Obama's budget is obliterated in the Senate

[Zander]

At Jillian's request: This is the congressional record- the link only lasts 30 mins. Congressional Record - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

 

[rightwinger]

i think he forgot that people actually think about their kids and grandkids.

If you look at who is leading the fight over the destruction of Medicare, it is the older Americans

They realize how important Medicare is to them and don't want their children and grandchildren saddled with a voucher program

Doing nothing with medicare is the fastest way to do harm to children and grandchildren.

I couldn't agree with you more.

And the answer sure isn't some capped voucher buy-out while medical expenses are allowed to run through the roof.

The best way to fix Medicare is to fix the healthcare system itself. We need more open competition, let Doctors publish their fees, force the pharmaceutical industry to compete, allow importation of drugs, cut down on the overhead (paperwork) in our medical system.

 

[Wicked Jester]

The only budget voted on today was the Ryan plan. In fact, the righties are all over the news saying the dems should put forth their own budget instead of being the party of no.

but that wasn't the point of yesterday's vote. yesterday's vote it was a given they wouldn't vote to turn medicare into a voucher system.

see Zanders post, you're ill informed.

I'll ask directly;

where is the democratic 2012 budget plan Jillian?

where is the democratic plan to close on the debt ceiling?

where is the democratic plan to deal with the budget deficit going forward ala entitlements etc. ?

i'm far from "ill-informed".

i tried to look at his link. it was timed out and i asked him for another

If there's no 2012 budget plan, then how did they vote on "obama's plan" yesterday?

if they didn't deal with the "deficit", then what are you alleging they voted on yesterday other than ryan's bill"?

The budget is created by the House. The Senate then votes on what is passed in the House. They are under no obligation to create a budget, though they may.

Here's a hint for the uninformed (since you're keen at tossing insults around today).. Until the right agrees to close tax loopholes and gets rid of bush's tax cuts and addresses military spending. you're not going to get a deal. no matter what "agreement" they signed for grover norquist.

the arrogance of thinking the middle class should bear the brunt of the last admin's stupidity is awe-inspring.

Jillian, they voted on whether or not to go forward on the Obama plan........It was voted overwhelmingly as NO!

 

[jillian]

We really need a two pronged approach. Spending cuts and tax increases. The reason conservatives oppose tax increases is because historically, Congress spends every penny they get, and then a whole lot more. Tax increases have to be tied to deficit reduction and mandatory spending cuts or it's a non-starter.

I agree with you about the two-pronged approach. Americans don't mind *shared* sacrifice. They mind being played for fools. I'd disagree about the reason conservatives oppose tax increases, though. I think it's because only repubs with Ronald Reagan type popularity can overcome having to do it. Daddy Bush sure couldn't. Also, they're terrified that if they vote to raise taxes, Norquist is going to pull out the "pledge" he forces each of them to sign (though how he leverages that is beyond my understanding) and they know it will be waved in front of their faces and they'll get clobbered with "the base".

 

[Zander]

We really need a two pronged approach. Spending cuts and tax increases. The reason conservatives oppose tax increases is because historically, Congress spends every penny they get, and then a whole lot more. Tax increases have to be tied to deficit reduction and mandatory spending cuts or it's a non-starter.

I agree with you about the two-pronged approach. Americans don't mind *shared* sacrifice. They mind being played for fools. I'd disagree about the reason conservatives oppose tax increases, though. I think it's because only repubs with Ronald Reagan type popularity can overcome having to do it. Daddy Bush sure couldn't. Also, they're terrified that if they vote to raise taxes, Norquist is going to pull out the "pledge" he forces each of them to sign (though how he leverages that is beyond my understanding) and they know it will be waved in front of their faces and they'll get clobbered with "the base".

I can't speak for all conservatives, but personally, I feel that most Congressmen don't care about deficits, balanced budgets, or anything else. They want to bring home the pork for their state or district and would sell their own mother to do it. They just want to be reelected. When we get a courageous man like Paul Ryan who is willing to do the right things regardless of the political fallout- he is fed to the lions by partisan bickering and backbiting.

If we give more money to the government, they'll spend all of it and 40% more. So the only way to get the whole she-bang under control is by starving them of money until we have a crisis. We never do anything in the country until we have a crisis. We are facing one now. Time for the adults to sit down, formulate a plan, and execute it. We are running out of time.

 

[signelect]

Obama's leadership skills are missing in action. The real issue is a bunch of over paid, under worked, over benefited congress men and women of both parties whose soul purpose in life is to be reelected and screw the voters. I am a physical conservative but this is getting ridiculous on the budget. We can't keep spending more that we bring in. I just heard that we are spending 4 million on electric cars for some city so they can save $150,000 on gas. What idiot thought that was a good idea.

