Rock Bottom

Why do they even need to do research, and that much to research!?! Like harbor deepening has never been done before.

report 1 of 2 people like this.   like  dislike

You could pay a couple of high school dropouts to do the research, but then you get what you pay for. They'd spend it all on pot and then try to wax intellectual about manatees...

I think those dropouts are the ones they paid to do Mt P town planning years ago, allowing a bunch of sprawling subdivisions and then building Hungry Neck and expanding 17 because they didn't consider the implications of sprawl.

report 2 of 3 people like this.   like  dislike

The Politician that doesn't fight for earmarks for his home state is putting his very office on the line, yet we face serious financial dilemnas that the Congress needs to address.
The President's proposed budget is a joke. Posters on here have addressed this many times and continued to pass along the administration's falsehoods.
From Meet the Press this past Sunday morning:
White House Chief of Staff and former budget director Jack Lew said: A lot of that was because of the extreme, you know, conservative approach taken by House Republicans."
the host: Gregory: "Your party controls the Senate, does it not?"
Lew: "Yea, but the positions that ended up tying the Congress in knots came out of the House, came out of the Tea Party wing in the house."
• Number Of Votes Needed To Pass A Budget Through The Senate – 51
• Number Of Democrats In The Senate – 53
a budget resolution is one of the few things that are not subject to a filibuster. In fact, that is one reason why a bill based on reconciliation instructions cannot be filibustered.
It’s Been 1020 Days Since Senate Democrats Passed A Budget and They Have No Intention Of Doing So This Year Either.
Do your own research !

report 1 of 1 people like this.   like  dislike

Well said, artrogue!

Speaking of budgets, did you see Obama's OMB Director attempt to answer the question, "In which year of the President's ten year budget projections do we reach a balanced budget?" Watch the one minute long clip here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjklHhh5toI

Now compare that to Obama's "promises" in March of 2009:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FFsfioJuiM

Trillion dollar yearly deficits as far as the eye can see. Hope and change only a dummy could believe in.

You can't make this stuff up......

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

You Republicans make me sick. The Republican Party is the party of huge government expansion (Dept of Veteran Affairs, Dept of Homeland Security, Medicare part D) and huge revenue cuts (Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act). The gigantic federal debt is entirely due to Republican mismanagement.

Not a single Republican voted for the Deficit Reduction Act of 1993. Today they refuse to accept 4 to 1 spending cuts to tax increases. Only a moron would think they have any interest in fiscal responsibility.

Do your research. You will find that the past 4 Republican administrations (Ford, Reagan, Bush, Bush) have all increased public debt as a percentage of GDP while the past 5 Democratic administrations (Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Carter, and Clinton) all reduced public debt as a percentage of GDP.

In 2011 we spent more money on the military (when veterans benefits and interest payments from debt on the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are included) than we collected in income tax revenue. If Lindsey Graham were serious about cutting spending he would start with cuts in defense spending. Since he throws a hissy fit anytime cuts in defense are mentioned, it's obvious that he's simply playing politics with the debt.

report 2 of 2 people like this.   like  dislike

Both sides keep spinning this but the fact remains:
• Number Of Votes Needed To Pass A Budget Through The Senate – 51
• Number Of Democrats In The Senate – 53
A budget resolution is one of the few things that are not subject to a filibuster. In fact, that is one reason why a bill based on reconciliation instructions cannot be filibustered.
It’s Been Over 1020 Days Since Senate Democrats Passed A Budget and They Have No Intention Of Doing So This Year Either.
Senator Harry Reid and Schumer are arguing that the Senate doesn’t need to pass a formal budget resolution to enable the government to spend taxpayer money irresponsibly, then they’re right. For the past couple years, while the Senate Budget Democrats have sat on their hands, failing to submit a budget resolution to the full Senate, the Senate Appropriations Committee has still authorized ungodly amounts of discretionary spending.
But if what Reid and Schumer are saying is that they’ve followed the law and submitted a budget resolution, then they’re flat-out wrong!
The Congressional Budget Act requires the president to submit a budget to Congress by Feb. 1 every year. The Senate Budget Committee is to report a budget resolution to the full Senate by April 1. The House and Senate are to reach agreement on a concurrent budget resolution by April 15. Senate Budget Democrats haven’t submitted a budget since 2009.
By never submitting a budget, enacting a few discretionary spending caps as a part of the Budget Control Act (a.k.a. the debt ceiling deal) and punting to the Super Committee that also punted on entitlement reform, Democrats avoid any difficult discussion of how to ensure the solvency of our entitlement programs.
With no plan of their own on the table, they’re free to shoot down anything Republicans propose.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

