PDA

View Full Version : While not a huge fan of Boehner...



Uncle Bill
02-21-2013, 01:59 PM
...he nonetheless has the facts about this "SEQUESTER" FIASCO pretty well time-lined. For those that need an update...

UB

Boehner to WSJ: Obama Raging Against Self-Created Budget Crisis
Wednesday, 20 Feb 2013
By Barton Webster
Most Americans are hearing for the first time about the sequester: federal spending cuts due to take place a week from now.

While President Barack Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who may lose their jobs because of the policy, most Americans donít realize that the policy is the result of the presidentís own faulty leadership, House Speaker John Boehner writes in The Wall Street Journal.

Unless Congress acts, $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts will occur this year beginning March 1. Another $1.1 trillion will kick in over the next decades. We should be cutting more spending, but not via the sequester, which Boehner, a Republican from Ohio, calls "an ugly and dangerous way to do it."
The sequester focuses on a narrow part of the budget that funds operations for federal agencies and departments, including the departments of Defense and Homeland Security. Most entitlement spending Ė the part of the budget driving the vast portion of the "looming" debt crisis Ė is exempt. The sequester would slash the military budget by nearly half a trillion dollars over the next decade. Border security, law enforcement and aviation safety would be among other programs left underfunded.

In the summer of 2011, Boehner recalls that he and Obama nearly reached an historic agreement. But, Boehner writes, the deal fell apart at the last minute when Obama raised the ante and demanded an extra $400 billion in new tax revenue Ė 50 percent more than the two had agreed upon "just days before."

With a breach of the debt limit days away, Boehner acted fast, getting together with Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell to forge a bipartisan congressional plan that would be called the Budget Control Act.

The plan aimed at cutting $917 billion from discretionary spending and setting up a House-Senate "super committee" to find another $1.2 trillion in savings. To ensure the committee met its target, the debt limit would not be increased again in a few months.

Obama wanted to avoid another battle over the debt-limit increase before his re-election campaign. So, Boehner writes, the president "scuttled" the bipartisan agreement and proposed the sequester instead.

As the debt limit was due to hit within hours, Republicans and Democrats in Congress were forced to accept the president's proposal and a revised version of the Budget Control Act was passed, Boehner writes.

But the super committee failed to reach an agreement, and the presidentís sequester now looms.

Both parties have a responsibility to reach a bipartisan solution to the sequester. Congress should replace the sequester with other spending cuts that put American on the road to a balanced budget within a decade without risking national security, Boehner writes.

Simply turning off the sequester and eliminating its deficit reduction measures isnít an option.

Since the president first proposed and demanded the sequester, Boehner writes, it would make sense for the president to take the lead in replacing it. However, Obama has not put forth any detailed plan that can pass Congress, and the Democratic-controlled Senate hasnít even voted on a plan.

Boehner notes that the president has already gotten the higher taxes he demanded ó $600 billion from higher earnings ó at the end of 2012, as well as higher taxes via ObamaCare.

Nobody should be talking about raising taxes when the government is giving people free cellphone and spending millions of dollars on other senseless programs.

Washington must get serious about cutting spending, says Boehner. If it canít reform the retirement security programs and safety net, they will not be there when people need them. Republicans have shown they are willing to do what is necessary to save the programs. The president has not shown the same courage.

Republicans agree with the president that the sequester is bad policy, Boehner writes. Now it is time for the president to step up and show what he is willing to cut in order to replace the sequester.

Meanwhile, the New York Times cites officials as saying that many of the spending cuts that will take place under the sequester are unlikely to be felt immediately. Instead, they will gradually ripple across the federal government as agencies learn to phase in the cuts.

"The scheduling will depend on what the workload is, what the cases are, what can wait," said Nanda Chitre, a spokeswoman for the Department of Justice. "There's going to be impact all across law enforcement. But we've tried to give as much flexibility as possible."

Marvin S
02-21-2013, 05:34 PM
...he nonetheless has the facts about this "SEQUESTER" FIASCO pretty well time-lined. For those that need an update...

UB

Boehner to WSJ: Obama Raging Against Self-Created Budget Crisis
Wednesday, 20 Feb 2013
By Barton Webster
Most Americans are hearing for the first time about the sequester: federal spending cuts due to take place a week from now.

While President Barack Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who may lose their jobs because of the policy, most Americans donít realize that the policy is the result of the presidentís own faulty leadership, House Speaker John Boehner writes in The Wall Street Journal.

Unless Congress acts, $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts will occur this year beginning March 1. Another $1.1 trillion will kick in over the next decades. We should be cutting more spending, but not via the sequester, which Boehner, a Republican from Ohio, calls "an ugly and dangerous way to do it."
The sequester focuses on a narrow part of the budget that funds operations for federal agencies and departments, including the departments of Defense and Homeland Security. Most entitlement spending Ė the part of the budget driving the vast portion of the "looming" debt crisis Ė is exempt. The sequester would slash the military budget by nearly half a trillion dollars over the next decade. Border security, law enforcement and aviation safety would be among other programs left underfunded.