 

[rightwinger]

We really need a two pronged approach. Spending cuts and tax increases. The reason conservatives oppose tax increases is because historically, Congress spends every penny they get, and then a whole lot more. Tax increases have to be tied to deficit reduction and mandatory spending cuts or it's a non-starter.

I agree with you about the two-pronged approach. Americans don't mind *shared* sacrifice. They mind being played for fools. I'd disagree about the reason conservatives oppose tax increases, though. I think it's because only repubs with Ronald Reagan type popularity can overcome having to do it. Daddy Bush sure couldn't. Also, they're terrified that if they vote to raise taxes, Norquist is going to pull out the "pledge" he forces each of them to sign (though how he leverages that is beyond my understanding) and they know it will be waved in front of their faces and they'll get clobbered with "the base".

I can't speak for all conservatives, but personally, I feel that most Congressmen don't care about deficits, balanced budgets, or anything else. They want to bring home the pork for their state or district and would sell their own mother to do it. They just want to be reelected. When we get a courageous man like Paul Ryan who is willing to do the right things regardless of the political fallout- he is fed to the lions by partisan bickering and backbiting.

If we give more money to the government, they'll spend all of it and 40% more. So the only way to get the whole she-bang under control is by starving them of money until we have a crisis. We never do anything in the country until we have a crisis. We are facing one now. Time for the adults to sit down, formulate a plan, and execute it. We are running out of time.

No Congress member has a problem with spending projects for the home front
No Congress member has a problem cutting taxes

Both get you elected

What is hard is telling people they have to sacrifice, telling people they have to pay more and receive less. But that is what reduces the national debt

 

[AmericanFirst]

But in an attempt to turn the tables on Democrats, Republicans then forced a procedural vote on President Obama’s budget submission from February. That measure failed by a vote of 0-97, with all the Democrats voting against it because they believe it is now outdated.

Senate Shoots Down Controversial Ryan Budget & President Obama's Plan, Too - The Note


Yeah, those dumb Dems, not following the GOoPers in committing political suicide.

If it's suicide to pass a budget, then Congress is going to have alot of vacancies because they are required to pass a budget every year.

We need people who actually want to fulfill their responsibilities in Congress not cowards.

Cowards like pelosi's congress, who is to blame for most of the economical problems since 2006.

 

[AmericanFirst]

You guys are seriously hilarious.

Obama sent a budget plan earlier this year. It's a "blue print". The "beginning of negotiations". Republicans wouldn't vote on the Ryan Plan unless the unfinished Obama budget was also brought up for a vote.

No one has even heard of the Obama budget, but EVERYONE has heard of the disastrous Ryan budget.

Now, all but 5 Senators are ON RECORD to destroy Medicare. "No one voted for the unfinished Obama budget" may be news tonight, but from now until the 2012 elections, EVERYONE will know and remember the Republican Budget to end Medicare.

See? It's no longer the "Ryan" budget. Because the majority of Republicans have ENDORSED it, it's now the "Republican budget". Hilarious!

There you go believing the lies coming from the idiotic left. Ryan's budget does not destroy medicare, just scare tactics to keep in power. What obamaturd and his cronies have done the last two years is worse. But idiots like you don't care.

 

[rdean]

The only budget voted on today was the Ryan plan. In fact, the righties are all over the news saying the dems should put forth their own budget instead of being the party of no.

but that wasn't the point of yesterday's vote. yesterday's vote it was a given they wouldn't vote to turn medicare into a voucher system.

see Zanders post, you're ill informed.

I'll ask directly;

where is the democratic 2012 budget plan Jillian?

where is the democratic plan to close on the debt ceiling?

where is the democratic plan to deal with the budget deficit going forward ala entitlements etc. ?

i'm far from "ill-informed".

i tried to look at his link. it was timed out and i asked him for another

If there's no 2012 budget plan, then how did they vote on "obama's plan" yesterday?

if they didn't deal with the "deficit", then what are you alleging they voted on yesterday other than ryan's bill"?

The budget is created by the House. The Senate then votes on what is passed in the House. They are under no obligation to create a budget, though they may.

Here's a hint for the uninformed (since you're keen at tossing insults around today).. Until the right agrees to close tax loopholes and gets rid of bush's tax cuts and addresses military spending. you're not going to get a deal. no matter what "agreement" they signed for grover norquist.

the arrogance of thinking the middle class should bear the brunt of the last admin's stupidity is awe-inspring.

