90 Days Until Shutdown

[MMC]

The heads of the Senate and House budget committees -- Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington and GOP Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin -- will meet Thursday with an eye on addressing these budget divides. They'll helm budget negotiations intended to come up with a broader spending plan for the rest of fiscal year 2014, which ends on September 30.

Obama, for one, didn't seem in the mood Wednesday night for more of the same -- saying politicians in Washington have to "get out of the habit of governing by crisis."

"Hopefully, next time, it will not be in the 11th hour," Obama told reporters, calling for both parties to work together on a budget, immigration reform and other issues.

As he left the podium, Obama was asked whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months. His answer:

"No.".....snip~


Obama signs bill to end partial shutdown, avert debt default - CNN.com



Seems Obama doesn't think we will be Right back where we are now.....come Feb 7th. Plus don't forget he gets all the Federal Employees a 1% raise starting this coming January. So the Repubs caved on keeping the freeze on Federal Employees pay. Which they were suppose to hold Obama and the Democrats to this. Due to the economy.

Moreover they also again agreed to a Super Committee which will be headed by Ryan and Murray. Notice the wording they will Helm budget negotiations.

 

[Summerwind]

Not much good without a (economic) brain.

Well done and bravo!

 

[Tigger]

Would you say the same of the people, or congress, in general?

Yes, to both.

 

[jonny5]

89 Days till shutdown!

 

[MMC]

89 Days till shutdown!

Did Obama come up with an Idea yet......ya knows. Like his Sequester type of idea.

Did the Democrats offer up anything as negotitation over Obamacare yet. Since they said they would negotiate after they got their lil fix.

 

[Born Free]

89 Days till shutdown!

No there will be yet another extension and another and another, all the while the national debt keeps skyrocketing.

 

[jonny5]

Did Obama come up with an Idea yet......ya knows. Like his Sequester type of idea.

Did the Democrats offer up anything as negotitation over Obamacare yet. Since they said they would negotiate after they got their lil fix.

To be fair its only been a day. And they have the commission to blame for inaction until the shutdown. At the momeny, their solution is to end sequestration so they can spend more.

 

[Dezaad]

You know they wont. So 90 days to go.

There should be continuing resolutions until the new budget is passed. Always.

 

[jonny5]

There should be continuing resolutions until the new budget is passed. Always.

I disagree. A continuing resolution locks in previous years spending, with no effort to priortize spending or eliminate wasteful spending, or even add spending which might be neccesary. There should be no spending until the congress does their job and passes a budget and real spending bills. Furthermore, failure to do so is a violation of the Budget Act of 1974 which requires congress to agree to a budget.

DECLARATION OF PURPOSES
SEC. 2. ø2 U.S.C. 621¿ The Congress declares that it is essential—
(1) to assure effective congressional control over the budgetary
process;
(2) to provide for the congressional determination each
year of the appropriate level of Federal revenues and expenditures;
(3) to provide a system of impoundment control;
(4) to establish national budget priorities; and
(5) to provide for the furnishing of information by the executive
branch in a manner that will assist the Congress in discharging
its duties.

 

[MMC]

To be fair its only been a day. And they have the commission to blame for inaction until the shutdown. At the momeny, their solution is to end sequestration so they can spend more.

Mornin J5. :2wave: Yeah I know its been just a day.....we want to get anything that breaks Right away. This way it will be needing constant re-call so that the left can't confuse issues and deny what is stated from the get go.

 

[Dezaad]

I disagree. A continuing resolution locks in previous years spending, with no effort to priortize spending or eliminate wasteful spending, or even add spending which might be neccesary. There should be no spending until the congress does their job and passes a budget and real spending bills. Furthermore, failure to do so is a violation of the Budget Act of 1974 which requires congress to agree to a budget.

Any law passed later supercedes a prior law. This a continuing resolution would supercede the law on 1974.

It is the pinnacle of bad governance to shut down the government. Those who do not pass CRs are irresponsible. Yes, it is irresponsible to fail to pass a budget. But not nearly as egregious as letting the government shut down. It is very expensive to shut down the government, and not just in dollars, but to the economy as well. Those who block CRs are not fit to govern, and those who support those who block CRs are not fit to be citizens. It is just that stupid.

 

[MMC]

Any law passed later supercedes a prior law. This a continuing resolution would supercede the law on 1974.

It is the pinnacle of bad governance to shut down the government. Those who do not pass CRs are irresponsible. Yes, it is irresponsible to fail to pass a budget. But not nearly as egregious as letting the government shut down. It is very expensive to shut down the government, and not just in dollars, but to the economy as well. Those who block CRs are not fit to govern, and those who support those who block CRs are not fit to be citizens. It is just that stupid.

So hows that work out when the Democrats don't do that......did you forget all that history of theirs? You didn't think it magically stopped for some reason now.....did you?

But with your concept.....then how would you be able to proceed going forward, knowing that the majority of the left would no longer be citizens?

 

[Karl]

Yeah hopefully in 3 months Republicans will have grown a spine.

In addition to the tail? :2razz:

 

[Karl]

just pass a ****ing budget already.

Unfortunately that is not going to happen because the Tea Party contingent controlling the House cannot resist putting a poison pill in any budget they pass (such as the privatization of Medicare or, as we have just seen, the defunding of Obamacare).

However, I see no particular problem with CR's... it gets the job done. I think the "no budget" issue is a red herring meant to inflame the media-informed.

 

[Dezaad]

So hows that work out when the Democrats don't do that......did you forget all that history of theirs? You didn't think it magically stopped for some reason now.....did you?

But with your concept.....then how would you be able to proceed going forward, knowing that the majority of the left would no longer be citizens?

I don't support it when Dems have refused to pass a CR.

