing were liabilities (loans), when, in fact, documentary evidence indicates that it was compensation for being employed as a consultant to the Flagler Dog Track for the gaming referendum.

The Miami Herald reported yesterday that state prosecutors will not charge Rivera, as the statute of limitations has expired. IRS and FBI investigations into Rivera’s alleged tax evasion and failure to disclose $132,000 in “loans” from a company co-owned by his mother are reportedly ongoing. Rivera has denied the allegations and his campaign said in statements that Rivera “at all times acted in compliance with both the letter and spirit of Florida and federal campaign finance laws and has timely and properly reported all personal income” and that the investigation was an “unprofessional waste of taxpayer dollars.”

In 2010, now-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) promised that if his party won the majority in the midterm elections, he (as majority leader) ‘institute a zero-tolerance policy‘ on ethics violations. In light of these serious charges, the Republican leadership could show its commitment to this policy by beginning an Ethics Committee investigation, stripping him of his committee assignments, calling for his resignation or even moving to remove him from Congress. It has done none of these things. Even with these apparent ethical breaches, they continue to let Rivera serve on the House Foreign Affairs Committee (and, ironically, its Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee) and the Committee on Natural Resources.

This is yet another in a growing series of examples of just how little Cantor’s promised “zero tolerance” policy for ethical scandals really means.

Despite all this, Cantor is still “puzzled” that President Obama would threaten to veto the bill, which he did yesterday. On CNBC this morning, Cantor accused Obama of not caring about small businesses due to his opposition to the tax giveaway:

Well, listen, the President’s now issued a veto threat against the bill, which is kind of puzzling, because the President has continued to say he’s for small business, he’s for the middle class, and yet he’s now denying any help to small businesses, who frankly could use a 20 percent tax cut.

Watch it:

Cantor’s tax boondoggle would cost $46 billion and gives millionaires an average tax cut of $45,000. Meanwhile, for actual small businesses that can’t afford a platoon of accountants and lawyers, the tax cut will add another layer of complexity to the tax code. The IRS says that the tax cut would increase tax compliance costs and require businesses to perform additional analyses.

Despite calls from some conservative members of the party, GOP leadership won’t demand spending cuts to offset the “small business” tax cut that is being proposed by Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), Politico reports:

Several Republican leadership aides say they have no plans to offset the tax cut, which a centerpiece of their agenda during these next two weeks in session.

The payroll tax cut, which Republicans did everything to block until it became politically impossible to continue, primarily benefited working class Americans and has real economic benefits. Cantor’s tax cut, on the other hand, is supposedly targeted at small businesses, but will largely aid millionaires like Oprah Winfrey and the owners of professional sports franchises. According to the Center for American Progress’ Seth Hanlon, the bill gives millionaires an average tax cut of $45,000.

Cantor’s bill is hardly the only Republican-sponsored legislation that is no longer subject to the orthodoxy the party claimed was so important just six months ago. The House GOP’s budget provides $3 trillion in tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations, and though its author, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), claims his plan will maintain current revenue levels, the budget would actually make the nation’s debt worse.

The Campaign for Primary Accountability, which goes after incumbents from both parties, has already played a major role in ousting two Republican congressmen, Reps. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) and Don Manzullo (R-IL). It also unsuccessfully went after Reps. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) and Jo Bonner (R-AL). Next up on its radar are Texas Reps. Joe Barton (R) and Ralph Hall (R), as well as Tim Murphy (R-PA).

Some Republican congressmen, who did not divulge their names, said that Cantor’s donation, which came via his ERIC PAC, “raises questions about the majority leader’s political judgment.” The Hill has more:

More than a half dozen Republican lawmakers, stunned by the news of Cantor’s donation, agreed to speak with The Hill on the condition of anonymity to vent their frustration without fear of retribution. The lawmakers interviewed included both younger and senior members of the GOP conference.

One veteran lawmaker, upset with the majority leader’s perceived aggression toward members of his own party, said House GOP members will now fear payback when they speak out or vote against leadership.

“It is a serious breach of trust,” the lawmaker said. “It sends a signal to the rest of us that if we don’t fall 100 percent in line…they will come after you.”

The matter may come up in the House this week as lawmakers return to Congress for the first time since Cantor’s donation became public. Though Cantor claims that his donation was only meant to support freshman Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), who ultimately prevailed in his primary race against Manzullo, the money could have been used at the PAC’s discretion. For those incumbents currently being targeted, their anger at Cantor is understandable.

Some Republicans see a more ulterior motive behind Cantor’s decision. “I think it [was] designed to show Boehner the door after this election,” said one lawmaker. However, with his donation now public, the ensuing backlash this week and beyond could outpace any positive feelings Cantor is able to engender among freshmen.

