Comments on: Will Obama bypass Congress on debt ceiling?
Add a Comment
- by retm-w July 4, 2011 12:16 PM EDT
How about this, we cut all giveaways foreign and domestic. That means no foreign aid, no subsidies or tax cuts for any business, no social security, no medicare, no VA benefits, no medicaid, no welfare,layoff government employees, cut politicians pay let them pay their own benefits. Do all those things bingo the budget is balanced
-------------------
Retm, I will agree to that. One issue you might want to deal with in there is being able to get people to stay in the military. But I am sure you have a plan for that.
Other than that, it all sounds great! Let's start tomorrow! - Reply to this comment
- Probably some Repuglican plan to play the Stock Market, make it crash, then buy and then come to their senses and see the stocks they bought rise in value.
- Reply to this comment
- If Congress does not empeach this jerk real soon this country is down the tubes. He does not understand our contitusion and is not going to obay it. He is determined to make us a 3rd world country as fast as he can. We are going further and further into debt.
- Reply to this comment
- One word - impeachment!
- Reply to this comment
- Subject: The Real Republican Entitlements Plan
The Republicans have plans to address the federal deficit and raising the federal deficit limit by drastically modifying or ending Medicare and Social Security.
The Republicans actively participated in creating and/or passing federal budgets which relied on borrowing and spending payroll tax receipts from the Medicare and Social Security trust funds since 1994. Now that the excess payroll taxes to be borrowed are lower, the Republican Party and Tea Party goal is to walk away from Medicare and Social Security and any of the outstanding money borrowed from the Medicare and Social Security trust funds (currently $2.6 trillion dollars for Social Security).
The Republicans were happy to borrow (and spend) the payroll tax receipts of hundreds of millions of American employees and tens of millions of American employers; they just don't like paying them back to the Medicare and Social Security trust funds for their intended purposes.
The Rep. Ryan Medicare plan is most likely part of a two-step plan to save Medicare by destroying it. The first step, already passed by the House of Representatives, replaces Medicare for those under age 55 with a voucher plan to purchase health insurance from a government-approved list of private health insurance companies like the one that paid a retiring CEO $800 million dollars. The second step will be reducing and then eliminating the voucher plan to purchase retiree health insurance. If the Republicans can end Medicare; the Republicans can surely end the voucher program that ended Medicare.
Rep. Boehner has already reported to the press that he is willing to "means test" Social Security; i.e. if you make more than an unspecified amount to be determined by Congress, your Social Security retirement income is reduced or eliminated. Rep. Boehner has also reported his support to extend the Social Security retirement age to 70, which will eliminate paying the first three years of Social Security retirement benefits from the current retirement age of 67 to age 70.
My suggestion is for the Executive Branch to advise Congress that in the event of a "government shut-down" due to failure to extend the federal debt limit all FICA Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes collected will be directed to the Social Security Administration (SSA) and Health and Human Services (HHS) to enable the continuation of Social Security and Medicare benefits.
It is time the Members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, stopped using the payroll taxes to meet federal budgetary needs in lieu of raising adequate federal revenues from income taxes (business and personal) and fees for governmental services. They appear to have adopted the strategic default mentality created and effectively used by Wall Street and millions of Americans to walk away from paying for things they ordered but don't want to pay for.
It is also time for Congress to honor the debts and obligations created in the name of the people. If more revenue is needed; the first action item should be to let the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 expire for everyone affected by the legislation and "share the pain" equally (all income groups).
Congress, with active participation by the entire electorate, should then aggressively start cleaning up and removing the many gift packages buried in the federal business and personal tax code. - Reply to this comment
- by pasha128 July 4, 2011 10:06 AM EDT
You are wrong read the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974; congress stripped the president of the power to impound (not spend) funds authorized by congress -- congressional appropriations except for contingency and reserve funds with conditions ARE NOW BY LAW REQUIRED SPENDING for the President and the Administration until Congress revises the above act.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I am familiar w/that Act. There is, however, a flaw in your reasoning. Actually, a couple. The President cannot spend money that does not exist. Congress, and congress alone, has the power to borrow money & thus to increase the public debt. If congress does not authorize the borrowing of monies to pay for legislation previously enacted then the legislation becomes, de facto if not de jure, unfunded legislation. The President cannot fund, or borrow money for the funding of, unfunded legislation. The Act previously mentioned deals w/funded legislation where the monies are available & prevents the President from unilaterally deciding to "defund" legislation approved AND funded by congress. In short, there is no "time bomb" for the President nor is there some sort of conspiracy to force the President to violate the law. The only "time bomb" in this equation is what will happen if congress does not authorize the borrowing of money to continue to fund already authorized legislation & the ongoing operating expenses of the Federal Government, which, by the way, is authorized by congress. - Reply to this comment
- Except for Scott Brown the Republicans seem to be unanimously in favor of committing ENTRAPMENT and violating the debt ceiling act by FORCING DEFICIT SPENDING in law and refusing to raise the debt limit to make their own legislative actions legal.
The following REPUBLICANS all are potential co-conspirators in the attempt to entrap others into breaking the law they in fact are breaking. All approved required deficit spending by the executive branch and none of them voted to raise the debt limit (HR 1954) to make the legally mandated spending they approved legal unde rthe Debt Limit Act.
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachus
Barletta
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Ellmers
Emerson
Eshoo
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Goodlatte
Gosar
Granger
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hultgren
Hunter
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kelly
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Reed
Renacci
Ribble
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schock
Schrader
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stearns
Stivers
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Webster
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN) - Reply to this comment
- Here's the bottom line. IF he tries to make an end around congress, thereby negating the will of the peoples elected officials he should be impeached or tried for treason. Remember, congress holds the purse strings...not the president...any president. Let him try this maneuver..it will make a great republican camapaing ad.
- Reply to this comment
- What is so funny, is that if this were Bush, all the liberals would be having a fit. But since it's Obama, a democrat then all is well.
What a bunch of Hypocrites. Remember liberals, if Barry is out in 12 then the new guy can do the same things and you can't say a word. - Reply to this comment
- by pasha128 July 3, 2011 10:31 PM EDT
"...REMEMBER THE IRAQ SOFA AGREEMENT all without congressional approval."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately for you premise pasha, the following information is a matter of public record.
H.J.RES.114: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 October 11, 2002 Passed
Final vote on H.J.RES.114 October 11, 2002 Passed 77-26
So you can stop claiming that gdub didn't consult congress. Whether what gdub did was right or wrong isn't the subject of this post, but the fact is he did it WITH congressional approval. Strike Four for your comments. - Reply to this comment
