Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
A post on a bipartisan bill, who's effectiveness is unknown but is amazingly low cost at this point at least?
Sounds good on paper, you provided no information on how it plans to do this, so basically this is a troll post.
BTW you like to claim that your bosses are more fiscally responsible, so I look forward to you posting about spending cuts in the near future.
|
In response to you (and Baraka's post asking why this hasnt been done in the past).
It has been done successfully in the past but was sunsetted (a common legislative practice) so that it doesnt become a permanent program without the opportunity for periodic review its effectiveness. Republican leaders in the House (not Republican backbenchers) have blocked this version for the last seven years.
Oh..and Democratic members of Congress are not my bosses. Under the best scenario, I (and the voters) am their boss.
But with Republican filibuster threats of appropriation bills in the Senate, and Bush threats of vetoes, the 09 appropriation (spending) bills,
based on Bush's record $3.1 trillion budget request, now being debated will not be Democratic bills.
Actually, both the House and Senate passed $3 trillion budget frameworks (used as a guideline for the 13 appropriation bills that actually make up the budget), comparable to Bush's. The difference is that they want to pay for it by proposing an end to Bush's "temporary" 2001-2003 tax cuts for the top 2%....its called pay-as-you-go (paygo), a concept totally foreign to Republicans in the last seven years:
Quote:
Democrats in Congress have passed similar $3 trillion election-year budget plans that promise spending increases for education, defense and other popular programs, but many of President Bush's tax cuts would have to expire in order to pay for them.
The Senate passed its budget early Friday by a 51 to 44 vote. The House passed its plan 212 to 207. A final version will emerge after talks to iron out differences over taxes and other issues.
The three presidential candidates returned to Washington to cast votes on the budget. Republicans backing John McCain hope to take political advantage of votes cast by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton against tax cuts as the heated presidential campaign goes on.
|
I agree that both parties are big spenders. The difference is Democrats want to pay-as-you-go....with every new spending proposal, they propose an offset (spending less on something else or ending temporary tax cuts)...
...and the Republicans want to just keep spending and pass the cost on to your kids.
Which approach do you think is more fiscally responsible?