Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

      
Post Reply 
President's Budget 2012
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Crewdogz Offline
I'm Your Huckleberry
*

Posts: 8,867
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 262
I Root For: America
Location:

Donators
Post: #1
President's Budget 2012
But we also need to be honest. You can’t pass a budget in the Senate of the United States without 60 votes and you can’t get 60 votes without bipartisan support. So unless Republicans are willing to work with Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid is not going to be able to get a budget passed. And I think he was reflecting the reality of that that could be a challenge.”

--White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew, on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Feb. 12. 2012

You only need a majority 50 + 1, the current Budget Director of the United States doesnt know this; or more partisanship..?
 
02-13-2012 09:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Crewdogz Offline
I'm Your Huckleberry
*

Posts: 8,867
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 262
I Root For: America
Location:

Donators
Post: #2
RE: President's Budget 2012
Washington Post Article:

Quote: Newly-named White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was not only recently budget director for President Obama; he was also the budget director for former President Bill Clinton. So when he speaks about the budget process, you would think he speaks with authority.

That’s why his comment on CNN jumped out at us. He also said something similar on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” when asked about the number of days since Senate Democrats passed a budget plan. (1,019). Lew’s response: “One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something.”

Given that President Obama unveils his budget on Monday—and the congressional budget process is so complex—it seems like it is time for a refresher course. Let’s examine if Lew is being misleading here.



The Facts


The term “budget” is used rather loosely in Washington. The White House every year proposes a budget, but that document is at best a political statement and wish list, since none of those proposals will take effect unless Congress enacts them into law. The House and Senate every spring are supposed to pass a budget resolution, which also does not have the force of law but guides the amount of money available to the Appropriations Committees, in addition to setting parameters for tax and entitlement legislation.

The Appropriations Committees actually determine how much money each discretionary federal program will receive; that’s the source of real budget power.

But the congressional budget resolution can be important because of a process known as reconciliation. If language is included in the budget resolution that directs a Congressional committee to meet certain spending or tax targets, then the resulting bill cannot be subject to filibuster (ie, needing 60 votes to end debate) and can pass with only a majority vote. (For more information on the budget process, see this excellent primer by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.)

President George W. Bush used reconciliation to pass his tax cuts, and President Obama used reconciliation to pass amendments to the health care law. (Note: Republicans often say he used to reconciliation to pass health care, but technically, the health-care law was passed in the Senate with 60 votes, and then amendments were passed under reconciliation to placate House Democrats.) The Congressional Research Service also has a good primer on reconciliation.

The bottom line is that the budget resolution (i.e., the congressional “budget”) is a useful tool for passing laws and spending money, but it is not the only tool. While Senate Democrats did not pass a budget resolution for the 2011 fiscal year, Republicans also failed to pass budget resolutions that reconciled differences between the House and Senate in 1999, 2005 and 2007, when they controlled Congress, according to the Congressional Research Service. But money ultimately was still appropriated for government programs.

That said, Lew is completely wrong when he claims that 60 votes are needed to “pass a budget in the Senate.” As he well knows, 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.

You don’t even need 50 votes, just a simple majority. Here are a few of the recent close votes for the budget resolution, as listed by CRS: 48-45 (2009 budget); 51-49 (2006); 51-50 (2004); 50-48 (2001). Senate Democrats may have reasons for failing to pass a budget plan—such as wanting to avoid casting politically inconvenient votes—but a GOP filibuster is not one of them.

Asked for an explanation of Lew’s remarks, a White House official said: “The Chief of Staff was clearly referencing the general gridlock in Congress that makes accomplishing even the most basic tasks nearly impossible given the Senate Republicans’ insistence on blocking an up or down vote on nearly every issue.”



The Pinocchio Test


We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the “need to be honest.”

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.

We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact..._blog.html
 
02-13-2012 09:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Billy_Bearcat Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,859
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 401
I Root For: UC Bearcats
Location:

Donators
Post: #3
RE: President's Budget 2012
You can say whatever you want as long as you say it with conviction and have a D behind your name. You will never be challenged by mainstream media outlets. Just look at Biden's debate in 2008.
 
