Pledging to curb federal budget deficits, US President Barack Obama used his weekly radio address Saturday to praise the Senate's passage of a measure requiring that increased spending be offset with cuts and to tout his proposed freeze on non-discretionary budget spending. "As we work to create jobs, it is critical that we rein in the budget deficits we've been accumulating for far too long - deficits that won't just burden our children and grandchildren, but could damage our markets, drive up our interest rates, and jeopardize our recovery right now," Obama said. Obama, in his radio address, once again compared a family's budget to what the government must do. "There are certain core principles our families and businesses follow when they sit down to do their own budgets. They accept that they can't get everything they want and focus on what they really need. They make tough decisions and sacrifice for their kids. They don't spend what they don't have, and they make do with what they've got," he said. He continued: "It's time their government did the same. That's why I'm pleased that the Senate has just restored the pay-as-you-go law that was in place back in the 1990s. It's no coincidence that we ended that decade with a $236 billion surplus. But then we did away with PAYGO - and we ended the next decade with a $1.3 trillion deficit. Reinstating this law will help get us back on track, ensuring that every time we spend, we find somewhere else to cut." He also repeated his call for a bipartisan commission that would propose steps to reduce the deficit, a panel he pledge to create by executive order during his State of the Union address. The Senate voted against creating such a commission this week. "It failed when seven Republicans who had co-sponsored this idea in the first place suddenly decided to vote against it," Obama said. "Now, it's one thing to have an honest difference of opinion about something. I will always respect those who take a principled stand for what they believe, even if I disagree with them." "But what I won't accept is changing positions because it's good politics. What I won't accept is opposition for opposition's sake," he said. "We cannot have a serious discussion and take meaningful action to create jobs and control our deficits if politicians just do what's necessary to win the next election instead of what's best for the next generation."
