You are here: Home / Archives for shut

Budget Battle Tests Boehner’s Resolve to Get Things Done. Did He Pass?

April 10, 2011 By 4 Comments

Yesterday my facebook wall was on fire with Teaparty members disagreeing about  Fridays’ last minute deal. Some believed there were wins. While others were not so happy with what was passed, but all agreed it was good the military gets paid on time.  I think it is also good to point out there was a bit of progress made. After all; the history of offers on this bill went like this: “Democrats first offered no cuts, then $4 billion, then $6.5 billion, then $33 billion, then settled at $38.5 billion.”

and although it did not defund Obamacare,  or Planned Parenthood some felt it was a start.

Another fb friend said “We could find 100′s of millions more to cut, and I have no doubt, if we controlled the senate as well as the house more cuts would have happened. But everyone has to understand, we control a little over 1/2 of the House. We have a minority in the Senate. And we have a Democratic White House. Of all the gains we made in the last election, we are still in a bad position, with limited options. Be careful what you ask for. A government shutdown wouldn’t have been the end of the world, but it would have cost us more money, and everyone would have felt effects from it. Keep the pressure on, and move slowly, and carefully back in the right direction “

 

In an almost an apologetic manner facebookers offered up:  “that when you only control a little over one half of one third, we did pretty good getting with what we did. “  Oh yeah? Lets wait and see if you still feel that way at the end of this article. Before I tell you how I really feel shall we examine the record for ourselves? What exactly did this CR accomplish?

 

  • Our military will get paid. We COULD NOT let our military not get paid. Their first check would’ve been delayed, their next check would be stopped until another deal was made.

 

  • This was a bipartisan agreement on spending cuts to support American job creation.

 

  • It is the LARGEST SPENDING CUT IN AMERICAN HISTORY. This agreement immediately cuts $38.5 billion in federal spending – the largest spending cut in American history in terms of dollars – just months after President Obama asked Congress for a spending “freeze” that would mean zero cuts.
  • There are HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS IN SPENDING CUTS which happen save money for the American people. This agreement will cut hundreds of billions of dollars from the federal budget over the next decade – “real money,” as the Wall Street Journal editorial board recently noted.
  • It officially ends the “STIMULUS” SPENDING BINGE. This agreement begins to reverse the “stimulus” spending binge that began in 2009
  • This agreement also signals the official end of a period of unprecedented government intervention that former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan and other economists say hurt job creation in America by crowding out private investment.
  • It set the stage for trillions more in spending cuts because it clears the way for congressional action on House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget – ‘The Path to Prosperity’ – and that in turn cuts trillions in spending and offers a long-term blueprint for American job creation.
  • It guarantees a senate vote on the repeal of Obamacare. The agreement reached with Senate Democrats guarantees a Senate debate and vote on legislation that would repeal President Obama’s government takeover of health care in its entirety. The House passed such legislation in January as part of the Pledge to America.
  • NEW TOOLS IN THE FIGHT TO REPEAL OBAMACARE. This CR will generate new tools for the fight to repeal Obamacare by requiring numerous studies that will force the Obama Administration to reveal the true impact of the law’s mandates, including a study of how individuals and families will see increased premiums as a result of certain Obamacare mandates; they would have to reveal in a full audit all of the waivers that the Obama Administration has given to firms and organizations – including unions – who can’t meet the new annual coverage limits.
  • a full audit of what’s happening with the comparative effectiveness research funding that was in Obamacare and the president’s failed “stimulus” spending bill; and a report on all of the contractors who have been hired to implement the law and the costs to taxpayers of such contracts.
  • It denies additional funding to the IRS:  The Obama administration has sought increased federal funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) – money that could be used to hire additional agents to enforce the administration’s agenda on a variety of issues. This increased funding is denied in this recent agreement.
  • It guarantees a senate vote & debate on DE-FUNDING PLANNED PARENTHOOD.  We are talking about a Senate debate and vote on legislation that would end federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
  • BANS TAXPAYER FUNDING OF ABORTION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The agreement includes a complete ban on federal funding of abortion in the District of Columbia, applying the pro-life principles of the Hyde Amendment (“D.C. Hyde”).
  • There is also mandatory audits of the new job crushing bureaucracy set up under Senators Dodd-Frank. The agreement subjects the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Bureau created by the job-destroying Dodd-Frank law to yearly audits by both the private sector and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to monitor its impact on the economy, including its impact on jobs, by examining whether sound cost-benefit analyses are being used with rule makings.

