Five Blue Dog Democrats joined House Republicans in backing a conservative plan to condition a $2.4 trillion increase in the debt limit with immediate spending cuts, an annual cap on spending and a strict balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
Reps. Heath Shuler (N.C.), Dan Boren (Okla.) Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike McIntyre (N.C.) and Jim Cooper (Tenn.) all voted for the GOP “cut, cap and balance” plan that passed the House Tuesday on a vote of 234-190. The support from Democrats was a surprise, one GOP leadership aide said. Most Democrats railed against the GOP plan as a “radical” attempt to enact deep spending cuts and reforms that would threaten entitlement programs.
Cooper, also a member of the New Democrat coalition, signed a letter Tuesday endorsing the Senate’s “Gang of Six” plan, which includes $3.7 trillion in budget savings and is likely to draw more support from Democrats.
The bill didn’t get complete republican support. Nine ‘Pubs voted against Cut, Cap and Balance.
GOP presidential candidates Reps. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Ron Paul (Tex.) were among the nine House Republicans to vote no. The others were Reps. Paul Broun (Ga.), Quico Canseco (Tex.), Scott DesJarlais (Tenn.), Morgan Griffith (Va.), Connie Mack (Fla.), Walter Jones (N.C) and Dana Rohrabacher (Calif.).
Michele Bachmann said she voted against the bill because it didn’t include a repeal of Obamacare. I can understand that. There were already sufficient votes to insure passage and she is able to maintain her position against Obamacare. I can understand why, I don’t agree with her. I think she’d get more mileage supporting the Constitutional amendment.
Ron Paul’s reasoning is a bit different. He continues his efforts to cut defense in order to force the US back into isolationism.
Rep. Ron Paul said he voted against the bill because it only serves to sanction the status quo by putting forth a $1 trillion budget deficit and authorizing a $2.4 trillion increase in the debt limit.
Paul said it’s “impossible” to eventually balance the budget without cutting military spending, Social Security or Medicare.
“These three budget items already cost nearly $1 trillion apiece annually,” he noted. “This means we can cut every other area of federal spending to zero and still have a $3 trillion budget. Since annual federal tax revenues almost certainly will not exceed $2.5 trillion for several years, this Act cannot balance the budget under any plausible scenario,” Paul said.
I maintain my position that Ron Paul is unfit to hold any national office. If he had been President in the years leading to WW2, Europe would still be under Nazi control. Paul has yet to understand that National Defense is best when it’s performed over there rather than over here.
As the news of the passage of Cut, Cap and Balance spread, there came an announcement by Obama about a deal among the Senate’s Gang of Six. That group consists of Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).
Supposedly it contains $3.6/3.7 Trillion in cuts over ten years, cuts to be determined at some unspecified time, with $1 Trillion immediate new tax increases—uhhh, new revenue. In short, it reinstates Obama’s 2011 budget plan. A plan that didn’t get ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT VOTE!
The Gang of Six planunveiled to senators on Tuesday punts on key details, including exactly how it would reform Social Security and Medicare, according to a detailed outline obtained by The Hill.
The plan adopts a two-track approach: a $500 billion down payment and a later reform bill generating an additional $3.2 trillion in deficit reduction. That later bill is largely left up to committees of jurisdiction, and they are only required to meet specific savings targets.
So the cuts, instead of being specified, would be left to the discretion of some later committee.
We can believe that just like there were $38 Billion in cuts in the last funding CR. Those cuts turned out later to be only $343 Million, not Billions. Whenever a democrat is involved, you can be sure the basis of any agreement is a lie and a fraud.
Getting back to Cut, Cap and Balance. I have one disagreement with it. The Constitutional Amendment should have been separate. The President has no vote in the passage of an Amendment—only the two houses of Congress and 2/3rd of the states. With the Amendment embedded in the bill, Obama can, as he’s already stated, veto it.
Neither plan has any hope of passage. Harry Reid won’t let Cut, Cap and Balance pass in the Senate. The House ‘Pubs won’t pass the non-plan from the Gang of Six.
The best option that I can see for any increase in the debt limit is a one-for-one deal. That would be for every Dollar of increase in the debt limit there would be one Dollar of REAL spending cuts. Real cuts. Not some unspecified, nebulous item that doesn’t really exist. Defunding Obamacare and Dodd-Frank would be a good start.
As far as reaching any agreement by Obama’s August 2nd deadline? Ain’t gonna happen. Unhappy Birthday, Obama.