Thiebear Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 http://thehill.com/homenews/house/194023-blue-dogs-break-with-dems-endorse-balanced-budget-amendment%20 Blue Dogs break with Dems on balanced-budget amendment By Russell Berman - 11/16/11 02:22 PM ET The conservative Blue Dog Democrat coalition officially endorsed the House Republican balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution, breaking with Democratic Party leaders and the White House. The support from the 25-member bloc keeps GOP hopes alive that the measure, scheduled for a final vote Friday, could gain the two-thirds support necessary to pass. add that to this: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/194055-hensarling-says-gop-is-willing-to-consider-new-dem-tax-proposals Hensarling says GOP is willing to consider new Dem tax proposals By Russell Berman - 11/16/11 03:27 PM ET The Republican co-chairman of the deficit-reduction supercommittee on Wednesday indicated he and his party were willing to listen to proposals from Democrats to consider higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) walked back a statement he made Tuesday on television, when he said Republicans “have gone as far as we feel we can go” by offering to raise $250 billion in new tax revenues. And you have hope they can still fix things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 I'm sure it'll fall one vote shy, or something pointless and stupid like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 I'm sure it'll fall one vote shy, or something pointless and stupid like that Pretty much. An actual balanced budget amendment is a horrible idea, and everyone in the leadership of both sides knows it, but it is a great political slogan, and everyone knows that too. So, the Blue Dogs are doing what they need to do to keep themselves electable and not get hit with a cheap talking point when they run against a GOP candidate in the fall, and the Democratic leadership has no problem with letting them do it because they know that the whole thing is going to be carefully orchestrated to be dead in the water when the time comes to vote. Business as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Pretty much. An actual balanced budget amendment is a horrible idea, and everyone in the leadership of both sides knows it, but it is a great political slogan, and everyone knows that too. So, the Blue Dogs are doing what they need to do to keep themselves electable and not get hit with a cheap talking point when they run against a GOP candidate in the fall, and the Democratic leadership has no problem with letting them do it because they know that the whole thing is going to be carefully orchestrated to be dead in the water when the time comes to vote. Business as usual. Agree with you. To me, if the thing actually passes, then every single person who voted for it should be impeached, if not tried for treason. Sonce the only possible reason for voting for it are insanity, or a willingness to use Constitutional Amendments as political publicity stunts, and hopes that somebody else will put country before politics and prevent my show vote from actually becoming law. Although, given that, I could certainly see THIS Congress passing the thing, secure in their faith that the Senate won't pass it, so what the heck, our votes will just be for show, and somebody else will actually be grown up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Agree with you. To me, if the thing actually passes, then every single person who voted for it should be impeached, if not tried for treason. Sonce the only possible reason for voting for it are insanity, or a willingness to use Constitutional Amendments as political publicity stunts, and hopes that somebody else will put country before politics and prevent my show vote from actually becoming law. Although, given that, I could certainly see THIS Congress passing the thing, secure in their faith that the Senate won't pass it, so what the heck, our votes will just be for show, and somebody else will actually be grown up. Quick question: Do you mean that you think it's a crazy idea in our current circumstances, or do you think that it's always, no matter what, a crazy idea? Because we didn't exactly have debt problems for most of our history, and we seemed to do pretty damn well (except for wars, but a BBA would contain special clauses for wars). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted November 17, 2011 Author Share Posted November 17, 2011 I would rather work towards and balanced budget agreement. IF there is a emergency we could start with an emergency fund until its dry. And then budget the war out from there vs. what Bush did. We can all agree that Whats been done in trickery is not what we want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Pretty much. An actual balanced budget amendment is a horrible idea, and everyone in the leadership of both sides knows it, but it is a great political slogan, and everyone knows that too. So, the Blue Dogs are doing what they need to do to keep themselves electable and not get hit with a cheap talking point when they run against a GOP candidate in the fall, and the Democratic leadership has no problem with letting them do it because they know that the whole thing is going to be carefully orchestrated to be