Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt

Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Sanity -> Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 4:30:04 PM)
For everyone who claims there is no difference between the two parties: quote: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (AP) WASHINGTON – The Democratic-controlled Senate on Saturday cleared away a Republican filibuster of a huge end-of-year spending bill that rewards most federal agencies with generous budget boosts. The $1.1 trillion measure combines much of the year's unfinished budget work — only a $626 billion Pentagon spending measure would remain — into a 1,000-plus-page spending bill that would give the Education Department, the State Department, the Department of Health and Human Services and others increases far exceeding inflation. The 60-34 vote met the minimum threshold to end the GOP filibuster. A final vote was set for Sunday afternoon to send the measure to President Barack Obama. (Full article here).

Sanity -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 5:09:39 PM)
In related news: quote: Democrats plan nearly $2 trillion debt limit hike WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats plan to allow the government's debt to swell by nearly $2 trillion as part of a bill next week to pay for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The amount pretty much equals the total of a year-end spending spree by lawmakers and is big enough to ensure that Congress doesn't have to vote again on going further into debt until after the 2010 elections. The move has anxious moderate Democrats maneuvering to win new deficit-cutting tools as the price for their votes, igniting battles between the House and the Senate and with powerful interest groups on both the right and the left. The record increase in the so-called debt limit - the legal cap on the amount of money the government can borrow - is likely to be in the neighborhood of $1.8 trillion to $1.9 trillion, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Friday. That eye-popping figure is making Democrats woozy but is what is needed to make sure they don't have to vote again before next year's midterm elections. The government's total debt has nearly doubled in the past seven years and is expected to exceed the current ceiling of $12.1 trillion before Jan. 1. Is this the way towards Obama's promise of halving the budget deficit by the end of his first term? No, hell no. And since this is the direction the Democrats are choosing to take the nation, I really do hope they fail in their efforts to lead us down this disastrous path toward national bankruptcy.

thornhappy -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 5:33:20 PM)
I think that Ron, among others, have pointed out that we've been in bankruptcy since the Reagan administration, if you're going by the existence of budget deficits. Raising debt ceilings is an old, old technique, and certainly isn't unique to Pelosi, fer crying out loud. I don't know if he can pull off a reduction by half in another 3+ years. With the various bail outs, stimulus stuff (although that's not even half expended), and extended unemployment benefits, etc. there's a hell of a lot of pressure on the budget. Let alone 2 wars that were never properly funded (done on credit instead.) From what I've seen, it's been the practice for awhile of using short term deficit spending to bail yourself out of recessions. We've got 20-20 hindsight on the economy now, but no one in 2/09 had a magic crystal ball that enabled them to go "Holy shit, we are so screwed!!" (And that's when I saw the quote about reducing the deficit by half at the end of his first term - 2/23/09.)

Sanity -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 6:14:03 PM)
This isn't business as usual thornhappy. Need I remind you we're in the midst of what the Democrats were calling (just before the elections) the second great depression? According to the Associated Press article I cited, the Dems are trying for "a huge end-of-year spending bill that rewards most federal agencies with generous budget boosts... (a) bill that would give the Education Department, the State Department, the Department of Health and Human Services and others increases far exceeding inflation." Its really as if they've lost their minds. Or they're deliberately trying to bankrupt us!

AnimusRex -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 6:26:23 PM)
Happy happy joy joy- My favorite topic- the budget! Very quickly since I have to run out- here is a snippet of the article: "The measure combines $447 billion in operating budgets with about $650 billion in mandatory payments for federal benefit programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. It wraps together six individual spending bills and also contains more than 5,000 back-home projects sought by lawmakers in both parties." plus, this discussion of bipartisan pork: "Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., who leads the transportation, housing and community development spending panel, obtained 61 earmarks worth $68.8 million in programs under her jurisdiction, including $1.2 million for infrastructure improvements for the Port of Everett. Her GOP counterpart, Christopher Bond of Missouri, pulled down 21 projects worth $32.5 million from some portion of the bill, including $2.5 million for a community center in Kansas City." So most of the money is going to Medicare/ Medicaid. The rest is an operating budget for nearly everything else the government does. And given that both parties are loading it with pork, I would say that if you want to make the case that the GOP is the party of fiscal restraint, this ain't the article to do it. I left the GOP in the mid 90's exactly because of this crap, btw.

Sanity -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 6:39:35 PM)
Its an omnibus bill loaded with everything, all the federal spending there is, so of course there are things in there for Republican representatives and their respective states. Are you arguing that if a party falls out of power then the states represented by the minority party should be shut out of federal spending? Thats completely ridiculous. The real problem with this bill is that it gives outrageous budget hikes to all these federal agencies that should be tightening their belts right now because of shrinking revenues and soaring deficits. This obviously isn't the time for massive budget increases. And this isn't a GOP vs. Democrat thing, this is common sense. It doesn't matter who did it first, this is insane. Its bizarre that you're trying to claim you left the GOP in the mid 1990's due to this "sort of crap" as Clinton was in power at that time - and the GOP was forcing him to be more fiscally Conservative than he otherwise would have been on his own.

