|
| Thread: Will the Republicans balance the federal budget |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Raelag84
Famous Hero
|
posted February 10, 2011 01:11 PM |
|
|
I am still doing research on the federal budget, but in the mean time here is an article relevant to our discussion.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41506295/ns/politics-the_new_york_times
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2011 06:00 AM |
|
|
So much for balancing the budget.
Only a few real conservatives exist in the republican party and opposed this, but as soon as the republicans swept into the house this is how the house schedule looks.
Each "Constituent Work Week" is a week of paid vacation. They are wasting more money than ever before. 2 weeks of real work, 1 week off to relax or campaign.
Rinse, repeat on the tax payer's dime.
All approved by Cantor and Boener, who both worked to vastly grow the government in the first place.
Sick.
And to make it look like the house is even actually busy, they filled the calendar with holidays.
On top of that, every piece of legislation filed is to do with abortion... these people ran on fiscal issues not social issues and they're already wasting so much money fighting a battle they were told to put on the back burner until the economy is fixed... what the hell?
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted February 16, 2011 12:43 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 00:44, 16 Feb 2011.
|
The dims greatly increased spending when they had control of both houses of congress and the presidency. They are peeved at the Republicans and complain that the Republicans want to cut too much spending. the tax-and-spend-o-crats would love to ramp up taxes and ramp up spending.
The Republicans are trying to do what that said they would try to do. The socialists are trying to block them every step of the way.
Clicky
Many Democrats have accused Republicans of going too far in their 2011 budget plan.
Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Tuesday that the GOP was using a "meat cleaver approach to budget cuts."
But Ryan said the party is trying to counteract the overspending they see out of the administration. "The president wants to lock in these really high spending levels. Twenty-four percent increase in base government spending, 84 percent on domestic agencies, when you count the stimulus. We want to pull back all those spending agreements that he's trying to lock in. There's the impasse," he said.
.......
The Republican budget package includes $100 billion in cuts to hundreds of programs for the remaining seven months of this federal fiscal year. AmeriCorps and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be zeroed out while deep cuts would be carved from energy programs to job training and beyond.
"If you make cuts of this magnitude you're going to hurt the economy and hurt and lose jobs," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, who noted that programs for homeless veterans, student loans and the National Institutes of Health are among those on the chopping block.
But conservative Republicans insisted that budget leaders remove $100 billion to fulfill a pledge made in the November midterm race.
"Everyone comes up here and says they're going to do this and they're going to do that, and they never do," said Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., a Tea Party favorite "Well, I think now is the time that we do make that change because you can't tell me what can't be done because I'm not part of a Washington, D.C., establishment. I believe that it can be done."
____________
Revelation
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2011 10:20 AM |
|
|
Sadly 85% of house republicans are not even close to the fiscally respnsible ones you just mentioned.
Beohner and Cantor for example are nowhere qualified to pretend to be fiscally conservative.
The Democrats have been doing an awful job too mind you, and certainly not enough of them are fiscally sound either.
My point is that you're screwed with either party because the big spenders who are thrall to special interests are still in charge.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
bLiZzArdbOY
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 18, 2011 03:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The Republican budget package includes $100 billion in cuts to hundreds of programs for the remaining seven months of this federal fiscal year. AmeriCorps and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be zeroed out while deep cuts would be carved from energy programs to job training and beyond.
"If you make cuts of this magnitude you're going to hurt the economy and hurt and lose jobs," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, who noted that programs for homeless veterans, student loans and the National Institutes of Health are among those on the chopping block.
But conservative Republicans insisted that budget leaders remove $100 billion to fulfill a pledge made in the November midterm race.
"Everyone comes up here and says they're going to do this and they're going to do that, and they never do," said Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., a Tea Party favorite "Well, I think now is the time that we do make that change because you can't tell me what can't be done because I'm not part of a Washington, D.C., establishment. I believe that it can be done."
Oh fo' shizzle, 100 billion dollars in cuts. If the year was 1968 that would be a lot of money. It's also totally awthome to know that the Republicans are going out of their way to target AmeriCorps and energy programs but keeping around those redundant nuclear aircraft carriers and military bases. I suppose we're going to need them now that the M.E. is finally unshackling itself after 90 years.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted February 18, 2011 05:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Sadly 85% of house republicans are not even close to the fiscally respnsible ones you just mentioned.
Beohner and Cantor for example are nowhere qualified to pretend to be fiscally conservative.
They are ar whole lot more conservative and responsible with finances than demoncrats.
America already has one failed national passenger railroad attempt Obama wants to build another one. The dmes have always been about hight taxes and high spending.
