Shooting won't faze GOP spending agenda

House Republicans' plans to cut the budget by about $60 billion are not expected to be affected in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., despite a likely call for more funding to protect members of Congress, analysts said on Monday.

"The American people still voted for limited government last November, and that is exactly the agenda that I would expect elected officials to pursue after lawmakers take a break this week in response to the shooting," said Brian Riedl, a senior policy analyst on budget issues at the Heritage Foundation.

Republicans won House control in the November elections and increased their numbers in the Senate by running on a platform that included significantly cutting spending. One of the first moves in the newly installed House was to cut congressional operating budgets by up to $35 million.

Riedl said that Republicans are focused on cutting non-security-related discretionary spending and that traditionally the GOP has been eager to support national defense and homeland-security programs.

"There could be some additional funds for Capitol security; those would likely be very modest and not make a significant dent in the deficit," Riedl said. "I wouldn't expect this [incident] to affect the budget debate in either rhetoric or policy."

His comments come with Giffords in critical condition after she was shot in the head on Saturday at a constituent-services event in Tucson, Ariz.

The shooting has provoked many questions about the security of members of Congress in Washington and in their districts. Last summer, several Democrats had heated confrontations with constituents over the health care reform law.

Scott Lilly, a former House Appropriations Committee staff director who is now a senior fellow with the Center for American Progress, said that the incident reflects the increasing needs of the Capitol Police, which conflict with the Republican agenda to cut costs.

"I do know that there have been a lot of security issues over the past 18 months in which the Capitol Police were simply not able to provide the kind of protection that members felt they needed," he said.

Lilly declined to provide any details because "most of these things were expressed in confidence."

"There have been a lot more threats than have been generally reported, and there have been a lot more inquiries from members' offices about obtaining security during that period of time," Lilly continued. "And I think the Capitol Police responded as best they could with their resources they had."

He predicted that Republicans may face the same situation as their predecessors did after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., determined "after 9/11 it was his job to ensure the security of representative democracy in this country, and that meant" spending more money than people wanted on such things as "barriers and gates and installing detector systems ... but there wasn't any choice," Lilly said. "I think we are in an equally difficult situation now."

Lilly said he doesn't know what additional security will be needed or how much more it will cost. He expects Congress or an independent commission to decide.

"I don't know how far it has to go," he said. "What I do know is that we are at a point in time where we have to have a serious review of this, and people who specialize in providing security need to take a look at what the options are and how we could do it in a way that doesn't cost a lot of money. But I am also sure it is going to cost some money."