Wonder if the Tea Partiers will condemn their reps?

[Guns Guns Guns]

Convening shortly after the midnight deadline had passed, the House of Representatives voted 348 to 70 for a stopgap spending plan to keep the government running through Thursday. It earlier passed the Senate on a voice vote. President Barack Obama was expected to sign it early Saturday.​

​

There was little dissent among GOP House lawmakers. Though they were elected in November on a "Pledge to America" to cut even more spending, they privately urged Republican leaders to take the deal.​

A shutdown, many concluded, would be highly unpopular - a point that polls reinforced.​

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/04/09/2158612/lawmakers-strike-last-minute-deal.html#ixzz1J0u5Uq5k​

​

Under the deal, the GOP won budget cuts of $39 billion for the remaining six months of the fiscal year, far more than either party had expected a few months ago. Democrats managed to hold off Republican demands to strip funding for the new health-care law and for a range of other Democratic priorities. GOP provisions to cut all federal funding to Planned Parenthood of America and National Public Radio also were dropped.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704503104576250541381308346.html
​

​

​

​

If [House Speaker John Boehner] agrees to less than $61 billion in cuts, then the GOP will have broken their campaign promise,” said Debbie Dooley, a national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, an umbrella group for the movement. “If they fold on this, then they will fold on the debt ceiling and they will fold on budget 2012. Why should we trust them further to keep their promises?”​

“It’s just kind of depressing; how are they ever going to get anything done when they can’t get past this small hurdle,” said Colleen Owens, a 48-year-old stay-at-home mother and a leader of the Richmond Tea Party in Virginia. “How are they ever going to really tackle and handle the future spending if they can’t get past this?”​

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/04/08/tea-party-to-gop-dont-fold/​

 

[DamnYankee]

Typical of the GOP to compromise to the least conservative option. They used a nail clipper on a budget that need an ax, or better yet, a chain saw. What pussies.

 

[Annie]

The GOP did what they could now, without the problems that would come with a shutdown and got MORE than what they thought. More importantly, the conversation changed from whether to cut, to where to cut:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/264308/boehner-wins-big-andrew-stiles

Boehner Wins Big
By Andrew Stiles
Posted on April 09, 2011 2:21 AM

President Obama’s 2011 budget called for a spending increase of $40 billion. Tonight, he touted a bipartisan agreement on “the largest annual spending cut in our history” — some $38.5 billion [emphasis added]. All told, he got $78.5 billion less than he originally requested.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) didn’t want to cut anything at first. But bowing to political reality, eventually ponied up about $4.7 billion in cuts. He ended up with $33.8 billion less spending than he wanted. And he called it an “historic” accomplishment. (Not surprisingly, the left is appalled).

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio), on the other hand, initially proposed $32 billion in spending cuts. House Republicans, led by an undaunted freshman class, bumped that number up to $61 billion ($100 billion off the president’s budget), before settling on $38.5 billion. That’s $6.5 billion more than Boehner asked for to begin with, and $5.5 billion more than the $33 billion that Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Democrats claimed had been agreed to less than two weeks ago. It remains to be seen how much of that will be cuts to discretionary spending, but all told it would appear that we’'ll see a substantial reduction in baseline spending that will yield hundreds of billions in savings over the next decade.

But unlike Obama and Reid, the speaker didn’t quite feel the need to pat himself on the back over it. “We fought to keep government spending down,” he told reporters in a brief speech after the deal was announced. And they’ll keep fighting, because the biggest battles — over the debt limit and the 2012 budget — are still to come...

Now if you want more conservatives, elect them. However, putting out people like Trump, Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Gingrich or Ron Paul is not going to win elections. Paul Ryan? Sure. Cantor? Yep. Roskum to Senate? Yep, though unlikely in IL.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

First, Republican candidates for office last November pledged $100 billion cuts off currently projected spending for this fiscal year, FY2011.
Cooler heads, and objective reality, prevailed and the GOP scaled back to a $50m billion cut.

That step backwards was challenged vigorously by pledges of even larger cuts by various GOP House members–Michele Bachmann’s $450 billion; the House Republican Policy Committee’s $2.5 trillion reduction recommendations; the declaration by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers’ that his committee will find “the largest series of spending cuts in the history of Congress;” and other statements equally as bold.

Note my use of the word “statements.” As political statements, the verbiage passes the rhetorical test. As policy recommendations, the ideas fail the reality test.

Most interesting, the most detailed real policy initiative remains that of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan. Almost none of his colleagues have supported Ryan just because, in large part, it is specific and meets the debt/fiscal reality test.

Republicans risk over-promising and drastically under-achieving. Simple arithmetic condemns most of the $100 billion and “back to FY08″ ideas.

Without wanting to be a curmudgeon on the subject, I still fall back on simple numbers.

The United States will spend approximately $450 billion on “non-security” discretionary spending programs in the fiscal we now occupy–FY11. We are about 4 months into the fiscal year. In the 8 months remaining, then, a linear approach gives us about $300 billion remaining to be spent from already appropriated funds for these discretionary domestic programs.

Thus, the pledge to find $100 billion in cuts, or to return to FY08 levels, means a reduction of one-third of all remaining spending in the targeted programs.

To find $100 billion in outlays (after all, it is outlays compared to revenues that gives us deficits), I estimate that one would have to really cut about 50 per cent of all remaining monies. This begins to be technical, so you have to trust me here–most members of the House and Senate have no idea that outlays (spending) by agencies in any given fiscal year varies dramatically from new appropriations annually. That is a problem of immense proportions.

When I tried to explain this to my friend–a graduate of Brown University with his Ph.D. from Cambridge–he asked me to stop after about 10 minutes. It made his head hurt and it made no sense.