The dems think taht big government, high taxes, and redistribution of wealth are the solution to all problems. Whereas the sane policy is small government, low taxes, and respecting private property rights. But the Constitution means less than nothing to the dems.
clicky
Quote:
Among the line items in the $3.7 trillion budget blueprint President Obama outlined this week is a six-year $53 billion investment in a national high-speed intercity passenger rail network
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted February 19, 2011 03:47 AM |
|
|
Woooohoooo! Gogo Republicans! Battling the Marxist Obamacare and taxpayer funded abortion mills.
Clicky
Quote:
"Today's vote is the latest victory for the American public and our country in preventing the disastrous Obamacare law from forever damaging our health care system and hampering job creation," Rehberg said in a written statement. "Our efforts -- and my amendment -- will save billions of wasted funding while opening the door for true health care reform that reduces costs and improve access."
House Democrats warned that defunding the bill would lead to repeal and an increase in the deficit and chided Republicans for attempting to gut the legislation through an amendment without hearings on the issue.
...
Indiana Rep. Mike Pence's proposal targeting Planned Parenthood also captured national attention. His proposal would eliminate the more than $75 million a year the group receives from the federal government to provide family planning and sex education, mostly to poor women.
Even though the Hyde Amendment bans the use of taxpayer money for abortions, the debate on the Planned Parenthood amendment devolved into a testy, at times emotional exchange about abortion Thursday night, chewing up nearly three hours on the House floor.
That amendment passed 240-185.
"This afternoon's vote is a victory for taxpayers and a victory for life," Pence said in a statement. "By banning federal funding to Planned Parenthood, Congress has taken a stand for millions of Americans who believe their tax dollars should not be used to subsidize the largest abortion provider in America."
____________
Revelation
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted February 19, 2011 12:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Congress has taken a stand for millions of Americans who believe their tax dollars should not be used to subsidize the largest abortion provider in America.
There's also a few lonely nutcases who don't like their dollars going into the largest weapons industry in the world but they're anti-Christian anyway.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2011 01:18 PM |
|
|
Shhh, killing for democracy is good.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted February 22, 2011 08:53 PM |
|
|
There is now a very good chance I could lose my job thanks to a proposed $70 million cut to LSC that just passed the House.
Looks like the man is trying to put me down.
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2011 03:03 AM |
|
Edited by shyranis at 03:06, 23 Feb 2011.
|
Quote:
They are ar whole lot more conservative and responsible with finances than demoncrats.
Socially conservative (in the American definition) yes.
Fiscally conservative no.
They pass these cuts when they know they won't go through but as soon as they get into power they start ratcheting up the spending again. As I said, both parties are horrible abominations.
A small injection of people who are truly fi-con will not overcome the huge number of neo-cons.
Have I said the Democrats were doing a good job? No.
I have said they are just as terrible as 85-90% of the current elected Republicans.
Also OD:
Hope everything works out well.
My husband has been laid off twice due to companies cutting budgets. It's not fun but you'll survive if it does happen. I pray it doesn't.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Raelag84
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2011 05:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Marxist Obamacare and taxpayer funded abortion mills.
At this point I don't think I can convince you that republicans are just politions not saints, but lets get one thing strait.
I am not going to change my view just because you called Obama a marxist (or a NAZI, or a islamic fundalmentalist or whatever). You want me to change my view then you only chance is stop making speeches and start talking to me like a human being.
Now knowing this. Feel free to sell me on your argument in a civilized manner.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 08:42 AM |
|
|
Clicky
Quote:
More than a dozen Republican senators announced Thursday they would push for a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to pass an annual balanced budget.
"It's an historic day for the Republican Party. We all agree on something," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, joked, as he spoke about the proposed amendment that has the support of all 47 Republican senators.
"A balanced budget amendment will make us do here what everybody has to do at home," Graham said during a news conference on Capitol Hill.
Previous attempts to pass a balanced budget amendment have failed, but backers hope they’ll fare better this year because of public concern over growing deficits.
The press conference was originally scheduled for earlier in March, but was postponed when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, decided to push for a unanimous Republican front for the amendment.
The amendment would require a balanced budget, a two-thirds majority to raise taxes, and three-fifths to increase the debt limit. Additionally, the proposal would limit government spending to 18% of GDP, which is below the average of 21 percent over the last 41 years, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank.
The Republican proposal does allow for exceptions to a balanced budget in times of war or military conflicts, but does not allow for an exception in times of economic crisis. Critics argue that would mean it would be more difficult to pass a stimulus program during a recession.