With Tax Day approaching, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and the House GOP are pushing a $46 billion boondoggle they call the “Small Business Tax Cut Act of 2012.” As ThinkProgress has previously reported, the bill is really just a windfall for rich people, many of whom, like hedge fund managers, owners of sports teams, celebrities, lawyers, and lobbyists are not most people’s idea of “small businesses.” Cantor’s tax giveaway, half of which goes to millionaires, is also among the least effective ways to create jobs. (Our full analysis is here.)

So what do actual small businesses get? A big headache, according to a new “tax complexity analysis” of Cantor’s bill from the Joint Committee on Taxation (Congress’s nonpartisan tax experts) and the IRS. By adding a complicated new provision to the tax code, Cantor’s bill would mean small businesses would have more paperwork, more time wasted on tax filing, and more disputes with the IRS:

It is anticipated that small businesses that elect to apply the provision will need to keep additional records due to this provision, and that additional regulatory guidance will be needed…It is anticipated that the provision will result in an increase in disputes between small businesses and the IRS. [...]

The provision likely will increase the tax preparation costs for most affected small businesses. Small businesses will have to perform additional analysis concerning whether the small business has 500 or fewer employees and which income qualifies for the deduction allowed under the provision. For income that is determined to be eligible for the deduction under the provision, small businesses will be required to perform additional calculations to determine the amount of the deduction…[S]mall businesses will be required to undertake calculations to determine the amounts of costs that are allocable to domestic business gross receipts. In some cases, small businesses would not have been required otherwise to perform these calculations but for the provision.

Due to the detailed calculations required by the provision, it is anticipated that the Secretary of the Treasury will have to create a new form for qualified small businesses to compute the deduction and will have to make appropriate revisions to several types of income tax forms and instructions. In addition, the Secretary of the Treasury will have to issue guidance to carry out the purposes of the provision.

The IRS adds that the new tax form required by Cantor’s bill, Form 8903-A, “would be complicated.”

By creating a complicated new loophole, available to some business but not to others according to arbitrary rules, and favoring the very rich, the Cantor bill epitomizes everything that is wrong about the tax code.

Ironically, the House GOP just passed a budget bemoaning the tax code’s “labyrinth of deductions” and promising tax reform to close special loopholes and carveouts (though it did not identify a single loophole that it would close). In less than three weeks, House Republicans have done a complete 180, abandoning their showy commitment to tax reform and carving out a new $46 billion loophole. The Cantor bill is the “antithesis of tax reform” according to Rep. Sandy Levin (D-MI), the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee.

But at least the GOP budget and the Cantor bill are consistent about one thing – more windfall tax cuts for the rich.

Those facts, however, aren’t stopping him from running advertisements in his Richmond-area district touting the bill, as the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports:

Cantor rolled out the Small Business Tax Cut Act of 2012 on March 21, and he’s promoting the plan in a TV ad featuring a half-dozen local businesspeople. The ad is airing in his district.

The 30-second spot, released by his campaign operation, opens with Mark Oley of Westwood Pharmacy, followed by Suzanne Wolstenholme of Homemades by Suzanne.

Four others also make appearances in the ad, which is expected to run for the next two to three weeks.

“If we believe in free markets, if we believe that small businesses really are the growth engine, we ought to just empower them by allowing them to keep more of their money so that they can retain and hire more workers,” Cantor said Thursday. But as Pat Garofalo noted last week, Cantor’s bill “fundamentally misunderstands the problems facing actual small businesses, which is that there’s no demand in the economy for their goods or services.” Without demand, businesses have no incentive to expand and hire.

Once again, Republicans are betting that its single trick of cutting taxes for every millionaire (“small businesses” and “job creators,” to borrow from their parlance) will stimulate job growth. The problem is, there’s no evidence that it will.

Earlier today ThinkProgress reported that the House Ways and Means Committee is expected to approve a proposal by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) that is misleadingly entitled the Small Business Tax Cut Act.

People who have read the bill and not just its title, however, have noted that it is extremely poorly targeted at small businesses. It is, in fact, just another tax cut for rich people. Among the biggest beneficiaries would be the owners of extremely profitable businesses like Oprah Winfrey’s production company and professional sports teams like the Super Bowl champion New York Giants, as well as highly paid professionals like lawyers, lobbyists, doctors, and consultants.

The Tax Policy Center has now estimated who benefits from Cantor’s bill. Among TPC’s findings:

– The top 1 percent would receive an average tax cut that is 1000 times bigger than the average tax cut for people in the middle quintile ($23 vs. $23,000). The top 0.1 percent would receive an average tax cut of more than $130,000.