Bottom line–if you want to cut $100 billion from spending in FY11, you will have to start with immediate furloughs of hundreds of thousands of government workers, stop paying the government’s share of the TSP savings programs, close down most government funded operations, and stop most of the research grants the U.S. funds.

It can be done. But if it is done, President Obama and the Democratic Party will have been given one of the great electoral gifts of all time.

Just imagine the head of a local hospital, funded in part by federal monies, who headed up the finance team for one of the new House Republicans, calling that Member and saying, “Holy Cow, do you know that you have just closed down part of the cancer wing here.”

All of this rhetoric, perfectly unnecessary if the GOP would endorse the Ryan Plan or a sub-set of it and move ahead with it.

But, that, too presents political dangers.

Welcome of Washington, fellas.

http://www.frumforum.com/how-serious-are-the-gops-budget-cuts
​

 

[PostmodernProphet]

We are about 4 months into the fiscal year. In the 8 months remaining, then, a linear approach gives us about $300 billion remaining to be spent from already appropriated funds for these discretionary domestic programs.

May, June, July, August, September.......8?

In any event, on Monday they can start work on the 2012 budget.....

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

May, June, July, August, September.......8?

In any event, on Monday they can start work on the 2012 budget.....

You really are as stupid as you seem, aren't you?

Had you read the linked article, dumbass, you would have seen the date: January 20th, 2011. Here it is, again, moron.

http://www.frumforum.com/how-serious-are-the-gops-budget-cuts

I made it bigger so you wouldn't miss it this time - unless you're actually too fucking stupid to read before you post.

If you knew as much as you pretend to know about politics, retard, you'd know the federal fiscal year runs from October 1 of the prior year through September 30 of the next year.

Hence, January is month 4, numbnuts. You can count, can't you?

Jesus, you're thick.

​

 

[PostmodernProphet]

You really are as stupid as you seem, aren't you?

Had you read the linked article, dumbass, you would have seen the date: January 20th, 2011. Here it is, again, moron.

http://www.frumforum.com/how-serious-are-the-gops-budget-cuts

I made it bigger so you wouldn't miss it this time - unless you're actually too fucking stupid to read before you post.

If you knew as much as you pretend to know about politics, retard, you'd know the federal fiscal year runs from October 1 of the prior year through September 30 of the next year.

Hence, January is month 4, numbnuts. You can count, can't you?

Jesus, you're thick.

View attachment 1193​

Do you always look like an idiot when you post or is just when you respond to me.....perhaps in the future, when discussing what happened yesterday, you should use news reports of what happened yesterday....

I might also suggest that the next time you quote something someone else said you don't make it look like you were the one who thought it up......it appears the only thing you deleted was "Steve Bell, Visiting Scholar at the Bipartisan Policy Center:"

 

[Rationalist]

I don't blame Republicans. Considering they control only 1/3rd of the government, and that our fine President would veto any continuation of military funding, there is little else they could do. I'm happy with these cuts until we can kick the Democrats' sorry asses out of the Senate and humble that arrogant prick in the White House.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Do you always look like an idiot when you post or is just when you respond to me.....perhaps in the future, when discussing what happened yesterday, you should use news reports of what happened yesterday....

I might also suggest that the next time you quote something someone else said you don't make it look like you were the one who thought it up......it appears the only thing you deleted was "Steve Bell, Visiting Scholar at the Bipartisan Policy Center:"

You stayed up late all by yourself to draft that witty retort, did you, retard?

​

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

I don't blame Republicans. Considering they control only 1/3rd of the government, and that our fine President would veto any continuation of military funding, there is little else they could do. I'm happy with these cuts until we can kick the Democrats' sorry asses out of the Senate and humble that arrogant prick in the White House.

The Tea Party is steamed over DC's budget deal.
While President Obama, Senate majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) hailed Friday night's eleventh hour accord to avoid a government shutdown as "historic," several Tea Party members did not feel the same way.

Tea Party darling Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) called the $39-billion slashing deal a "disappointment."

Millions of Americans expected $100 billion in cuts and "wanted to make sure their tax dollars stopped flowing to the nation's largest abortion provider, and who wanted us to defund ObamaCare," Bachmann said in a statement.

"Instead, we've been asked to settle for $39 billion in cuts, even as we continue to fund Planned Parenthood and the implementation of ObamaCare.'

Bachmann, who is considering running for President in 2012, voted against a temporary bill to keep the government running while the deal moves through Congress.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) echoed Bachmann's sentiments.

The stopgap measure does "not set us on a path to fixing the spending and debt problems our country is facing. There is not much of a difference between a $1.5 trillion deficit and a $1.6 trillion deficit-both will lead us to a debt crisis that we may not recover from," said Rand.

The $39 billion in cuts for the rest of the fiscal year was far more than Democrats originally wanted to concede, but not nearly enough to satisfy the appetite for budget-slashing among Tea-Party backed Republicans, who had called for axing $61 billion.

The deal spared Planned Parenthood and environmental regulation riders the GOP had been pushing for.

Reid had repeatedly blamed the Tea Party for the breakdown in budget negotiations, placing Boehner in a sticky situation to make a deal with the Democrats and satisfy those in his own ranks, including Tea Partiers.

The deal is still tentative, and Congress passed a one-week stopgap budget to put the bill in legislative form.

"It doesn't go far enough or fast enough for me, based on what we've seen so far," Tea Party backed-freshman Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) told Politico. I don't like the number that I'm hearing".

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/04/09/2011-04-09_tea_party_members_michele_bachmann_rand_paul_blast_budget_deal_as_john_boehner_c.html

Link enlarged for retard PMP