02-14-2012 08:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Crewdogz Offline
I'm Your Huckleberry
*

Posts: 8,867
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 262
I Root For: America
Location:

Donators
Post: #4
RE: President's Budget 2012
Quote: On Monday, President Barack Obama released a budget proposal that has a lot in common with the one he presented last year. Despite raising taxes on wealthier Americans, it projects a deficit of more than $1.3 trillion. As such, it re-confirms his utter failure to back up tough talk about spending restraint with the tough calls required to achieve it.

Reprising a familiar theme, President Obama delivered what a Washington Post news story aptly described Tuesday as “an unusually partisan budget message to Congress.” Contrasting his approach with that of the Republican opposition, he said his budget plan “rejects the ‘you’re on your own’ economics that have led to a widening gap between the richest and poorest Americans.”

But last year, a similar presidential budget was rejected not just by the Republican-controlled House but by the Democratic-controlled Senate, which voted it down unanimously (97-0). This budget also has no chance of getting through Congress.

Instead, in this election year, the president has opted to ramp up his class-warfare campaign. The president wants to eliminate the Bush-era tax cuts on incomes of more than $250,000, in effect raising those taxes. That would be a damper on small businesses’ contribution to economic and job growth.

In contrast, the budget’s $3.5 million for a study on deepening Charleston Harbor would be an efficient use of federal money, enhancing America’s competitive role in global commerce. While the president’s budget is dead on arrival in Congress, the modest harbor allocation improves its chances of funding when a final budget is approved.

Unfortunately, the White House plan would double capital-gains and dividend taxes from 15 to 30 percent. That would undermine the incentive for capital investment, another indispensable fuel for job growth.

But even if you accept the administration’s rosy projections about how much money those tax hikes would produce, they would still amount to a mere drop in the budget-gap bucket.

The president’s plan did draw muted praise from his “fiscal responsibility and reform” commission’s co-chairs — former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, a Republican, and former Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles, a Democrat. Still, they sounded less than enthusiastic about a plan that falls far short of the goals their panel set in 2010.

From their joint statement: “While the President’s proposal is a step in the right direction, it would achieve less deficit reduction than the Fiscal Commission proposed when compared on an equal basis and would only briefly stabilize the debt at a level that is already too high.”

That record national debt, $15.37 trillion as of Tuesday, will keep climbing at an alarming rate until difficult decisions are made.

Simply put, the overall White House budget doesn’t improve the chances of restoring America’s fiscal stability. President Obama is now three-for-three in presiding over the largest deficits in U.S. history, with his smallest one more than doubling the previous record. His new plan would make him four-for-four.

And while the president and fellow Democrats have taken the lead in the continuing, reckless federal spending spree, Republicans have been ducking hard budget choices, too. For instance, GOP House leaders predictably backed down Monday from their insistence on offsetting spending cuts and signaled their willingness to go along with a full year’s extension of the Social Security payroll tax cut. That reduction will further lower the funding for a system that’s already in serious financial trouble.

Medicare is in even worse shape. Yet the White House budget again steers clear of long-overdue entitlement reform.

In fairness, the president inherited an economic mess three years ago. And he and other politicians from both parties aren’t the only Americans who have refused to face bottom-line reality.

Ultimately, the U.S. public must demand courageous leadership from elected officials to put our nation back on a responsible budgetary course.

Otherwise, we’ll stay on the downward path to fiscal oblivion.

EDIT : to add link http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2012/...ing-spree/
 
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2012 12:34 PM by Crewdogz.)
02-15-2012 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearChatter v2.0 Offline
Rounding Third and headed...
Jersey Retired

Posts: 8,548
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 62
I Root For: Da Bearcats!
Location: Blue Ash
Post: #5
RE: President's Budget 2012
Quote:President' 2012 budget.

He has one?
 
02-16-2012 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.