Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense

Modbert

Daydream Believer
Sep 2, 2008
33,178
3,055
48
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

Congressional leaders from the Democratic and Republican parties are still attempting to negotiate a compromise on the federal budget that would avert a government shutdown this Friday. According to various reports, the current compromise cuts about $33 billion from the federal budget, though the Republicans claim that they are demanding even more. The current cuts will come from a large number of federal programs, including the National Institute for Health and Department of Education. However, there is one massive federal program that will actually receive a funding increase. Despite an agreement by the Pentagon to accept defense cuts, Republicans are actually planning on giving $6 billion more the Department of Defense.

In their defense the Republicans are not the only ones proposing an increase in defense spending. Last year the United States spent $508 billion on defense. In their proposed budget, the Obama administration proposed increasing funding by $5 billion to $513 billion. When Republican demanded cuts be made to the federal budget Senate Democrats came forward with a package that included $10 billion in cuts to defense spending. That proposal was “immediately” rejected according to Sam Stein of The Huffington Post. Now Republicans are demanding that $514 billion be spent on defense, a $1 billion raise over the Obama budget proposal, even while the GOP demands more cuts to other programs.

I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.
 
Granny says dem politicians is poutin' `cause dey can't spend money willy-nilly no more an' now dey holding the gov't. hostage...
:cuckoo:
Government shutdown: How it came to this
April 6, 2011 -- The fiscal year is 188 days old, and the federal government is still operating without a long-term spending bill. And now, if lawmakers can't cut a deal, the government will shut down.
Usually, lawmakers make some effort to pass a real, 365-day budget. Not this year. Instead, lawmakers have passed six short-term spending bills. With their Friday deadline bearing down, the two parties remain billions of dollars apart on spending cuts. "This is just an eyeball-to-eyeball moment where Republicans want to exercise their power," said Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. "And Obama is trying to defend his reputation with Democrats."

As even school children know, Congress has the responsibility to appropriate funds for the government to spend. It's right there in Article 1 of the Constitution. But this year -- and let's not mince words -- lawmakers have fallen down on the job. Of course, short-term spending bills are nothing new. Congress has enacted at least one every year for all but three of the past 30. But six in one year? How did it come to this? President Obama first proposed a budget for fiscal year 2011 on Feb. 1, 2010. That was 430 days ago.

If the process worked as designed, Congress would have taken a look at the president's suggestions. Lawmakers on the budget committees would have set target spending levels, and appropriations committees would have hammered out spending plans to fit. The result was supposed to be 12 separate appropriations bills. Congress would have voted on each, and moved them to the president's desk. That's all supposed to happen by Oct. 1, the start of the fiscal year.

Lots of talk, no action

See also:

How a Gov't Shutdown Could Affect You
April 05, 2011 – With President Obama and Congress still far apart on a budget-cut agreement, it’s looking increasingly likely that this week will end with a government shutdown.
First, let’s be clear on what that doesn’t mean. The postal service will not stop delivering the mail, nor will the military have to hold a bake sale. “Essential services” will remain uninterrupted. And it’s not likely that the shutdown will last forever – the last time this happened in late 1995, political pressure on both parties brought things to a speedy resolution, though the government was still closed for a total of three weeks. With neither party poised to come out of this one smelling like roses, expect cooler heads to prevail sooner rather than later.

Oh, and don’t think this means you get an extension on your taxes. Come hell or high water, that deadline is still April 18. Here are some situations in which you could find yourself directly impacted by the shutdown.

1. You’re a non-essential government employee. Nobody likes to think of themselves as “non-essential,” but if you’re on the federal dime and you’re not delivering the mail, defending the country, taking care of the sick or telling planes when to land, there’s a chance you’ll find the doors to your office locked on Monday morning.

MORE
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

Congressional leaders from the Democratic and Republican parties are still attempting to negotiate a compromise on the federal budget that would avert a government shutdown this Friday. According to various reports, the current compromise cuts about $33 billion from the federal budget, though the Republicans claim that they are demanding even more. The current cuts will come from a large number of federal programs, including the National Institute for Health and Department of Education. However, there is one massive federal program that will actually receive a funding increase. Despite an agreement by the Pentagon to accept defense cuts, Republicans are actually planning on giving $6 billion more the Department of Defense.
In their defense the Republicans are not the only ones proposing an increase in defense spending. Last year the United States spent $508 billion on defense. In their proposed budget, the Obama administration proposed increasing funding by $5 billion to $513 billion. When Republican demanded cuts be made to the federal budget Senate Democrats came forward with a package that included $10 billion in cuts to defense spending. That proposal was “immediately” rejected according to Sam Stein of The Huffington Post. Now Republicans are demanding that $514 billion be spent on defense, a $1 billion raise over the Obama budget proposal, even while the GOP demands more cuts to other programs.
I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Providing for defense is in the Constitution, education and science research isn't. Simple
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