The only way Republicans could be cornered into voting on Ryan's plan was to agree to vote on a budget Obama submitted months ago. It wasn't about Obama's budget. It was about getting Republicans on record as wanting to destroy Medicare. It worked.

Ryan's plan is now the "Republican's Plan". Stop calling it "Ryan's Plan". Call it, The Republican Plan, which is what it is.

 

[Trajan]

In a procedural vote this evening, five GOP senators opposed the Ryan budget: Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Susan Collins of Maine, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Every Democrat opposed the measure. The final vote tally was 40-57, sending the House-passed Ryan plan down to defeat.

Why do Republicans want to kill grandma?

MediSCARE .....pathetic. I suppose you like the Democrat plan. Do nothing. It ends Medicare a lot faster and with much more pain.

So now Republicans are all on the record for wanting to kill Medicare


Suckers

I am under 55, they have my blessing to re-structure it, cause it won't be there when I need it at this rate, well, let me back up, it won't be there though I am planning to not have to count on the gubermint, in any case, becasue you know, as an INDIVIDUAL, at the end of the day, I get what I pay for, or plan for.....you? well have a great old age, that hip surgery you'll need in 2020 ? good luck on that.

 

[Trajan]

Ryan's plan had no effect on those currently enrolled in medicare....

Stop being a lying leftist hack...

It shows what a spineless hack Ryan really is..

He thought he could buy off the elderly population by telling them it won't affect them and he thought working Americans were too dumb to care about their Medicare.

Guess what?

Wrong on both counts

i think he forgot that people actually think about their kids and grandkids.

thats exactly why , because the system is unsustainable, read my post to RW, good luck to you too. When you need some water, they'll have to petition the council to prescribe some....

 

[Trajan]

The only budget voted on today was the Ryan plan. In fact, the righties are all over the news saying the dems should put forth their own budget instead of being the party of no.

but that wasn't the point of yesterday's vote. yesterday's vote it was a given they wouldn't vote to turn medicare into a voucher system.

see Zanders post, you're ill informed.

I'll ask directly ( again);

where is the democratic 2012 budget plan Jillian?

where is the democratic plan to close on the debt ceiling?

where is the democratic plan to deal with the budget deficit going forward ala entitlements etc. ?

i'm far from "ill-informed".

i tried to look at his link. it was timed out and i asked him for another

If there's no 2012 budget plan, then how did they vote on "obama's plan" yesterday?

if they didn't deal with the "deficit", then what are you alleging they voted on yesterday other than ryan's bill"?

The budget is created by the House. The Senate then votes on what is passed in the House. They are under no obligation to create a budget, though they may.

you are ill informed, he posted the link again, and;

Immediately after the vote on the Ryan budget, the Senate unanimously rejected President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal. The Obama budget did not secure the support of a single lawmaker, with all 97 senators present voting “no.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...erhaul-medicare/2011/05/25/AGacUTBH_blog.html

so wapo is what? lying?

Here's a hint for the uninformed (since you're keen at tossing insults around today).. Until the right agrees to close tax loopholes and gets rid of bush's tax cuts and addresses military spending. you're not going to get a deal. no matter what "agreement" they signed for grover norquist.

the arrogance of thinking the middle class should bear the brunt of the last admin's stupidity is awe-inspring. .

heres a hint for you too;

wait, wait, so, there is no 'plan' ?.....back to square one;

I'll ask directly ( again);

where is the democratic 2012 budget plan Jillian?

where is the democratic plan to close on the debt ceiling?

where is the democratic plan to deal with the budget deficit going forward ala entitlements etc. ?


oh, and saying you are " ill-informed" is an insult? wow, you've got quite a thin skin, practice what you preach.

 

[Trajan]

We really need a two pronged approach. Spending cuts and tax increases. The reason conservatives oppose tax increases is because historically, Congress spends every penny they get, and then a whole lot more. Tax increases have to be tied to deficit reduction and mandatory spending cuts or it's a non-starter.

 

[boedicca]

MediSCARE .....pathetic. I suppose you like the Democrat plan. Do nothing. It ends Medicare a lot faster and with much more pain.

So now Republicans are all on the record for wanting to kill Medicare


Suckers

I am under 55, they have my blessing to re-structure it, cause it won't be there when I need it at this rate, well, let me back up, it won't be there though I am planning to not have to count on the gubermint, in any case, becasue you know, as an INDIVIDUAL, at the end of the day, I get what I pay for, or plan for.....you? well have a great old age, that hip surgery you'll need in 2020 ? good luck on that.

