Who is to blame for the budget?

[Rainman05]

The Congress is to blame for the budget.

The Congress passes the budget. Not the President. The presidency can submit a budget proposal to Congress, but they can choose to ignore it and do whatever they want. However, this doesn't change the fact that the last budget proposals from the Obama administration to Congress have been nothing short of laughable and there are plenty of youtube videos that show so many congressmen poking countless holes in their proposal.

Once a budget is passed however, the President must implement the budget. that means he must spend every dollar that is assigned to anything that is assigned. You can't have it otherwise.

And since the budget runs at a deficit, it is the president that must borrow the money from the Federal Reserve (most of the time) or foreign countries (not so much). However, it is Congress that implements the debt limit and only they can raise it.

So can the President do something about this? Not really. Unless he fights in the public arena and make the people put more pressure on their congressmen to make better budgets, there will be no change. Not really. And the president won't do that because he needs the budget to be big and bulky because he, and the congressmen on Capitol Hill need to reward, with public money, the people that supported them financially in the campaigns. So trying to change that will inevitably result in a bad, bad PR show for all parties involved.

But, since Obama is in his second term, if he is truly a leader and truly wants to make a difference, this is how he should do it. Screw clean energy or having cars that run more mileage for less gas by 2020. Those are all things that the private sector can manage much, much better than the government and will manage if they have the right tools and economical landscape to do it. If Obama were a true leader, he would point out these special interest groups, hunt down the corruption and in 2 years time have a new, better Congress in place that is competent and less corrupt. He has nothing to lose except some PR image. That is it. It is his second term. He is already very rich, he needs no money. He is covered for life because the presidents get protection and salary after they are done, what he can do is completely reform the political class in the US. If he wants to do that. He is more popular than Congress who has a 7% approval rating. He can wipe the floor with all of Congress, the democrats and the republicans because both sides have tons of bad apples, and have a better, more competent congress in 2 years.

And that will lead to better budgets, less drama over the debt limit and more than 220 bills passed in 4 bloody years.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Are you kidding me? 94% of our congress critters were re-elected by "the people". Budgets are now "deals", called continuing resolutions, that keep federal borrowing and spending high because, as you say, pork begets camapign cash. Obama campaigned on cutting the federal deficit in half, yet has never found, in his famous line by line review process, anything that he wants to cut. In the latest SOTU cheering fest more gov't spending, that will not cost (or save) "one dime", was proposed - but NO CUTS were mentioned at all. The battle in congress now, after 98.6% of the tax increases were dropped, and $90 billion in new spending was added, is how to NOT go along with the "promised" sequestration spending cuts.

 

[MMC]

The Congress is to blame for the budget.

The Congress passes the budget. Not the President. The presidency can submit a budget proposal to Congress, but they can choose to ignore it and do whatever they want. However, this doesn't change the fact that the last budget proposals from the Obama administration to Congress have been nothing short of laughable and there are plenty of youtube videos that show so many congressmen poking countless holes in their proposal.

Once a budget is passed however, the President must implement the budget. that means he must spend every dollar that is assigned to anything that is assigned. You can't have it otherwise.

And since the budget runs at a deficit, it is the president that must borrow the money from the Federal Reserve (most of the time) or foreign countries (not so much). However, it is Congress that implements the debt limit and only they can raise it.

So can the President do something about this? Not really. Unless he fights in the public arena and make the people put more pressure on their congressmen to make better budgets, there will be no change. Not really. And the president won't do that because he needs the budget to be big and bulky because he, and the congressmen on Capitol Hill need to reward, with public money, the people that supported them financially in the campaigns. So trying to change that will inevitably result in a bad, bad PR show for all parties involved.

But, since Obama is in his second term, if he is truly a leader and truly wants to make a difference, this is how he should do it. Screw clean energy or having cars that run more mileage for less gas by 2020. Those are all things that the private sector can manage much, much better than the government and will manage if they have the right tools and economical landscape to do it. If Obama were a true leader, he would point out these special interest groups, hunt down the corruption and in 2 years time have a new, better Congress in place that is competent and less corrupt. He has nothing to lose except some PR image. That is it. It is his second term. He is already very rich, he needs no money. He is covered for life because the presidents get protection and salary after they are done, what he can do is completely reform the political class in the US. If he wants to do that. He is more popular than Congress who has a 7% approval rating. He can wipe the floor with all of Congress, the democrats and the republicans because both sides have tons of bad apples, and have a better, more competent congress in 2 years.

And that will lead to better budgets, less drama over the debt limit and more than 220 bills passed in 4 bloody years.

Well the House has passed a budget. Its the Senate that hasn't had one for 4 years. To top it off Obama in the Submitting of his two Budgets.....couldn't get one Democrat to vote for his Budgets. Which was twice. Now he is late with another. Which I don't think he should get any points because he preempted such with an announcement that he would be late with one.

Maybe if they all had one and finally were forced to sit down and not come out of some room until some agreement was reached. We could get something done.