– Half of the tax benefits would go to millionaires, who comprise less than one-half of one percent of all taxpayers and only 4 percent of actual small business owners according to a recent Treasury study. Millionaires, on average, would get a tax cut of $45,000 — almost as much as median household income in 2010.

– Business owners with annual income of $200,000 or less — who comprise more than 75 percent of small business owners — would receive only 16 percent of the benefit from Cantor’s bill.

The Cantor bill would cost $46 billion and is not paid for. More debt-financed tax cuts for the rich: haven’t we tried that before?

And the bill’s problems certainly don’t end there. As Citizens for Tax Justice noted today, Cantor’s bill will also give hugely profitable operations like Oprah Winfrey’s production company and professional sports teams a big tax break:

While the legislation caps the amount of the deduction (at half of non-employee payroll), there is no limitation on the type or amount of income that business can have. So highly profitable operations like Oprah Winfrey’s production company or the Trump Tower Sales & Leasing office would both qualify for the deduction simply because they have fewer than 500 employees on payroll.

Who else would qualify? Professional sports teams (including teams owned by Mitt Romney’s friends) with their multi-million-dollar salaries to non-owner players. So would private equity firms, hedge funds, and other “small businesses” with income in the millions, or even billions, of dollars, along with most of the top law and lobbying firms inside the Beltway and elsewhere.

Adding insult to injury, many truly small businesses won’t qualify for the tax break because the cut is only available to businesses whose employees are non-owners. So a family business in which all the family members share ownership will get nothing at all, while Oprah’s production company walks away with a tax cut

This bill, like so many put forth by the GOP, fundamentally misunderstands the problems facing actual small businesses, which is that there’s no demand in the economy for their goods or services. Businesses simply have no reason to expand without the reasonable expectation of more customers, and giving an already profitable firm a big tax break won’t entice them to act any differently. As the chief economist for the conservative National Federation of Independent Business explained, “if you give a small business guy $20,000 he’ll say, ‘I could buy a new delivery truck but I have nobody to deliver to.’”

Instead, the GOP is hoping once again that its tax cut snake oil will have some effect. But as a new study released yesterday shows, “there’s no there there” when it comes to tax cuts promoting economic growth.

Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL)

Buchanan is reportedly already under a separate ethics investigation for alleged incomplete financial disclosure. The committee did not identify the nature of the new inquiry, though it did say it will announce its course of action on the matter, on or before May 9. An aide to the Florida Republican said the Congressman was confident the committee would clear him of any wrongdoing. Buchanan is also reportedly facing a federal grand jury investigation.

Despite House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) stated “zero-tolerance” policy on ethics, Buchanan continues to serve as finance vice chair for the National Republican Congressional Committee (the House GOP’s campaign arm). In fact, Buchanan was already one of more than 10 Republican Congressmen embroiled in ethics scandals.

Amusingly, Buchanan’s Congressional website includes stories calling for reform in light of a Bush administration ethics scandal at the Minerals Management Agency, and touts his work in support of a 2007 ethics and lobbying bill.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (left) doesn't believe Rep. Cliff Stearns' (right) birtherism is a problem

As ThinkProgress first reported last week, Stearns — a top GOP lawmaker who has taken the lead in investigating Planned Parenthood and Solyndra — told a town hall meeting in February that it’s a “legitimate…question” whether President Obama was born in the United States. When pressed by reporters yesterday, Stearns confirmed his doubts, pointing to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s birther investigation that declared Obama’s birth certificate to be a “forgery and fraud.”

Amidst concerns about Stearns’ suitability as a top congressional investigator, Cantor stepped in today to assure reporters that Stearns “has my full confidence”:

“I think Cliff Stearns does a good job with the chairmanship of his subcommittee,” Cantor told The Hill in the Capitol Wednesday. “He has my full confidence.”

Cantor was responding to a question about whether it’s appropriate to have someone who has questioned Obama’s birth certificate leading a probe of the White House.

The GOP leader, in the very brief interview, made clear that he’s not among the people that question the president’s citizenship. “Let’s just get it straight … I believe the president is an American citizen, so that question I can dispense with,” Cantor said.

Though not a birther himself, Cantor is developing a reputation as a birther-apologist. Last year, he refused to criticize those who do not believe the president is an American citizen, telling NBC host David Gregory, “I don’t think it’s nice to call anyone crazy, OK?”

Cantor may be unwilling to candidly and correctly criticize members of his party who advance absurd conspiracy theories, but some congressmen underneath him are more frank. Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE), who serves with Stearns on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, criticized his colleague to Politico. “You really put me on a box on this one,” Terry said when asked about it. “Let’s just say I disagree with his position and that is somewhat distracting from the issues we’re trying to work on in this committee.”

