Republicans pull spending cut bill

Status
Not open for further replies.

rick_reno

member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
3,027
And they wonder why we call them RINO's.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/10/house.budget/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Republican leaders abruptly called off a vote Thursday on a bill that would trim $50 billion in spending after moderate Republicans resisted cuts to a range of social programs, including Medicaid, student loans and food stamps.

House Majority Leader Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, acknowledged the leadership team was "not quite where we need to be to go to the floor." He said the vote was postponed because representatives needed to get back to their districts for Veterans Day events.

Blunt said he needed to do some work getting members "more comfortable" with the bill, and he said he would bring the measure back for a vote next week.

The unusual debate was the first big test for the House Republican leadership since Rep. Tom DeLay was required by congressional rules to step down as majority leader in September following his indictment in Texas on money laundering and conspiracy charges. He has pleaded not guilty.

Late Wednesday night, House leaders -- bowing to objections from two dozen moderate Republicans -- dropped a provision in the bill that would have allowed oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The concession was a blow to President Bush, who has been urging Congress to open ANWR as part of an effort to develop more domestic energy sources. However, the Senate has included ANWR exploration in its version of the budget bill, which means it could be revived when the two versions are reconciled by a conference committee.

One of the GOP moderates, Rep. Mike Castle, R-Delaware, said the move to strip ANWR out of the bill was significant, but he said it was not enough to garner support from House members concerned with the level of spending cuts. He said he remained undecided on whether to vote for the measure at the time it was pulled.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said Democrats made the bill "too hot to handle" for Republicans, and she called the cuts "anti-family, anti-taxpayer and anti-American."

"By having to pull it today, it is a failure on the part of the Republicans," she said.

Blunt downplayed the idea that the decision could prompt questions about his leadership abilities, saying, "It's pretty easy to criticize leadership."

Though no longer an official member of the House leadership, DeLay was involved throughout the day in meetings to secure votes, and he appeared with the leadership team when they announced they were postponing the vote.

DeLay described his role to reporters as "advising the speaker and the leadership. I worked the votes, did it all."

He blamed Democrats for refusing to work across party lines, charging that "if it weren't for the political scheming of the Democratic leadership, there would be Democrats who would be excited for voting for this bill."

The budget bill passed by the Senate last week had $35 billion in spending cuts, as opposed to $50 billion in the House version.
 
And this should make us all realize that the "red tide" of conservatism many thought they saw in '00 and '04 is about six inches deep. A lot of the GOP might as well be Democrats.
 
A lot of the GOP might as well be Democrats.
Yep. And if the Dems had not moved to such a radical left agenda, they would be.

There are limitations ( and downsides) to the GOP being such a "big tent." You can build a "big tent" much bigger than a smaller, strong concrete structure, but when the winds blow... The GOP tent has moved so far left that the base on the right is uncovered. The Dem philosophy seems to have been to not try to cover everybody with a tent. Leave them exposed so that they will be dependent on government for help.
 
Republicans win when they run on and govern on solid conservative principals.

When they behave like luke-warm socialist wannabees, they lose.

Be prepared for a Democratic landslide in '06 and '08.

Late Wednesday night, House leaders -- bowing to objections from two dozen moderate Republicans -- dropped a provision in the bill that would have allowed oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

And this one day after screamin to the heavens about how awful high gas prices are. I would puke, but they aren't worth the effort.:mad:
 
Congress is gonna put a ferry out of business in Alaska
to build a bridge to an island airport for the benefit of
fifty or sixty people at a cost of 223 million wallet wads.

George Orwell in 1984 has O'Brien the party official tell
Winston Smith the true nature of government is an iron
heel in the face of a man grinding away forever.
Naw. Its a groping hand in your backpocket digging for
the last dollar in your wallet for eternity.
 
Jeez, all they're trying to do is get reelected. Give 'em a break. Spending cuts are tough, especially when programs were cut or hard fought victories the first time through. This is only a time out, not a bill passage. The press can make negative, GOP bashing news out of the fact that Congress ran out of time before a holiday break. It figures.
 