Ditto. If they don't restructure it, the programs will be insolvent by the time I retire, so I'd rather see them fixed now, even if it I'm means tested out or receive far less than the current (empty) promises.

I assumed I'd never see a dime of SS since I got my first real job and "did the math" on the demographic trends...and have planned, saved, and invested ever since. I'd prefer that the government not destroy private health care so there are no choices left when I retire.

 

[boedicca]

We really need a two pronged approach. Spending cuts and tax increases. The reason conservatives oppose tax increases is because historically, Congress spends every penny they get, and then a whole lot more. Tax increases have to be tied to deficit reduction and mandatory spending cuts or it's a non-starter.

I would like to agree with this, but can't. Government spending is so out of control (increased by 25% in real terms over a 3 year period), that giving them more tax money will only delay the much needed cuts.

Stephen Moore has a good piece in today's WSJ regarding tax rates. The net-net of it is that back when we had higher rates, other countries had even higher ones. Today, we are a high tax country. Higher rates will just put us at more of a competitive disadvantage. Raising taxes will not result in increased revenues in a country with moribund GDP growth.

Now let's consider how our tax system today compares with the system that was in place in the late 1980s—when the deficit was only about one-quarter as large as a share of GDP as it is now. After the landmark Tax Reform Act of 1986, which closed special-interest loopholes in exchange for top marginal rates of 28%, the highest combined federal-state marginal tax rate was about 33%. Now we may be headed to 62%. You don't have to be Jack Kemp or Arthur Laffer to understand that a 29 percentage point rise in top marginal rates would make America a highly uncompetitive place.

What is particularly worrisome about this trend is the deterioration of the U.S. tax position relative to the rest of our economic rivals. In 1990, the highest individual income tax rate of our major economic trading partners was 51%, while the U.S. was much lower at 33%. It's no wonder that during the 1980s and '90s the U.S. created more than twice as many new jobs as Japan and Western Europe combined.

It's true that the economy was able to absorb the Bush 41 and Clinton tax hikes and still grow at a very rapid pace. But what the soak-the-rich lobby ignores is how different the world is today versus the early 1990s. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, over the past two decades the average highest tax rate among the 20 major industrial nations has fallen to about 45%. Yet the highest U.S. tax rate would rise to more than 48% under the Obama/Democratic tax hikes. To make matters worse, if we include the average personal income tax rates of developing countries like India and China, the average tax rate around the world is closer to 30%, according to a new study by KPMG.

What all this means is that in the late 1980s, the U.S. was nearly the lowest taxed nation in the world, and a quarter century later we're nearly the highest.

Despite all of this, the refrain from Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and most of the Democrats in Congress is our fiscal mess is a result of "tax cuts for the rich." When? Where? Who? The Tax Foundation recently noted that in 2009 the U.S. collected a higher share of income and payroll taxes (45%) from the richest 10% of tax filers than any other nation, including such socialist welfare states as Sweden (27%), France (28%) and Germany (31%). And this was before the rate hikes that Democrats are now endorsing....

Stephen Moore: A 62% Top Tax Rate? - WSJ.com

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The only budget voted on today was the Ryan plan. In fact, the righties are all over the news saying the dems should put forth their own budget instead of being the party of no.

but that wasn't the point of yesterday's vote. yesterday's vote it was a given they wouldn't vote to turn medicare into a voucher system.

see Zanders post, you're ill informed.

I'll ask directly;

where is the democratic 2012 budget plan Jillian?

where is the democratic plan to close on the debt ceiling?

where is the democratic plan to deal with the budget deficit going forward ala entitlements etc. ?

i'm far from "ill-informed".

i tried to look at his link. it was timed out and i asked him for another

If there's no 2012 budget plan, then how did they vote on "obama's plan" yesterday?

if they didn't deal with the "deficit", then what are you alleging they voted on yesterday other than ryan's bill"?

The budget is created by the House. The Senate then votes on what is passed in the House. They are under no obligation to create a budget, though they may.

Here's a hint for the uninformed (since you're keen at tossing insults around today).. Until the right agrees to close tax loopholes and gets rid of bush's tax cuts and addresses military spending. you're not going to get a deal. no matter what "agreement" they signed for grover norquist.

the arrogance of thinking the middle class should bear the brunt of the last admin's stupidity is awe-inspring.

You are just full of denial, aren't you?

They voted on 4 budget proposals yesterday, and the only one to get a unanimous vote was Obama's.