Since the current round of government funding runs out in September, the GOP’s decision to cut deeper than the Budget Control Act sets up another round of budget brinkmanship, with a government shutdown as a possible consequence. But back in September, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) seemed to believe that such brinkmanship should be avoided, saying during a pen and pad briefing that the GOP should stick to the spending level agreed to in August, at least when it came to a continuing resolution that was under consideration at the time:

Q: On the CR next week, will you do it at the level that you agreed to in August, the 1.043?

CANTOR: As Republicans, we believe strongly we ought to be reducing spending more than we have been able to. The other side has demonstrated unwillingness to join us in that. We did reach an agreement at the CR level and I am supportive of a CR being written at that level.

Q: So you would not go below it?

CANTOR: I think my colleague here would say we would try always to go below it. But the risk of bringing about brinksmanship or another potential shutdown is not something that we need right now, it is not something that would be helpful, that would create jobs and regain confidence, which is why I have taken the position I have.

During a December press conference, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) also promised that “the 1.043 [trillion] is going to happen,” referring to the spending level set by the Budget Control Act. But in the intervening few months, it seems that the GOP leadership has decided that yet another drive at the edge of the proverbial shutdown cliff is preferable to abiding by the terms of a deal passed just last year.

One of the loudest corporate voices arguing against the bank’s reauthorization is Delta Airlines, while one of the loudest arguing against it in Congress is House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). And as Politico noted today, Delta and Cantor have more than this policy agreement in common:

A sleepy Export-Import Bank debate in Congress has blossomed into a corporate political brawl matching the powerful Boeing Co. lobby against Delta Air Lines, represented here by a close friend and supporter of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

The issues are bigger than the personalities, affecting billions of dollars in U.S.-backed loan guarantees supporting the overseas sale of Boeing aircraft. But with pivotal Senate votes now scheduled for Tuesday, Cantor is without a doubt the crucial broker for the House. And Boeing is hammering away at his close ties with Delta lobbyist and confidante Andrea Newman — even as it fields a small army of its own.

If it seems David vs. Goliath, Newman, as Delta’s senior vice president for government affairs, comes with a BlackBerry instead of a slingshot. In an anecdote Cantor’s office denied Friday, he is said to have once emailed her about an aviation bill while still in a members-only meeting with the White House on the subject. And the two enjoy what’s described as a genuine family — University of Michigan — friendship even as she helps him raise campaign funds.

In addition to gumming up the works on the ExIm bank, Delta has been on the wrong side of many a policy fight recently. It’s worst work was pushing Republicans to include a union-busting provision in a bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration, while ultimately led to an FAA shutdown.

As CAP’s Sabina Dewan has explained, the ExIM bank (yes, in addition to providing some help to giant manufacturers like Boeing) is crucial for smaller exporters that have a hard time accessing financing. But it’s evidently more important for Cantor and crew to throw Delta yet another bone, at the expense of the wider economy.

And according to Reuters, that pressure has paid off, as both Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-OH) are ready to cut below the level specified in the debt ceiling deal:

Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives are ready to break a hard-fought budget deal with Democrats as they try to quell a revolt by conservatives who are insisting on deeper spending cuts ahead of the November elections.

House Republican aides said on Tuesday that House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor were pressing for a modest $19 billion reduction of discretionary spending caps in this year’s Republican budget plan.

“I’m really disappointed that they’re considering a budget – violating the budget agreement that is now the law of this country. This was designed to avoid another government shutdown or a threat of a shutdown,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). “We had a deal last August on the budget numbers, and we expect them to live with that deal,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) has said. The end result of this standoff could be yet another impending government shutdown, as the government’s current spending authority expires on September 30.

This morning, during appearances on Morning Joe and Fox & Friends, Grover Norquist and Rick Santorum both slammed Romney for saying that his Massachusetts health care law should be a model for national reform, while House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) — who endorsed Romney’s candidacy yesterday — conceded that the former governor has flip flopped on the issue. This is the Cantor exchange from this morning:

MIKA BRZEZINSKI (Co-host, Morning Joe): It’s clear that he has flipped on the issue and it’s hard for some to understand where he stands.

CANTOR: Well, listen if the process that he has gone through, he has arrived at the conclusion that what he felt was appropriate in Massachusetts is not now appropriate for federal level, I take him at his word on that.

Watch a compilation of the comments:

Norquist was far more direct in his criticism, saying that while Romney was wrong to argue that Obama should copy his plan, he is smart enough to change his position on the issue. “He shouldn’t have, the good news is that he shifted on that and he’s running against a guy who has actually passed it into law,” he said. For a complete timeline of Romney’s changing positions on the government’s role in health care, click here.