Sanity -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 7:00:19 PM)
Yet another related article: Who is working for who here? quote: For feds, more get 6-figure salaries Average pay $30,000 over private sector USA TODAY The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data. Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months — and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted. Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time — in pay and hiring — during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector. The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available. When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000. The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high-tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules. "There's no way to justify this to the American people. It's ridiculous," says Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a first-term lawmaker who is on the House's federal workforce subcommittee. (Full article here).

TheHeretic -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 7:28:56 PM)
For those who might wonder why the Senate Dems keep right on kissing Joe Lieberman's ass, here is your answer.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 9:29:26 PM)
quote: Its an omnibus bill loaded with everything, all the federal spending there is, so of course there are things in there for Republican representatives and their respective states. Are you arguing that if a party falls out of power then the states represented by the minority party should be shut out of federal spending? Thats completely ridiculous. The real problem with this bill is that it gives outrageous budget hikes to all these federal agencies that should be tightening their belts right now because of shrinking revenues and soaring deficits. This obviously isn't the time for massive budget increases. And this isn't a GOP vs. Democrat thing, this is common sense. It doesn't matter who did it first, this is insane. Its bizarre that you're trying to claim you left the GOP in the mid 1990's due to this "sort of crap" as Clinton was in power at that time - and the GOP was forcing him to be more fiscally Conservative than he otherwise would have been on his own. ORIGINAL: Sanity Another clue as to the workings of Sanity's mind: Earmarks given to democrat representatives for use in their local districts: Pork Earmarks given to republican representatives for use in their local districts: Justified spending on states. When the democrats are questioned on the earmarks they put in a bill: Justified questioning of the spendthrift ways of the democrats that are putting us onto the road of financial ruin. When the republicans are questioned on the earmarks they put in a bill: The evil democrats trying to totally disenfranchise the republicans. Amazing, aint it?

AnimusRex -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 10:14:00 PM)
OK, lets take this one at a time- quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Are you arguing that if a party falls out of power then the states represented by the minority party should be shut out of federal spending? Not at all; in fact, not ALL earmarks are by definition pork. Sometimes an earmark can be for a perfectly sensible thing. But there isn't any way to read this, and conclude that it is one party or the other that is being fiscally responsible, or not. quote: The real problem with this bill is that it gives outrageous budget hikes to all these federal agencies that should be tightening their belts right now because of shrinking revenues and soaring deficits. What makes you think the budget increases are unnecessary? I agree that some might be- but I didn't see any discussion in the article that made a convincing case that they should all get no increases. For example- if we increased the Defense budget, would you argue that it was a waste of money, because we are in a recession? quote: Its bizarre that you're trying to claim you left the GOP in the mid 1990's due to this "sort of crap" as Clinton was in power at that time - and the GOP was forcing him to be more fiscally Conservative than he otherwise would have been on his own. I left the GOP because of the 12 years of Reagan/ Bush yearly deficits, and blatant unconcern for them. Reagan and Bush were not forced to accept deficit spending- they planned for it and agreed to it. At the end of the Reagan/Bush era, government was still the same size as it was the day Reagan took office. The Gingrich congress of 94 did restrain it slightly, but not with any real intent. The mainstream GOP were every bit as eager to help themselves to platefuls of pork as the Dems. I also left because of the outrageous fixation with SoCon issues like Lewinsky, but that can wait for another thread. I find it outrageous that Dick Cheney told GWB that "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter". Not only that a GOP Vice President said this; but that he attributed it to RONALD FUCKING REAGAN! What twists the knife, is that Cheney is right. Even to this day, not one conservative or GOP figure- not one conservative blogger or pundit- is serious about balancing the budget. Not one. They aren't serious, because they know that achieving fiscal sanity would require painful sacrifices and unpleasant adjustments to the scale and scope of the entire federal government- INCLUDING SOCIAL SECURITY AND DEFENSE- and that is just too hard a sell. They bitch and moan about the pennies we spend on this highway fund or that railway project, but never talk about anything substantial. So "Fiscal conservatism" is the dusty old standard they pluck out of the attic, and wave around at Tea Party rallies and parades, like kids waving an old flag that they just can't quite figure out the meaning of, knowing only that it once had some importance, and meant something.

luckydawg -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/12/2009 11:13:49 PM)
Funny, I remember Bush trying to reform Social Security.