"It is about the most irresponsible action imaginable," said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "It would virtually ensure that an economic downturn would end up as a deep depression, by erasing any real ability of the government to pursue countercyclical fiscal policies and in fact demanding the opposite, at the worst possible time.”
The hurdles for adopting a constitutional amendment are high. Two-thirds of the House and Senate must vote in favor of an amendment and then at least 38 states must ratify it.
The constitution has only been amended 27 times, most recently in 1992.
____________
Revelation
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 09:09 AM |
|
|
I am not sure if setting addition limitations on how much the goverment can spend is a good idea(well, if they get a balanced budget trough anyhow).
I interprent that article as:
1. Require the goverment budget to go in either 0, or profit
2. Set a cap of 18% of US GDP for total spending
3. Need 66% majority to raise taxes(what vote is required to reduce them?)
4. You need 60% vote to pass trough any suggestions that will increase the nations debt
5. In case of war, this no longer applies during war.
1, 3 and 4 seems sane. Not sure if the spending limitation is sane however.
While it can be worked around by increasing nation profit.
Well, considering that they left in nr 4 in case of recession or other things that need to be done in extreme cases, I think the critics could be wrong.
Then again, I am not sure what it takes to get 66% of the votes in the US system and at the same time pass a unmodified bill.
____________
|
|
Raelag84
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 02, 2011 12:38 AM |
|
|
Ok you have my ear now.
But I must ask; why are the republicans trying to pass this amendment when they are not trully in power yet? Why did they not try to pass it during times when they had more control of the government?
Quote:
Clicky
Quote:
More than a dozen Republican senators announced Thursday they would push for a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to pass an annual balanced budget.
"It's an historic day for the Republican Party. We all agree on something," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, joked, as he spoke about the proposed amendment that has the support of all 47 Republican senators.
"A balanced budget amendment will make us do here what everybody has to do at home," Graham said during a news conference on Capitol Hill.
Previous attempts to pass a balanced budget amendment have failed, but backers hope they’ll fare better this year because of public concern over growing deficits.
The press conference was originally scheduled for earlier in March, but was postponed when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, decided to push for a unanimous Republican front for the amendment.
The amendment would require a balanced budget, a two-thirds majority to raise taxes, and three-fifths to increase the debt limit. Additionally, the proposal would limit government spending to 18% of GDP, which is below the average of 21 percent over the last 41 years, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank.
The Republican proposal does allow for exceptions to a balanced budget in times of war or military conflicts, but does not allow for an exception in times of economic crisis. Critics argue that would mean it would be more difficult to pass a stimulus program during a recession.
"It is about the most irresponsible action imaginable," said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "It would virtually ensure that an economic downturn would end up as a deep depression, by erasing any real ability of the government to pursue countercyclical fiscal policies and in fact demanding the opposite, at the worst possible time.”
The hurdles for adopting a constitutional amendment are high. Two-thirds of the House and Senate must vote in favor of an amendment and then at least 38 states must ratify it.
The constitution has only been amended 27 times, most recently in 1992.
|
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 06, 2011 10:33 PM |
|
Edited by Shyranis at 22:34, 06 Apr 2011.
|
Ouch.
The Republican budget will actually wind up making the debts much higher due to further planned tax breaks coupling with the cuts.
Also healthcare would be privatized, increasing costs even more for patients.
The numbers are right in the PDF document from the CBO to Rep Ryan.
Edit: The GOP is helping the Democrats ruin your country. Do something.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted April 06, 2011 11:09 PM |
|
|
Unfortunately, the people in charge of the country are Democrats and Republicans.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 07, 2011 01:22 AM |
|
|
Sad isn't it?
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted April 07, 2011 01:56 AM |
|
|
Indeed. They can all rot in Hell.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted April 07, 2011 02:08 AM |
|
|
Republicans haven't had a good tract record for being fiscally responsible for quite some time. They make a few program cuts and then have huge tax cuts that overcompensate for it. Though it's not entirely their fault, since they aren't able to cut everything they wish they could in their plans. Some of the programs are able to survive. The nature of the problem, while intricate in detail, is rather simple in the wider picture, and is pretty much the basis for any debt situation in a democracy: it's easy to have support to add programs, and it's easy to have support to cut taxes, but it's not easy to have support to raise taxes and it's not easy to have support to cut programs. The reason being that the potential positive effects of the later two are not easily visible. Throwing more out-of-pocket expenses on the elderly is an easy get-a-away for saving money since the elderly are, well, expensive compared to the not-so-elderly.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
| |
|
|