President's budget sinks, 97-0 - TheHill.com

Do you have any idea the last time the Senate had a unanimous vote on any substantive proposal?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

see Zanders post, you're ill informed.

I'll ask directly;

where is the democratic 2012 budget plan Jillian?

where is the democratic plan to close on the debt ceiling?

where is the democratic plan to deal with the budget deficit going forward ala entitlements etc. ?

i'm far from "ill-informed".

i tried to look at his link. it was timed out and i asked him for another

If there's no 2012 budget plan, then how did they vote on "obama's plan" yesterday?

if they didn't deal with the "deficit", then what are you alleging they voted on yesterday other than ryan's bill"?

The budget is created by the House. The Senate then votes on what is passed in the House. They are under no obligation to create a budget, though they may.

Here's a hint for the uninformed (since you're keen at tossing insults around today).. Until the right agrees to close tax loopholes and gets rid of bush's tax cuts and addresses military spending. you're not going to get a deal. no matter what "agreement" they signed for grover norquist.

the arrogance of thinking the middle class should bear the brunt of the last admin's stupidity is awe-inspring.

The only way Republicans could be cornered into voting on Ryan's plan was to agree to vote on a budget Obama submitted months ago. It wasn't about Obama's budget. It was about getting Republicans on record as wanting to destroy Medicare. It worked.

Ryan's plan is now the "Republican's Plan". Stop calling it "Ryan's Plan". Call it, The Republican Plan, which is what it is.

I think we should call it Clinton's plan since he supports it.

 

[Trajan]

So now Republicans are all on the record for wanting to kill Medicare


Suckers

I am under 55, they have my blessing to re-structure it, cause it won't be there when I need it at this rate, well, let me back up, it won't be there though I am planning to not have to count on the gubermint, in any case, becasue you know, as an INDIVIDUAL, at the end of the day, I get what I pay for, or plan for.....you? well have a great old age, that hip surgery you'll need in 2020 ? good luck on that.

Ditto. If they don't restructure it, the programs will be insolvent by the time I retire, so I'd rather see them fixed now, even if I means tested out or receive far less than the current (empty) promises.

I assumed I'd never see a dime of SS since I got my first real job and "did the math" on the demographic trends...and have planned, saved, and invested ever since. I'd prefer that the government not destroy private health care so there are no choices left when I retire.

Absolutely. When I sat for the first time with our financial planner 20 years ago, he told us, count on nothing from the gov. and plan accordingly. We did and do.

We have 2 medical ins. policies we pay into, one for home care and one for catastrophic old age coverage aside from her employer based medical savings plan.

Now, even with my union retirement coverage I still pay it.
The rest the house, savings to fund our living expenses and trips etc.

Of course in some feeble minds this means we deserve to not have access to what we have paid in for so far or for the balance of our working loves because, well, we planned to well and won’t need the gov., so they will make it so, because they need it, because, they were to weak and bedazzled not to.

We won’t be left adrift, Ryans plan will means test, fine by me. I think it blows buts it’s the reality, same for SS…….Those that count on gov.? They will get exactly what they deserve, a 7 week wait time, drinking water from the vases in their hospital room and kibbles and bits.

 

[Trajan]

i'm far from "ill-informed".

i tried to look at his link. it was timed out and i asked him for another

If there's no 2012 budget plan, then how did they vote on "obama's plan" yesterday?

if they didn't deal with the "deficit", then what are you alleging they voted on yesterday other than ryan's bill"?

The budget is created by the House. The Senate then votes on what is passed in the House. They are under no obligation to create a budget, though they may.

Here's a hint for the uninformed (since you're keen at tossing insults around today).. Until the right agrees to close tax loopholes and gets rid of bush's tax cuts and addresses military spending. you're not going to get a deal. no matter what "agreement" they signed for grover norquist.

the arrogance of thinking the middle class should bear the brunt of the last admin's stupidity is awe-inspring.

The only way Republicans could be cornered into voting on Ryan's plan was to agree to vote on a budget Obama submitted months ago. It wasn't about Obama's budget. It was about getting Republicans on record as wanting to destroy Medicare. It worked.

Ryan's plan is now the "Republican's Plan". Stop calling it "Ryan's Plan". Call it, The Republican Plan, which is what it is.

I think we should call it Clinton's plan since he supports it.

what Jillian doesn't realize becasue she is so well informed is, its impossible for the gov. NOT TO raise taxs on the middle class, it will happen, but somehow in Unicorn Universe, they will be exempt from paying their share of Obamas deficit spending becasue, well thats the way the progressive mind works.