AnimusRex -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 12:12:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg Funny, I remember Bush trying to destroy Social Security. Thats how I remember it too.

rulemylife -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 12:18:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity In related news: Democrats plan nearly $2 trillion debt limit hike WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats plan to allow the government's debt to swell by nearly $2 trillion as part of a bill next week to pay for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The amount pretty much equals the total of a year-end spending spree by lawmakers and is big enough to ensure that Congress doesn't have to vote again on going further into debt until after the 2010 elections. The move has anxious moderate Democrats maneuvering to win new deficit-cutting tools as the price for their votes, igniting battles between the House and the Senate and with powerful interest groups on both the right and the left. The record increase in the so-called debt limit - the legal cap on the amount of money the government can borrow - is likely to be in the neighborhood of $1.8 trillion to $1.9 trillion, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Friday. That eye-popping figure is making Democrats woozy but is what is needed to make sure they don't have to vote again before next year's midterm elections. The government's total debt has nearly doubled in the past seven years and is expected to exceed the current ceiling of $12.1 trillion before Jan. 1. Is this the way towards Obama's promise of halving the budget deficit by the end of his first term? No, hell no. And since this is the direction the Democrats are choosing to take the nation, I really do hope they fail in their efforts to lead us down this disastrous path toward national bankruptcy. Yeah, if only we had those fiscally conservative Republicans back in office: Another Possible Bump to the Debt Ceiling - washingtonpost.com May 8, 2006 With passage of the budget, the House will have raised the federal borrowing limit by an additional $653 billion, to $9.62 trillion. It would be the fifth debt-ceiling increase in recent years, after boosts of $450 billion in 2002, a record $984 billion in 2003, $800 billion in 2004 and $653 billion in March. When Bush took office, the statutory borrowing limit stood at $5.95 trillion.

luckydawg -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 2:50:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AnimusRex quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg Funny, I remember Bush trying to destroy Social Security. Thats how I remember it too. And animus shows himself to be a troll who resorts to fake quotes, when confronted with a fact he can't refute....What a shame. So we can assume that all your blather about the deficit, is just meaningless blather....

rulemylife -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 4:20:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg quote: ORIGINAL: AnimusRex quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg Funny, I remember Bush trying to destroy Social Security. Thats how I remember it too. And animus shows himself to be a troll who resorts to fake quotes, when confronted with a fact he can't refute....What a shame. So we can assume that all your blather about the deficit, is just meaningless blather.... Another Possible Bump to the Debt Ceiling - washingtonpost.com But the federal debt keeps climbing because of continued deficit spending and the government's insatiable borrowing from the Social Security trust fund. Not to mention Bush's plan to privatize Social Security, which was a very real attempt to destroy the program.

Sanity -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 8:12:31 AM)
Despite the way your mind obviously works, attacking me with your standard hollow strawman arguments won't make this Democrat spending bill a better bill, Spinner. Revenues are still down, the deficit is still exploding, and this is still runaway spending coming from the party that is totally in charge of the matter. Truly amazing... quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales Another clue as to the workings of Sanity's mind: Earmarks given to democrat representatives for use in their local districts: Pork Earmarks given to republican representatives for use in their local districts: Justified spending on states. When the democrats are questioned on the earmarks they put in a bill: Justified questioning of the spendthrift ways of the democrats that are putting us onto the road of financial ruin. When the republicans are questioned on the earmarks they put in a bill: The evil democrats trying to totally disenfranchise the republicans. Amazing, aint it?

Sanity -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 8:42:06 AM)
Incredible! Not even one... [8\|] quote: Even to this day, not one conservative or GOP figure- not one conservative blogger or pundit- is serious about balancing the budget. Not one.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 4:46:20 PM)
~FR~ It is a tribute to the GOP that while they had control of the congress, senate and white house, the deficit and the national debt didn't raise to the highest levels ever seen in this country. Wait a minute, it did. Neither the democrats or the republicans have been doing anything like a good job on controlling spending. To think otherwise is partisan foolishness.

DarkSteven -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 6:36:17 PM)
Sorry, Sanity, but the GOP lost budget credibility with me during the Bush term. Noe the Dems are joining them in my mind, but there is no way I will believe that the GOP is fiscally responsible as much as grandstanding. They want to be able to state that even though the bill passed, they opposed it. I doubt that they would have opposed it if there was a danger of it not passing... they almost all voted for the TARP abomination after all. You can try to make a case that the GOP is fiscally responsible. Personally, I'm planning to vote third party in 2012.

Brain -> RE: Senate GOP denied on spending filibuster attempt (12/13/2009 7:42:54 PM)
Unfortunately they are hypocrites! When George Bush was elected Clinton left a surplus and George Bush did not veto one spending bill. In fact, the very first bill George Bush vetoed was for stem cell research. For me Republicans trying to filibuster a spending bill is complete and absolute hypocrisy. Think of a better example if you want to show the parties are different; spending isn't it. I see more differences on social issues myself.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02