I suggest we pay Slartibartfast. He probably didn't receive an honorarium for the fjords.

report 1 of 1 people like this.   like  dislike

artrogue, how many votes needed in the House? How many Democrats? Why do you keep leaving this branch out? Please cite the law that allows the House to dictate the budget to the Senate and White House? The House is the body obstructing passage of your precious budget.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Isn't it our precious budget? Don't you want our country to be ruled by the laws that are in place? The House did pass a budget. It went to the Senate.
Senator Harry Reid By never submitting a budget, enacting a few discretionary spending caps as a part of the Budget Control Act (a.k.a. the debt ceiling deal) and punting to the Super Committee that also punted on entitlement reform, Democrats avoid any difficult discussion of how to ensure the solvency of our entitlement programs.
With no plan of their own on the table, they’re free to shoot down anything Republicans propose.
Your spinning it to fit your Democratic party views and making the Republicans out to be the only villians here. There is mutual blame !
The President continues to add to it by submitting his most recent budget he knows no one will support and he will come out looking like the abused executive. Oh poor me...vote for me again in 2012 so i can rid us of these evil doers.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Right on, artrogue!

Fish Pimp asks, "Please cite the law that allows the House to dictate the budget to the Senate and White House..."

I would look at the US Constitution. Specifically, Article one, Section seven, which clearly states "All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;".

Or, one might look at Article one, Section eight which states, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

And Article one, Section nine, clearly states that "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."

Article two, which delineates the powers of the executive branch, makes no mention of budget processes, taxation or spending. Why would the people want an omnipotent executive deciding who pays how much and where it will be spent? Investing that much power in a single person sounds like a bad idea, don't you think?

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

The Repubicans are to blame for the spending increases in the first place, and bankrupting us by funding a war with tax cuts.
Why? Because if they increased taxes to pay for their useless war they would have been voted out of office.
The Democrats are to blame for not repealing these massive spending increases, and not ending the useless wars immediately upon taking over the government.
But let's not forget that the Republicans inherited a booming economy and a large surplus.
By the time the Democrats took over they inherited a dead economy, worst since the great depression, a massive deficit, and no revenues to balance out the spending that they inherited.
So as Art says, plenty of blame to go around.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/spending-bu…

report 1 of 1 people like this.   like  dislike

Clearly the Budget Control Act signed in August and Continuing Resolution signed in December fulfill the Congress' Constitutional requirements for appropriations. But IP and artrogue are arguing opposite sides of the Congressional Budget Act. IP points out that the Constitution says nothing about the Executive defining the spending priorities while artrogue says the CBA requires the Executive to define the spending priorities and requires the House and Senate to come to agreement about them. Obviously you can't dictate a timetable for agreement, so historically Congress has missed the deadline and used CRs to fund the government as they did last year. Once the money is appropriated there is no more need for a budget.

The reason so many Republicans are upset about it this year is that mandatory spending requirements remain untouched and they wish to dismantle SS and medicare. They wish to characterize the federal debt as the result of these programs overspending despite the dedicated taxes and the large trust funds which pay for these programs and will not be exhausted for a decade at the earliest. Entitlement must be reformed in order to prevent deficits in the future but they have very little to do with the present.

The reason for our national debt is our ridiculous spending on defense. This spending is discretionary and could easily be reduced. We now spend more money on defense than the next 17 largest military powers combined. How many bars do we need on the windows? How many locks on the door? When the Republicans propose drastic reductions in military spending, then we'll know they are serious about debt reform. Today they not only refuse needed cuts to the military but continue to push for yet another war in the middle east.

The budget will not be balanced with cuts to foreign aid or scientific research. It will not be balanced with cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting or the State department. It won't be balanced by eliminating the Depts of Education and Energy. We can only balance the budget by raising revenue and decreasing our spending on defense.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike

Our posts are not in conflict. IP pointed out the actual constitution and I pointed out the modern requirements. Your just spinning it so hard ...now you might be on Harry Reid's staff.
For all intents and purposes this is what has occured:
By never submitting a budget,(against the law) enacting a few discretionary spending caps as a part of the Budget Control Act (a.k.a. the debt ceiling deal) and punting to the Super Committee that also punted on entitlement reform, Democrats avoid any difficult discussion of how to ensure the solvency of our entitlement programs.

With no plan of their own on the table, they’re free to shoot down anything Republicans propose.

There will be no budget again because the President really doesn't want to be held accountable in an election year. He is just kicking it down the road til he is firmly entrenched in office for another 4 years.

report 0 of 0 people like this.   like  dislike