This is My Two cents:

All this sounds like good news and it is however If I were to define Speaker Boehner’s performance I would have to say he was too meek.  In case you need help understanding what that means; I will attempt to define meek for you. Meek is not a word we use much in the American English language.  It’s meaning is power under control or power which refuses to exert itself on another.  Jesus Christ was meek by choice, out of love. He had all the power to do what he wanted but he did not use it.  John Boehner was too meek, and what a disappointment he was to many of us yesterday.  I am not trying to compare the Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner to Jesus Christ.  Jesus meekness is a virtue while for Boehner it is not. Boehner in meekness to the Democrats actually reveals his inadequacy as a leader. Another thing to consider is although there is much good in Paul Ryan’s budget proposal; it won’t pass in its’ original version either because it takes down Obamacare and we’ve seen a preview of the future with the past weeks budget battle. There was a standoff and the republicans in the House blinked.

I agree with you we had to pass something to pay our military and the CR in itself does a lot of good but Boehner had the wrong disposition to begin with. Have you ever watched a standoff? Show even a HINT of weakness and you are done. Boehner used words which reflect his willingness to compromise not just this past week but during the history of his leadership

Let’s face it Boehner is a career politician. Without term limits these politicians worry too much about losing their jobs. Boehner needs to understand his compromise on Planned Parenthood WILL cause him to lose his job. The CR is not such a bad deal. You have to look closely to see where the trouble is, when you do then you see what he did was tip his hand. It’s symbolic of his willingness to give in,  He actually said “this is the BEST we could do” no Mr. Speaker, this is just the same ole way of thinking and you disappoint me sir. I did not put you in power so you could let me down again, and THAT is what is unforgivable and the reason so many are up in arms.

 

click here to join Rosie Onthe Right facebook page.

Special thanks to Robert Brown for contributing to this article

Filed Under: Editorials, Politics, United States Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

If the government shuts down, will Congress still get paid?

April 6, 2011 By 3 Comments

Washington is once again talking about the possibility of a shut down. As it stands now the U.S Military will NOT get paid.

Not every government worker would be sent home in the event of a shutdown, however the U.S military will NOT get paid unless the resolution being considered now, H.R.1297, that will ensure the military will be paid through 2011 passes. This must be passed before the Friday deadline to be in effect if the government shuts down. Lots of politics being played here using our troops as bargaining chips. It’s a disgraceful bit of politics I might add. The congresswoman, Renee Ellmers, R-NC 2nd district, has a large number of the troops stationed at Ft Bragg, NC. I believe because of her constituents; she will not vote for anything less than a bill that guarantees the military will be paid before ANYBODY else gets paid. I have also learned today that Legislators and their staff will forfeit pay when if there is a shutdown.

Several types of federal officials and employees, including members of Congress, the president, presidential appointees, and certain legislative branch employees are not subject to a furlough caused by a funding gap.

Under Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution, members of Congress “shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United States.”

Since the constitution thus mandates Congress’ pay, their compensation is not subject to the annual appropriations process. (how convenient)

During the government shutdowns in 1995 and 1996 members were paid throughout because their pay is automatically funded.

Some “essential” congressional staffers will also continue to work,

though they will not have the same certainty about when or whether they will be paid. It is up to the individual members as to whether and which staffers are essential to their operations.

The staffers who work will only be paid if money for retroactive compensation is included in the spending bill that is eventually enacted. With the current budget environment and the anti-government sentiment among many voters, retroactive pay for congressional staffers may be politically unpopular.

Over the past few weeks the House and Senate have passed two different bills aimed at preventing Congress and the president from receiving their regular paychecks in the event of a shutdown.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) introduced a bill (S 388), passed by unanimous consent in the Senate on March 1, which would bar the president and members of Congress from being paid during a shutdown or a period of default caused by a failure to raise the debt limit.Last Friday the House passed its own bill (HR 1255) that would prevent lawmakers and the president from being paid for the duration of any government shutdown that lasts more than 24 hours. 15 Republican House members joined the entire Democratic caucus in opposing the measure.

Certain members of Congress, however, have warned that such measures could be unconstitutional.

In the House, where the rules require members to cite the constitutional justification for items of legislation when they are introduced, bill sponsor Steve Womack (R-Ark.) submitted a statement arguing that the legislation “is consistent with” the constitution “in that it does not vary the compensation” for members of Congress and the president “but only seeks to regulate its disbursement during certain periods.”

Neither bill appears to have enough support to pass the other legislative body and thus neither is likely to become law, meaning members of Congress are likely to continue to be compensated in the event of a shutdown.

join Rosie Onthe Right facebook fanpage here.

Filed Under: Politics, United States Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,