John Boehner and the Republican caucus in the House passed the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act as promised on a near-party-line vote tonight, 234-190. The move puts the onus back on the White House to propose an alternative or assume responsibility for killing the debt-ceiling hike it contains:
Defying a veto threat, the Republican-controlled House passed legislation Tuesday night to slice federal spending by $6 trillion and require a constitutional balanced budget amendment to be sent to the states in exchange for averting a threatened government default.
The 234-190 vote marked the power of deeply conservative first-term Republicans, and stood in contrast to stirrings at the White House and in the Senate on a renewed effort at bipartisanship to solve the looming debt crisis.
I just heard a Congressman say that no new debt plans will be coming onto the House floor UNTIL after this ”Cut, Cap & Balance” bill passes and gets signed or it dies on Obama desk or in the US Senate.
I also learned late last night that Sen. Durbin says the Gang of 6’s so-called plan has not been written OR scored by the CBO.
Therefor it is not going to be ready for anything until after the Aug 2nd deadline has passed.
Does Obama think he can trick our Legislators into passing yet another unread bill?
Twice bitten on that one, O-man.
Jake Tapper (ABC News) asked Jay Carney why Obama hasn’t demonstrated some leadership himself as President by presenting a specific plan.
Jay’s answer was very telling as to what Obama thinks is the definition of a ”leader.”
CONGRATULATION TO THE GOP, TO HAVE PASSED IT.
NOW, EVERY ONE STAY PUT, TO FINISH THIS HARMONIOUSLY.
FOR ALL AMERICANS TO HOPE AGAIN FOR A SECURE AMERICA, FOR ALL
WHO ARE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE EFFORT OF RECLAIMING IT.
THANK YOU CURT
The full text of H.R. 2560, also known as The Cut, Cap and Balance Bill.
Note the defense spending exception in SEC. 316. (d), and the Social Security and Medicare exceptions in SEC. 317.(b) (1) and (2).
These are the three largest components of the federal budget.
Ron Paul’s comment about that:
“First, it purports to eventually balance the budget without cutting military spending, Social Security, or Medicare. This is impossible. These three budget items already cost nearly $1 trillion apiece annually. (emphasis added) This means we can cut every other area of federal spending to zero and still have a $3 trillion budget. Since annual federal tax revenues almost certainly will not exceed $2.5 trillion for several years, this Act cannot balance the budget under any plausible scenario.”
In other words, the bill is totally bogus. It’s nothing but an illusion. Just another act in the fiscal responsibility dog and pony show.
Read the bill and draw your own conclusions. It’s short enough.
I’m obviously not a supporter of everything Ron Paul stands for and certainly not of Michelle Bachmann. I’ll give them both credit for remaining true to their stated principles, however. Both voted against the bill’s passage.
GREG, All they have to do is no 1, cut on the agencys
at the top level, cut on the services at the top level,
cut on the limousines sell them., keep only a couple, cut on the kitchen of the white house the food and all ,
cut on the planes and travels, at the top level , reduce the lawyers at the top level bring it back to 3 only,
cut the employees in half again in the top level, cut the MEDIA FEES BACK TO 1/3 RD OF IT.
NOW CUT THE SALARY OF ALL THE DEMOCRATS DOWN TO 1/2,
AND THEN YOU CAN CALCULATE ALL THOSE CUTS, AND COME BACK FOR
THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE WHERE ELSE TO CUT, THE SMART AMERICANS WHO KNOWS HOW TO BALANCE THEIR BUDGETS WILL GIVE MORE ADVICES, AFTER THOSE CUTS ARE DONE.
@Greg:
Greg, federal spending for those three items in 2010 totaled just over $2.1 Trillion. I don’t expect that all three will experience a nearly $900 Billion increase in spending in just one year.
Also, what you’ve commented on isn’t, exactly, how the bill lays it out. For example, the bill doesn’t allow unrestrained defense spending. It just allows an adjustment upward in spending if needed, but not to exceed $126 Billion in adjustments for 2012. Cuts are still made to the Defense department in accordance with the rest of the bill.
Further investigation is needed to determine exactly what that section on SS and Medicare actually means. Also, the “Cut” portion of the bill refers only to FY 2012. Future years beyond that seem to be addressed in the “Cap” portion.
I personally do not support it basically because it doesn’t go far enough in actual spending cuts.
johngalt, hi,
maybe as this thing was carried longer than they where expecting, on the GOP’S SIDE,
THEY ARE DEMANDING LESS TO GET THE ASSURANCE THAT IT WILL PASS,
IN ORDER TO GET IT BEFORE THE DATE LIMIT, THAT WOULD HAVE FALL ON THEIR BACK,
AND PROBABLY WAS THE STRATEGY OF THE DEMOCRATS TO DELAY IT PAST THE
LIMIT AUGUST 2,, SO THE GOPS BEAT THEM TO THE PUNCH,
AND THE BILL IS ON OBAMA’S HAND TO DECIDE NOW,
THEY GAVE HIM A ALTERNATIVE ,HE CAN’T REFUSE.
I thought they use a smart ending.
WALL STREET JOURNAL was showing another poll of for the raising the debt was 38/cent,
and against was 31/cent it was a change from another poll where it was 31 against and 28 for raising it
those are also per cent, they mentionned the swich from the 2 polls,
but I say that is normal because the people are getting more scared by the MEDIA of threats,
and negatives, so they will votes to raise the debt ceiling out of being freaked up by the whole propaganda around it. no one want to loose their coming checks as it was said by OBAMA MORE THAN ONCE,
again the fear factor was use on those depending on the GOVERNMENT,
THIS IS AWFULL
One point you’re missing, Greg.
The Social Security insurance program is funded through dedicated payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA).
The 2011 annual report by the program’s Board of Trustees noted the following: in 2010, 54 million people were receiving Social Security benefits, while 157 million people were paying into the fund.
In 2011, there will be 56 million beneficiaries and 158 million workers paying in.
In 2010, total income was $781.1 billion and expenditures were $712.5 billion.
In other words, we don’t need to worry about that ”trillion” you cited for Social Security.
Of the “annual federal tax revenues almost certainly will not exceed $2.5 trillion for several years,” you did not include one dime of the money we use to fund Social Security, that $781.1 billion in FICA revenue.