Congressional leaders from the Democratic and Republican parties are still attempting to negotiate a compromise on the federal budget that would avert a government shutdown this Friday. According to various reports, the current compromise cuts about $33 billion from the federal budget, though the Republicans claim that they are demanding even more. The current cuts will come from a large number of federal programs, including the National Institute for Health and Department of Education. However, there is one massive federal program that will actually receive a funding increase. Despite an agreement by the Pentagon to accept defense cuts, Republicans are actually planning on giving $6 billion more the Department of Defense.
In their defense the Republicans are not the only ones proposing an increase in defense spending. Last year the United States spent $508 billion on defense. In their proposed budget, the Obama administration proposed increasing funding by $5 billion to $513 billion. When Republican demanded cuts be made to the federal budget Senate Democrats came forward with a package that included $10 billion in cuts to defense spending. That proposal was “immediately” rejected according to Sam Stein of The Huffington Post. Now Republicans are demanding that $514 billion be spent on defense, a $1 billion raise over the Obama budget proposal, even while the GOP demands more cuts to other programs.
I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Providing for defense is in the Constitution, education and science research isn't. Simple

So let's abolish the air force since it's not in the constitution.
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

Congressional leaders from the Democratic and Republican parties are still attempting to negotiate a compromise on the federal budget that would avert a government shutdown this Friday. According to various reports, the current compromise cuts about $33 billion from the federal budget, though the Republicans claim that they are demanding even more. The current cuts will come from a large number of federal programs, including the National Institute for Health and Department of Education. However, there is one massive federal program that will actually receive a funding increase. Despite an agreement by the Pentagon to accept defense cuts, Republicans are actually planning on giving $6 billion more the Department of Defense.

In their defense the Republicans are not the only ones proposing an increase in defense spending. Last year the United States spent $508 billion on defense. In their proposed budget, the Obama administration proposed increasing funding by $5 billion to $513 billion. When Republican demanded cuts be made to the federal budget Senate Democrats came forward with a package that included $10 billion in cuts to defense spending. That proposal was “immediately” rejected according to Sam Stein of The Huffington Post. Now Republicans are demanding that $514 billion be spent on defense, a $1 billion raise over the Obama budget proposal, even while the GOP demands more cuts to other programs.

I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Is this one of those threads that tells how government research gave us "Tang"?

:lol:
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

Congressional leaders from the Democratic and Republican parties are still attempting to negotiate a compromise on the federal budget that would avert a government shutdown this Friday. According to various reports, the current compromise cuts about $33 billion from the federal budget, though the Republicans claim that they are demanding even more. The current cuts will come from a large number of federal programs, including the National Institute for Health and Department of Education. However, there is one massive federal program that will actually receive a funding increase. Despite an agreement by the Pentagon to accept defense cuts, Republicans are actually planning on giving $6 billion more the Department of Defense.
In their defense the Republicans are not the only ones proposing an increase in defense spending. Last year the United States spent $508 billion on defense. In their proposed budget, the Obama administration proposed increasing funding by $5 billion to $513 billion. When Republican demanded cuts be made to the federal budget Senate Democrats came forward with a package that included $10 billion in cuts to defense spending. That proposal was “immediately” rejected according to Sam Stein of The Huffington Post. Now Republicans are demanding that $514 billion be spent on defense, a $1 billion raise over the Obama budget proposal, even while the GOP demands more cuts to other programs.
I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Providing for defense is in the Constitution, education and science research isn't. Simple

And actually they are...

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
 
I'd certainly like to see a tighter control of spiraling R&D costs in defense.

I would like to see a 95% reduction across the board and tame the wild government animal. The American people should feel the pain of their actions while paying off the deficits.

Once we have paid the deficit off, then we could start talking a balanced budget and America's actual needs again.:eusa_angel:
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Providing for defense is in the Constitution, education and science research isn't. Simple

So let's abolish the air force since it's not in the constitution.

Neither are the EPA, the USDoE, the FDA, Czars..

Actually, the USAF was a branch of the U.S. Army (U.S. Army Air Force) and an Army is specifically covered under the U.S. Constitution. Basically, all branches of the service are considered covered as the Marines fall under the Navy which is also, specifically covered in Article 1 Sec 8 as well.
 
Why is the left so hell bent on cutting defense? You want us to be vulnerable? What's the end game in that? doyathink?
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com


I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Speaking of being taken seriously: Why would anyone use a blog source to support a thread?

The blogger sited above is parroting the Huffington Post, which used, "sources close to the discussions."