I called my Senate Critters and Representatives

While I want spending cuts, I believe they are wanting to cut spending in the wrong areas. I work in the Medical field and we are having a hard enough time getting paid for our medicaid patients. If they cut it anymore we will not get paic at all. I don't like people living off my dime any more than you do but I told them when I called this is the last place we need to be cutting.
Start cutting all that pork. Sorry everyone but I just don't see this bill as the way to go.
 
Spinning it as a GOP defeat?

Hardly.

Looks like Pelosi's accomplicies in the press are spinning for her again.

:rolleyes:
 
I work in the Medical field and we are having a hard enough time getting paid for our medicaid patients. If they cut it anymore we will not get paic at all. I don't like people living off my dime any more than you do but I told them when I called this is the last place we need to be cutting.
Start cutting all that pork.

Trying to distinguish between their pork and your pork is like trying to distinguish between so-called "assault rifles" and ordinary hunting rifles.

Medicaid is just one more form of pork.
 
Trying to distinguish between their pork and your pork is like trying to distinguish between so-called "assault rifles" and ordinary hunting rifles.
+1 Standing Wolf. A fact that some of my friends STILL don't understand. I'm a BIG supporter of scientific research and conservation of natural resources*, and would LOVE to see both endeavors have more money than they know what to do with. So long as the money is not picked from the pocket of everybody else via our numerous governments. Pork is pork, even if its for cool stuff like stem cells or space exploration.


*Conservation as Teddy Roosevelt thought of it, not the "Handsoff kick out the humans" mindset so common today.
 
Problem is congressional goober are spending someone else's money and they just can't stiffle themselves. Maybe the trick is to make the money their money.

Proposal--beginning day certain each member of congress is given a salary of $1 million. Next year's salary is adjusted in the direction of the previous year's results. This year congress ends up with a deficit of 5%. Next year's salary is cut by 5%. Run a 10% surplus? Next years they get a raise of 10%. Let them gain and lose as a consequence of their own greed.

Actually, the best solution is to repeal the amendment that mandates direct election of senators and make state's reponsible for their reps.
 
Sindawe said:
Pork is pork, even if its for cool stuff like stem cells or space exploration.

I disagree. Scientific research solves problems and brings about new industries and prosperity (e.g. the very computer you typed your opinion on). As such, it is a wise investment in the future of our society, especially in the brave new world of economic globilization wherein we must strive even harder to maintain our competitive edge.

That edge is now solely dependent on fundamental and applied research and the related emerging technologies because labor is so much more expensive here than in India or China. If we cut the money for science, we will sell out our future to maintain an unsustainable addiction to politically motivated economically foolish social programs.

Thus what should be cut is things like the Alaskan bridge to nowhere, the Byrd highways, financial stimuli for breeding like bunnies, protracted support for the chronically unemployed, and

dare I say it, funding for medical care and prescription drugs. (puts fire suit on). Sorry, but if you cannot afford a drug, you won't have it. Why should I pay for medical care and drugs for somebody else? I pay medical insurance every month. So should others. You can't pay, you won't have it, just like anything else. Harsh? Well, life is. What has been happening now is drug companies jacking up the prices because of Uncle Sam's deep pockets and politically motivated idiocy. The drug companies will lower the prices only when they know people would not pay. Supply and demand. Otherwise the taxpayer is filling their pockets, and the system is increasingly obviously unsustainable.
 
CAnnoneer said:
dare I say it, funding for medical care and prescription drugs. (puts fire suit on). Sorry, but if you cannot afford a drug, you won't have it. Why should I pay for medical care and drugs for somebody else? I pay medical insurance every month. So should others. You can't pay, you won't have it, just like anything else. Harsh? Well, life is. What has been happening now is drug companies jacking up the prices because of Uncle Sam's deep pockets and politically motivated idiocy. The drug companies will lower the prices only when they know people would not pay. Supply and demand. Otherwise the taxpayer is filling their pockets, and the system is increasingly obviously unsustainable.

