Two weeks past the deadline, the Pennsylvania House passed a budget proposal on to the state Senate on Monday — one that Republicans say spends more than residents can afford.

Rep. Martin Causer, R-Turtlepoint, said the bill was passed by Democrats without cost-saving compromises.

“Two weeks past the budget deadline, and the proposal adopted (Monday) was solely the product of House Democrat ideas and priorities, not a plan that was negotiated in good faith with the House, Senate and (Gov. Josh Shapiro),” Causer said. “The people of Pennsylvania deserve better.

“Just like the governor’s proposal outlined back in February, this plan spends far more than our taxpayers can afford. That’s why I cast a ‘no’ vote. I will continue to advocate for a final plan that funds the core functions of government and respects the taxpayers who foot the bill.”

House Republican Leader Jesse Topper, R-Bedford, said more needs to be done to get agreement from all parties while keeping in mind the need for fiscal responsibility and policy that significantly grows Pennsylvania’s economy.

“House Republicans have been consistent from the beginning of this process that this or any future budget will be unsustainable if we do not prioritize economic growth in our policymaking,” Topper said.

“While I appreciate the House majority’s desire to move the budget process along, this current spending plan is not agreed to. It spends too much, and it does not do enough to grow our economy. I look forward to working over the coming days and weeks to negotiate an agreed-to budget that couples fiscal responsibility with economic growth so that our commonwealth’s fiscal future is secured.”

Nathan Benefield, Commonwealth Foundation’s chief policy officer, criticized the proposal as a “special interest wish list.”

“House Democrats have had months to pass a fiscally responsible, bipartisan budget. Instead, after months of inaction, they are ramming through an unbalanced spending plan that does nothing to address the state’s financial problems or provide accountability to the countless failing systems being kept afloat year-after-year by state-funded bailouts,” Benefield said.

He continued, “Nowhere in this budget proposal do we see overdue reforms in welfare, regulation or education. HB 1330 does nothing to advance educational choice, unleash Pennsylvania’s energy sector or attract businesses back to the commonwealth.”

Families deserve better, he said, alleging this proposal was “put together in less than two hours.”

“We urge the state Senate to disregard this blatant partisan move and instead work towards a budget that protects families from tax increases, provides regulatory relief and delivers educational opportunity.”

Not everyone viewed the proposal as a loss. Marc Stier, executive director of the Pennsylvania Policy Center, said the budget “largely embraces Gov. Shapiro’s education funding proposals.”

He added that this proposal is not the final product, and that Senate Republicans must work with House Democrats on an appropriations bill that addresses the needs of the citizens. He noted, too, that the House proposal had reduced Shapiro’s proposal by $1 billion.

“A final budget that truly meets the needs of Pennsylvanians must include agreements on other issues that must be enacted alongside the appropriations bill,” he said. “These include cyber charter reform, funding for public transit, an increase in the minimum wage, and new revenues from the legalization of adult-use recreational cannabis and a tax on skill-based video gambling. The House has passed proposals on the first four items that are also waiting for Senate action.”