Dems in Senate reject House Budget Plan then go on Vacation

Post Reply New Topic

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner searched on Friday for an elusive debt-limit compromise as the Senate rejected a House plan containing deep spending cuts and for the moment put aside a last-ditch fallback option.

The 51-46 party-line Senate vote, and a decision by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to cancel weekend Senate sessions, left unresolved the urgent issue of how to lift the nation's borrowing powers to avoid a first-ever U.S. default on Aug. 3.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Senate-re ... l?x=0&.v=7

I'm going to say the House plan is the one that made the most sense right now, and what is wrong with a Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment. Quite frankly, it's probably the only way to get the Government to spend within its means.

Without borrowing the U.S. could not have fought the second world war.

ruveyn

Nor could Ronald Reagan and George Bush have thrown their wild trickle-down parties.

Maybe, but we can't keep this runaway spending going, and this about the only way to put a stop to the runaway spending.

No, it isn't.

At this point, it kinda is.


A deficit of $1-2 trillion a year is inexcusable, Bush's highest deficit was about $400-500 billion or so, and normally it was a lot less than that.

It doesn't matter how big the debt is. A ceiling is not the only possible fix (the other being to just stop spending), and is not actually viable (for reasons stated above).

It sounds like the republicans are just pushing for something they know is inviable so that they can just fail at it and have something to chant for during the elections. "Obama didn't want a debt ceiling, the magical pill for all our problems".

Bush doesn't have to deal with the revenue loss due to the worst recession since the Great Depression, which began under his watch, not Obama's mind you.

So there going on vacation? now watch out country turn into a third world nation! maybe yehaweh can save us~
I really hate living my life around other peoples ideas. but everything will be cheep now so maybe we can go back to using rocks as currency.

Trickle down worked under the Regan administration because we kept our industry inside the country so the money stayed inside our economy, and the spending worked okay under Bush 1, but it was getting time to cut up the credit card, which is probably the only nice thing I can say about Clinton. The first time I heard congress raised the debt limit (1996?), I was shocked they could do that. War on terror spending was necessary, but was done with gross inefficiency. Once again we need to cut up most of the credit cards. Obama wants to be poor blacks' and alien invaders' suggardaddy, but there's no money for it (even if we raise taxes) and the only thing that might control his spending is a debt ceiling. Unless he starts repealing his job killing policies, there's nothing to do but try to ride his administration out until January 2013.

At least we're not Greece, with a large communist party that can block austerity measures and continue recklessness social spending in an attempt to hide the fact that their policies failed like all other communists.

Before anyone flames me, I don't have a personal windfall of money and assets that insulates me from the economic crisis.

What's wrong is that the Balanced Budget Amendment proposed by the Republicans is totally irrational and unfeasible. Capping federal spending at 18% of GDP would require massive cuts to everything attached to the federal government-- Social Security, Medicare, food inspection, education, veterans' benefits, and yes, even the seemingly untouchable defense spending. Far from stimulating job growth, such an amendment would only further paralyze what little remains of the lower and middle class consumer base, and even worse, it would mandate that the government couldn't take any steps to fix the problem. At the same time, the proposed amendment would necessitate a two-thirds supermajority vote to raise taxes-- which, of course, would make it next to impossible to raise taxes specifically on the rich. In short, what you're asking for is the recipe for another Great Depression.

Really, Inuyasha-- I can't imagine how on Earth you thought the House bill was actually going to get somewhere. Obama even said he was going to veto it if it got past the Senate. The Republicans knew exactly what this was going to be. They knew this was going to get tossed out somewhere along the line. At this point, it's a diversionary tactic-- it's all about stalling the resolution of this debt ceiling fight as long as they can. Some of these Tea Party upstarts don't even want any resolution-- they just want to see the US default. It's clear that they have no idea just how bad defaulting would be. (How bad? So bad, Ronald Reagan even warned against it.)

Oh, and just as an aside... out of curiosity, Inuyasha-- into what tax bracket do you fall, that you're so willing to see everyone but the richest of the rich plunged into total economic chaos? I certainly hope you never have any loved ones relying on Social Security to stay out of the red, with as hard as you're railing against it.

I think the Democrats will be the ones to blame if no deal is reached.

Heck, even Obama is willing to work with the House Republicans to come up with a deal for now. The Democrats in the Senate are not just rejecting the House plan, they are refusing to come up with one of their own as a counter proposal...all as the clock is ticking down.

As opposed to the guys knowingly pushing for unfeasible reforms.

Will the Republicans touch the Third Rail?

ruveyn