It is fairly easy to propose solutions when ignoring ideological constraints. What you get though is something so politically incorrect that it never gets seriously considered.
 
Last edited:
A couple of things to keep in mind here, and it all has to do with government and how they define things.

First, the spending "cuts" that we're talking about are probably nothing more than reductions in the rate of INCREASE for planned spending. This is a far cry from an absolute reduction in the amount spent in the prior year.

Secondly, Medicaid in Indiana offers sufficient benefits that some employers actually ENCOURAGE their employees to sign up for it. Also, don't forget that illegal aliens qualify for Medicaid, under federal guidelines. Yet, when I ask state legislators if they know how much of that welfare is spent on illegals, they don't know. Information I've gotten from someone who works for the agency indicates that roughly 10% of all Medicaid in our state goes to illegals. Given how much money the state spends on Medicaid, that is a huge chunk of money. Since federal money contributes to Medicaid, Congress would be the target to get the law changed so that we can get this flow of welfare shut off to people who have broken the law to get here.



FWIW,

emc
 
RealGun said:
It is fairly easy to propose solutions when ignoring ideological constraints. What you get though is something so politically incorrect that it never gets seriously considered.

So I have noticed. The reality check will occur the not-so-far-away day when foreigners stop buying our national debt and the spending merriment ceases.

Btw, PC=
1) socialist
2) leftist
3) shortsighted
4) impractical
5) in-denial
 
Standing Wolf said:
Medicaid is just one more form of pork.


Will it still be pork when you're old enough to be on it? Or, at THAT point, will you declare it to be a good thing because it benefits you?

It's really, really easy to suggest cutting the things that don't affect you. But going after that is basically taking an RPG shot at the bridge on the road yet ahead of you.

I also find it painfully ironic when 20-somethings and 30-somethings around me declare that no age discrimination protection is needed. What, do they think they're never going to be that old? I know I will be, and blowing up a path you HAVE to take seems pretty stupid.
 
Manedwolf said:
Will it still be pork when you're old enough to be on it? Or, at THAT point, will you declare it to be a good thing because it benefits you?

Clearly, it will still be pork. Socialists and other hypocrites will always answer "YES!" to your second question.
 
Manedwolf said:
Will it still be pork when you're old enough to be on it? Or, at THAT point, will you declare it to be a good thing because it benefits you?

I won't.

It's really, really easy to suggest cutting the things that don't affect you. But going after that is basically taking an RPG shot at the bridge on the road yet ahead of you.

So I am expected to condone an old person's hand deep in my pocket now, in the hopes that later my own hand can find its way in the pocket of somebody who is not born yet? No, thanks.

I also find it painfully ironic when 20-somethings and 30-somethings around me declare that no age discrimination protection is needed. What, do they think they're never going to be that old?

That is not the same. An old person takes your job? As a young one, you can always go find another. Redistribution by taxes, now that is legalized robbery.
 
wonder if its time to buy an ar-15 before 2006 or 2008? cause ya know the socailist/Democrats will be in power and revive the assault ban. (with help from the gop)
 
Johnnybgood said:
While I want spending cuts, I believe they are wanting to cut spending in the wrong areas. I work in the Medical field and we are having a hard enough time getting paid for our medicaid patients. If they cut it anymore we will not get paic at all. I don't like people living off my dime any more than you do but I told them when I called this is the last place we need to be cutting.
Start cutting all that pork. Sorry everyone but I just don't see this bill as the way to go.

You are part of the problem. Has it occurred to you that medicare is YOUR pork, no different from any other pork except for the fact that you depend on it for a job?

We the taxpayers are not obliged to fashion a living for you at our own expenses. Medicaid, medicare, disability and social security all need to be cut and in a big way.

And yes, I will pay my own way when the time comes. As should everyone else. Keep your hands out of my pockets.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top