dead in the water when the time comes to vote. Business as usual. Why do you think a balanced budget amendment is crazy? I'm not saying I endorse the idea, I just want to hear your reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 I think it's too absolute. There ARE circumstances where it would not only be okay to run a deficit, it would be the best thing. War would be the first thing I could think of. Federal Govt isnt a State which can operate with such a requirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 But there are exceptions built into them for such events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Why do you think a balanced budget amendment is crazy? I'm not saying I endorse the idea, I just want to hear your reasoning. There are two possible things that can happen, if there's a balanced budget amendment. One is that we can balance the budget. All who think that that's going to happen any time soon, are requested to explain, in detail, their plan for how to take this chart, and make both sides the same size. Quickly. And in a way which can actually be passed by our existing government and voters. Or, if the budget isn't balanced, then what the amendment does is to make it vastly easier for a small group of politicians to prevent any budget from being passed, at all. All who think that that is a good idea, are invited to move to California for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 But there are exceptions built into them for such events. Then that's an even bigger nightmare. As time goes on, more and more "exceptions" will be added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Then that's an even bigger nightmare. As time goes on, more and more "exceptions" will be added. The nightmare has already been here, the lack of a BBA is just a symptom. It is not a solution,but the rejection simply demonstrates the extent of the infection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Thanks for the response. There are two possible things that can happen, if there's a balanced budget amendment. One is that we can balance the budget. All who think that that's going to happen any time soon, are requested to explain, in detail, their plan for how to take this chart, and make both sides the same size. Quickly. And in a way which can actually be passed by our existing government and voters. First things first, define what "Other" is. One would think that "Other" would reside in discretionary spending, and not mandatory. Second, it is obvious that entitlement spending needs to be reduced, while receipts need to be increased. Popeman's solution to raising tax receipts (will get grilled by both sides, so I think it is good): - Tax Brackets 10% Bracket becomes 13% married, 15% single 15% Bracket becomes 18% married, 20% single 25% Bracket becomes 30% married, 32% single 28% Bracket becomes 35% married, 38% single 33% Bracket becomes 40% married, 45% single 35% Bracket becomes 50% (threshold raises from $380K to $750K) married, 60% single - Grandfather in reducing (possibly eliminating) the mortgage deduction - Capital gains tax matches the tax brackets, period Now, on to entitlements: - Raise SS eligibility age to 70 - Grandfather in reduced benefits (safety net, not a retirement) - Eliminate increases to benefits for current recipients - Eliminate SS payments to Fed Govt retirees (the ones pulling in 100%, like my GD who is ROLLING in retirement - SS, DoI retirement(20years), AF Retirement(20years); he makes more in retirement than he ever made actually working!) - Reduce eligibility to prevent the rich from partaking On to cuts: - DOD budget reduced by 50% - DHS eliminated - Cut foreign aide 50-75% (I know its trivial, but its the principle) Flame away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 The nightmare has already been here, the lack of a BBA is just a symptom.It is not a solution,but the rejection simply demonstrates the extent of the infection If it isn't a solution, then it should be rejected. No doubt there should be better responsibility in spending the public's money, but if it hurts the ability for the government to do their job, it is a bad idea. Problem is, neither side want to seriously talk about doing what is needed and is playing politics. The BBA is just another talking point that will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Is there a link to the complete text of the proposed amendment? also, what vehicle would be used to amend the constitution? Its not like passing a law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted November 17, 2011 Author Share Posted November 17, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html Like has been said in the past: The Super Committe should be required to take the above test: Consolidate the results and implement the top 10 commonly picked items. my 10: Bank Tax National sales tax Eliminate loopholes, but keep taxes slightly higher Raise the Social Security retirement age to 72 Cap Medicare growth starting in 2013 Increase the Medicare eligibility age to 72 Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Europe/SK/Phillipines. Reduce Social Security benefits for those with high incomes Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels Eliminate earmarks ***PayGo with teeth*** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.