 

[Rainman05]

Are you kidding me? 94% of our congress critters were re-elected by "the people". Budgets are now "deals", called continuing resolutions, that keep federal borrowing and spending high because, as you say, pork begets camapign cash. Obama campaigned on cutting the federal deficit in half, yet has never found, in his famous line by line review process, anything that he wants to cut. In the latest SOTU cheering fest more gov't spending, that will not cost (or save) "one dime", was proposed - but NO CUTS were mentioned at all. The battle in congress now, after 98.6% of the tax increases were dropped, and $90 billion in new spending was added, is how to NOT go along with the "promised" sequestration spending cuts.

I was not functioning on the premise of what Obama will do in his second term. That is clear for everyone.
I was functioning on the premise of what a president, in this case, Obama, is able to do if he wants to do it, as a president. And yes, everything you say is true, because we all know what Obama will do. He will do what he has done in the past years. Nothing different. But if tomorrow he would become a schitzofrenic and change personalities into a non-partisan, true to his word politician, he could wipe the floor with congress, both repubs and dems, and break the BS that is Congress... and in 2-4 years the US may end up with a proper Congress. If not sooner.

 

[Smeagol]

Ultimately We The People. How many times have we re-elected politicians who run up the deficit on pork barrel projects? I think We the people need to demand the line item veto in a way that still keeps power over the purse in the hands of Congress yet forces them to vote individually on waste and not sneak it in as riders on bills they know will pass.

One person I don't blame is Bill Clinton.

 

[Rainman05]

Well the House has passed a budget. Its the Senate that hasn't had one for 4 years. To top it off Obama in the Submitting of his two Budgets.....couldn't get one Democrat to vote for his Budgets. Which was twice. Now he is late with another. Which I don't think he should get any points because he preempted such with an announcement that he would be late with one.

Maybe if they all had one and finally were forced to sit down and not come out of some room until some agreement was reached. We could get something done.

There is no point in trying to redeem Congress. Most of the people in Congress are irredeemable from a moral and a statesman standpoint. They need to be replaced fully, including the top apparatus of the administrative branch. All of it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I was not functioning on the premise of what Obama will do in his second term. That is clear for everyone.
I was functioning on the premise of what a president, in this case, Obama, is able to do if he wants to do it, as a president. And yes, everything you say is true, because we all know what Obama will do. He will do what he has done in the past years. Nothing different. But if tomorrow he would become a schitzofrenic and change personalities into a non-partisan, true to his word politician, he could wipe the floor with congress, both repubs and dems, and break the BS that is Congress... and in 2-4 years the US may end up with a proper Congress. If not sooner.

You, and Obama, are dreaming. Clinton actully did much of what you describe and indeed ended up with a surplus, yet he had a congress controlled by republicants and still actually governed. Obama is a dreamer, not a governor.

 

[MMC]

There is no point in trying to redeem Congress. Most of the people in Congress are irredeemable from a moral and a statesman standpoint. They need to be replaced fully, including the top apparatus of the administrative branch. All of it.

I wasn't trying to redeem them. I was just pointing out the House passed a budget with a few house Dems voting for it. When it hit the Senate it was dead in the water. Plus Obama first two were DOA and by his own party members. So I don't know what all was in them. But for not one Demo to vote in favor of it, there had to be some outrageous spending for them to not even consider it for legislation.

Well currently we just saw some of the GOP ole timers get sent out to pasture. Now we are seeing some Demos doing the same. Plus both have a few resigning this year.

Myself.....I have always been for term limits. Like along the lines of 5 years 2 term max. With like their freshman year doing that campaigning and their last year finishing out before sent to pasture. No Campaigning in between and running around the country giving out endorsements. Only from their State. I figure if they can't get anything accomplished in a decade then it is time to move on. As well if they can get anything accomplished. They still want to serve do in their own communities.

But you are correct he could have called the House and Senate Budget Committees together and said WE will not be leaving this room until we have an agreement. I don't care if we have to eat, sleep, piss, and chit in here. Until we have the agreement.....No One goes anywheres!

 

[Bob N]

Screw clean energy or having cars that run more mileage for less gas by 2020. Those are all things that the private sector can manage much, much better than the government and will manage if they have the right tools and economical landscape to do it.

Well I don't know about the right tools, but I would love to know why they do not believe that they have had the proper economical landscape to do this; the private sector has had years of low taxes to play with, so I'm ready to see whatever they can come up with when it comes to alternative energy whenever they are. :shrug:

 

[Smeagol]

Ultimately We The People. How many times have we re-elected politicians who run up the deficit on pork barrel projects? I think We the people need to demand the line item veto in a way that still keeps power over the purse in the hands of Congress yet forces them to vote individually on waste and not sneak it in as riders on bills they know will pass.

One person I don't blame is Bill Clinton.

Or Newt Gingrich, who in all fairness has a shared legacy with the former POTUS.

 

[DavidStone]

What budget are you talking about? I thought we didn't have one for four years now. The Senate never passed one. The president's proposed budget gets laughed at in Congress and rejected unanimously, which is the only show of bipartisanship we've seen lately.

The democratic party is the tax and spend party, that's the simple truth. They want to model an economy after Sweden, that's their wet dream. You don't have to take my word for it, all you have to do is listen to their economic guru Paul Krugman and he'll tell you that "Sweden is the kind of society we want to have". He even acknowledges that taxes on the rich won't pay for all of it and we will have to resort to VAT (which is at 25% in Sweden) and death panels.