While media attention focuses on the cuts to government spending demanded by House Republicans and broadly accepted by Democrats, the Pentagon is poised to reap billions more in federal funds, according to sources close to the discussions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/04/defense-spending-budget-as-pa_n_844692.html

Why not simply wait for the written agreement is published?

Could the Huffington Post have a POLITICAL AGENDA???:eek:
 
Budget compromise will cut education and science research, but not defense - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com

I said it before and I'll say it again. Those who want to have a discussion about the budget but are unwilling to cut the defense budget cannot be taken seriously.

Providing for defense is in the Constitution, education and science research isn't. Simple

And actually they are...

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

This speaks to patents and copyrights, not taking taxpayer dollars to fund "PissChrist".

Try again.
 
Why is the left so hell bent on cutting defense? You want us to be vulnerable? What's the end game in that? doyathink?

Because there's probably more waste in defense than anything..

Wasn't it Gates that also said something about cutting defense?.. I think Paul and his followers supported it somewhere along the line too.. :eusa_whistle:. Hardly flaming leftists.
 
Why is the left so hell bent on cutting defense? You want us to be vulnerable? What's the end game in that? doyathink?

Because there's probably more waste in defense than anything..

Wasn't it Gates that also said something about cutting defense?.. I think Paul and his followers supported it somewhere along the line too.. :eusa_whistle:. Hardly flaming leftists.

Sure, there is plenty of wast.. but it pales in comparison to the waste in entitlement spending which by it's very nature, is for th most part entirely a waste.
 
What kind of America is this when science, education and children programs are being cut but the pentagon offers to cut their budget and the govt says "no, no pentagon we won't hear of cutting YOUR budget...here take more..whether you like it or not"

Cut science, education and healthcare...he'll we won't need a military at that point because we would be ensuring our demise from the inside with a nation of idiots
 
Last edited:
Why is the left so hell bent on cutting defense? You want us to be vulnerable? What's the end game in that? doyathink?

Because there's probably more waste in defense than anything..

Wasn't it Gates that also said something about cutting defense?.. I think Paul and his followers supported it somewhere along the line too.. :eusa_whistle:. Hardly flaming leftists.

Sure, there is plenty of wast.. but it pales in comparison to the waste in entitlement spending which by it's very nature, is for th most part entirely a waste.

Waste should be cut from everything. But the majority of Republicans won't even look at Defense spending. Why? Could it be because the Defense contracters have them in their pockets?
 
Because there's probably more waste in defense than anything..

Wasn't it Gates that also said something about cutting defense?.. I think Paul and his followers supported it somewhere along the line too.. :eusa_whistle:. Hardly flaming leftists.

Sure, there is plenty of wast.. but it pales in comparison to the waste in entitlement spending which by it's very nature, is for th most part entirely a waste.

Waste should be cut from everything. But the majority of Republicans won't even look at Defense spending. Why? Could it be because the Defense contracters have them in their pockets?

I have no problem with it actually. I'm old enough to remember the $500 toilet seats and hammers.

And most Democrats won't even look at entitlement spending.
 
Providing for defense is in the Constitution, education and science research isn't. Simple

So let's abolish the air force since it's not in the constitution.

Neither are the EPA, the USDoE, the FDA, Czars..

Actually, the USAF was a branch of the U.S. Army (U.S. Army Air Force) and an Army is specifically covered under the U.S. Constitution. Basically, all branches of the service are considered covered as the Marines fall under the Navy which is also, specifically covered in Article 1 Sec 8 as well.

Nope, I've heard you guys argue that since it doesn't EXPLICITLY state something in the constitution then it can't be constitutional. Since the air force is explicitly mentioned it is therefor unconstitutional. That's how this works, right? I guess that would also must mean we must abandon our nuclear weapons at once.
 
Why is the left so hell bent on cutting defense? You want us to be vulnerable? What's the end game in that? doyathink?

Because there's probably more waste in defense than anything..

Wasn't it Gates that also said something about cutting defense?.. I think Paul and his followers supported it somewhere along the line too.. :eusa_whistle:. Hardly flaming leftists.

was that before or after your pissant in chief went to war in Libya?
 
So let's abolish the air force since it's not in the constitution.

Neither are the EPA, the USDoE, the FDA, Czars..

Actually, the USAF was a branch of the U.S. Army (U.S. Army Air Force) and an Army is specifically covered under the U.S. Constitution. Basically, all branches of the service are considered covered as the Marines fall under the Navy which is also, specifically covered in Article 1 Sec 8 as well.

Nope, I've heard you guys argue that since it doesn't EXPLICITLY state something in the constitution then it can't be constitutional. Since the air force is explicitly mentioned it is therefor unconstitutional. That's how this works, right? I guess that would also must mean we must abandon our nuclear weapons at once.

:eusa_eh:

I don't think retarded posters are mentioned either.
 

Forum List

Back
Top