Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) floated a memo to her fellow Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee outlying the need for ′revenues to be included′ in their federal budget outline. This comes as House Republicans passed a measure extending the debt ceiling for four months under the condition that the Senate Democrats must pass a budget, something they have not done in about 1367 days. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), head of the House Budget Committee, will be sending a budget proposal shortly that will balance the budget within 10 years. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) has been blocking any budgets from being passed in the Senate, but may be ready to let one go through now. Especially since Murray, Barack Obama, and he are all committed to raising more tax revenues. Also, as part of the new debt ceiling agreement, paychecks for members of Congress will be held in escrow until a budget is passed.
In a new Fox News poll, 83% of likely voters in America think that the federal government spends too much money. Even Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) told the Senate Foreign Committee yesterday during his first confirmation hearing to replace Hillary Clinton at the State Department that getting the nation′s fiscal house in order should be viewed as an international security issue. That our credibility as a world leader is questionable as we sink further and deeper in debt.
Yet, during his Inauguration Day speech, Obama made it quite clear that he has no stomach for making any serious spending cuts. Certainly nothing concerning entitlement programs like Social Security or Medicare which are bankrupting the nation. The Social Security Disability Trust Fund will run out of money in 2016 unless something is done to shore it up. All of the trust funds for the major entitlement programs face calamity within the next 10-20 years.
Time is running out for America. Some economists believe the ship of state has already sunk. I have serious doubts that Patty Murray will be able to come up with anything practical in the Senate Budget Committee. Senate Democrats have been punting the ball for some 1367 days now, so why should we expect any changes? While Rep. Paul Ryan has his act together with the House Budget Committee, there is only so much that House Republicans can do to save America from the likes of Barack Hussein Obama and Harry Reid.
January 25th, 2013 at 10:25 am
“Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), head of the House Budget Committee, will be sending a budget proposal shortly that will balance the budget within 10 years”.
Really? And this will be done exactly how? Please explain. He claimed a balanced budget in 30 yrs in his last proposal and that was laughed at and promptly rejected by the electorate.
Now I understand that Ryan “says” it will do something but what does that have to do with reality? Even conservatives hacks like Josh Boak and Eric Pianin, of The Fiscal Times admit it’s nuts. Andrew Fieldhouse, Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.), Joe Scarborough, Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) and I could go on and on and on have denounced the 10 year, if ever, possibility of Ryan’s new plan.
We’re to believe this, despite widespread opposition from both parties, despite prominent economists pointing out once again that the math isn’t there, despite the fact that Ryan’s budget still showers the wealthy at the expense of the middle class, and despite the fact that Paul Ryan is the Pinocchio poster child of the Fact Checkers, because Andrew Zarowny says it’s true?
Please explain precisely how Ryan’s plan will achieve a balanced budget in 10 years. It’s hard to argue for or against Patty Murray’s rationale when your imaginary solution has no legs to stand on.
January 25th, 2013 at 10:51 am
Ryan’s “new” plan will certainly have to differ from his last debunked budget as it is obvious that the mandate to cut taxes on the rich will not fly.
That was a major component of his last plan as it assumed that cutting taxes on both corporations and the wealthy will automatically lead to increased revenues (old-school supply side economics? Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, it was a major component of his failed campaign.
He additionally proposed privatizing Medicare and selectively cutting programs the GOP does not like. For example, food stamps would be cut by $134 billion over 10 years, while Medicaid expenditures would be reduced by $810 billion within the same 10 year period.
And then there are the defense spending cuts, oh, never mind, none of those.
So food and health are cut, but the bottomless pit of defense spending? Not on the table.
It appears the budget problem has a simple solution. Cut off social programs for the poor. I guess they are under the illusion (or delusion) that if these programs are cut that these people will somehow simply disappear. Either that or get into their Cadillacs and drive to some other location.
Well, that seems reasonable.
January 25th, 2013 at 11:12 am
Asking Democrats to balance the budget is like asking a monkey to do calculus.
January 26th, 2013 at 7:03 am
Ronald,
When Ryan finishes writing his budget plan and makes it public, then I will comment on its merits. I realize that you and the rest of the Liberal-Progressive idiots just automatically dismiss anything proposed by a Republican, but really! You are swinging at pitches yet to be thrown!
January 26th, 2013 at 8:02 am
Andy, can you not read and comprehend the very words you wrote? You stated as if fact that “Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), head of the House Budget Committee, will be sending a budget proposal shortly that will balance the budget within 10 years”. Now you back peddle and say “When Ryan finishes writing his budget plan and makes it public, then I will comment on its merits”. You then blame me for swinging at pitches yet to be thrown.
The funny thing is that you are probably serious.
January 26th, 2013 at 8:34 am
Ronald,
Once again you demonstrate just how dense you truly are!
Ryan can say now that he is working on a budget that will balance in 10 years. But as to how he will go about doing that will not be known until the plan is written out.
I understand that this concept may be too deep for your pea-sized brain to comprehend. Once again, you keep proving what I said about the knee-jerk reaction of you Marxists.