It wouldn't be horrible to pass CRs until the next election, when the voters have an opportunity to resolve any budgetary impasse. People who use threat of harm as leverage in a Democratic Republic aren't being responsible.

 

[MMC]

I don't support it when Dems have refused to pass a CR.

It wouldn't be horrible to pass CRs until the next election, when the voters have an opportunity to resolve any budgetary impasse. People who use threat of harm as leverage in a Democratic Republic aren't being responsible.

Thanks.....for sharing that Dezaad. That's good to know. Then at least you are remaining consistent in that Both parties are to be held responsible. That I can agree with.

So who is doing that now.....knowing that Sequester is reducing close to a third of that spending?

 

[jonny5]

Any law passed later supercedes a prior law. This a continuing resolution would supercede the law on 1974.

It is the pinnacle of bad governance to shut down the government. Those who do not pass CRs are irresponsible. Yes, it is irresponsible to fail to pass a budget. But not nearly as egregious as letting the government shut down. It is very expensive to shut down the government, and not just in dollars, but to the economy as well. Those who block CRs are not fit to govern, and those who support those who block CRs are not fit to be citizens. It is just that stupid.

It doesnt superceed it, because its not a budget. My point was how many times does congress need to pass laws trying to force the govt to adhere to fiscal responsibility? In the 20s they passed a law limiting the amount of money the govt could borrow. In 1974 they passed a law requiring the govt to produce a budget each year. Every year congress passeses spending bills that run out after a year. Recently theyve passed spending that runs out in 90 days. They passed a sequestor forcing spending cuts. Yet, when it comes time to deal with it, they dont.

Those who continue to drive the citizens into debt are not fit to govern. Those who continue to support those who continue to drive citizens into debt are not fit to be citizens.

 

[jonny5]

Unfortunately that is not going to happen because the Tea Party contingent controlling the House cannot resist putting a poison pill in any budget they pass (such as the privatization of Medicare or, as we have just seen, the defunding of Obamacare).

However, I see no particular problem with CR's... it gets the job done. I think the "no budget" issue is a red herring meant to inflame the media-informed.

The tea party is only a few members. They dont have the power to put poison pills into a budget that has bipartisan support.

 

[Dezaad]

Thanks.....for sharing that Dezaad. That's good to know. Then at least you are remaining consistent in that Both parties are to be held responsible. That I can agree with.

So who is doing that now.....knowing that Sequester is reducing close to a third of that spending?

As I understand it, the sequester is a duly passed budget law which would form the basis for any CR passed at this time. It is a ****ty law, but it is duly passed and signed. It is irresponsible in a smaller way than shutting down the government, but irresponsible nevertheless. Because it wasn't really intended to ultimately go into effect, It wasn't thought through, and as such it didn't carefully consider priorities. But, I guess it is the best we can do for now.

Why do you ask?

 

[Dezaad]

It doesnt superceed it, because its not a budget. My point was how many times does congress need to pass laws trying to force the govt to adhere to fiscal responsibility? In the 20s they passed a law limiting the amount of money the govt could borrow. In 1974 they passed a law requiring the govt to produce a budget each year. Every year congress passeses spending bills that run out after a year. Recently theyve passed spending that runs out in 90 days. They passed a sequestor forcing spending cuts. Yet, when it comes time to deal with it, they dont.

Those who continue to drive the citizens into debt are not fit to govern. Those who continue to support those who continue to drive citizens into debt are not fit to be citizens.

It doesn't have to be a budget in order to supercede it. The only laws that can create restrictions on future laws are Constitutional amendments.

We have had debt since the nation started. At times, Much bigger debt than we have now, as a matter of fact.

 

[MMC]

As I understand it, the sequester is a duly passed budget law which would form the basis for any CR passed at this time. It is a ****ty law, but it is duly passed and signed. It is irresponsible in a smaller way than shutting down the government, but irresponsible nevertheless. Because it wasn't really intended to ultimately go into effect, It wasn't thought through, and as such it didn't carefully consider priorities. But, I guess it is the best we can do for now.

Why do you ask?

Because both parties signed on to it.....knowing exactly what the sequester would do.

 

[Dezaad]

Because both parties signed on to it.....knowing exactly what the sequester would do.

Agreed. Pathetic that it was the best we could do, but agreed. But is there anything further that you believe this implies?

 

[MMC]

Agreed. Pathetic that it was the best we could do, but agreed. But is there anything further that you believe this implies?

Not at the moment. Other than a concern as to what they agreed to over this issue and if anything is of no pressing matter.

 

[NotreDame]

Any law passed later supercedes a prior law. This a continuing resolution would supercede the law on 1974.

It is the pinnacle of bad governance to shut down the government. Those who do not pass CRs are irresponsible. Yes, it is irresponsible to fail to pass a budget. But not nearly as egregious as letting the government shut down. It is very expensive to shut down the government, and not just in dollars, but to the economy as well. Those who block CRs are not fit to govern, and those who support those who block CRs are not fit to be citizens. It is just that stupid.

I am not sure what you mean by "supercede" but the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is still law, along with its amendments in 1985, 1990, and 1997. Until this statute is no longer law, then this statute remain in effect as law and therefore, regulating Congress as it pertains to budgets as expressed in the statute itself.

 

[jonny5]

It doesn't have to be a budget in order to supercede it. The only laws that can create restrictions on future laws are Constitutional amendments.

We have had debt since the nation started. At times, Much bigger debt than we have now, as a matter of fact.

No, Im pretty sure 17 Trillion is larger than any previous debt. And until the 1900s we paid debts off. For the last hundred years it has never gone down, never been paid off.

No law has changed the 1974 budget act. It requires a budget. They dont pass one, they are violating the act.