In the summer of 2011, Boehner recalls that he and Obama nearly reached an historic agreement. But, Boehner writes, the deal fell apart at the last minute when Obama raised the ante and demanded an extra $400 billion in new tax revenue Ė 50 percent more than the two had agreed upon "just days before."

With a breach of the debt limit days away, Boehner acted fast, getting together with Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell to forge a bipartisan congressional plan that would be called the Budget Control Act.

The plan aimed at cutting $917 billion from discretionary spending and setting up a House-Senate "super committee" to find another $1.2 trillion in savings. To ensure the committee met its target, the debt limit would not be increased again in a few months.

Obama wanted to avoid another battle over the debt-limit increase before his re-election campaign. So, Boehner writes, the president "scuttled" the bipartisan agreement and proposed the sequester instead.

As the debt limit was due to hit within hours, Republicans and Democrats in Congress were forced to accept the president's proposal and a revised version of the Budget Control Act was passed, Boehner writes.

But the super committee failed to reach an agreement, and the presidentís sequester now looms.

Both parties have a responsibility to reach a bipartisan solution to the sequester. Congress should replace the sequester with other spending cuts that put America on the road to a balanced budget within a decade without risking national security, Boehner writes.

Simply turning off the sequester and eliminating its deficit reduction measures isnít an option.

Since the president first proposed and demanded the sequester, Boehner writes, it would make sense for the president to take the lead in replacing it. However, Obama has not put forth any detailed plan that can pass Congress, and the Democratic-controlled Senate hasnít even voted on a plan.

Boehner notes that the president has already gotten the higher taxes he demanded ó $600 billion from higher earnings ó at the end of 2012, as well as higher taxes via ObamaCare.

Nobody should be talking about raising taxes when the government is giving people free cellphone and spending millions of dollars on other senseless programs.

Washington must get serious about cutting spending, says Boehner. If it canít reform the retirement security programs and safety net, they will not be there when people need them. Republicans have shown they are willing to do what is necessary to save the programs. The president has not shown the same courage.

Republicans agree with the president that the sequester is bad policy, Boehner writes. Now it is time for the president to step up and show what he is willing to cut in order to replace the sequester.

Meanwhile, the New York Times cites officials as saying that many of the spending cuts that will take place under the sequester are unlikely to be felt immediately. Instead, they will gradually ripple across the federal government as agencies learn to phase in the cuts.

"The scheduling will depend on what the workload is, what the cases are, what can wait," said Nanda Chitre, a spokeswoman for the Department of Justice. "There's going to be impact all across law enforcement. But we've tried to give as much flexibility as possible."

I believe the idea of a balanced budget in 10 years is disgusting - How about next week, the congresscritters have been at this for several years & the debt load has increased immensely for our Children & grandchildren & their offspring.

As for the FR's, they get more love now from the public than they deserve.

Wade
02-21-2013, 06:29 PM
Boehner and his little side kick Eric Cantor should not yield one bit to the President and the Democrats regarding the spending cut crisis. The Republicans have already done their portion of compromise with the Fiscal Cliff crap. Now it is the other sides turn.

Dan Storts
02-21-2013, 07:11 PM
Obama is playing the same card the local school board plays. If we don't get our 8 mil increase we are going to cut buses and sports.

Obama is saying he is going to cut the pentagon, which are all private contractors, and the republicans will cave again. The first responders and eduction is already a primary local funded program with state involvement at different percentages.

Again Boehner will cave in the last 24 hours. However this time they may run into some filibustering in the Senate. Cruz and Lee would be good possibilities. I believe they have had enough.

Uncle Bill
02-22-2013, 07:39 AM
Boehner and his little side kick Eric Cantor should not yield one bit to the President and the Democrats regarding the spending cut crisis. The Republicans have already done their portion of compromise with the Fiscal Cliff crap. Now it is the other sides turn.


Couldn't agree more, Wade.

This entire Obama designed sequestration that he now is attempting to wash his hands of, is just too ironic. The layoffs and job losses that will actually occur, will primarily, in my view, be by Obama voters...many of them union workers in the military complex. Talk about chickens coming home to roost...let that sequestration begin. Time for the genuflecting messiah fools to get their just rewards.

UB

road kill
02-22-2013, 07:45 AM
Stand fast Speker Boehner!

"Now is the time for all GOOD men to come to the aid of their country!"

paul young
02-22-2013, 11:42 AM
If someone dropped into this forum and hadn't stayed current on the facts surrounding sequestration, they might not realize that the supercommittee deadline to produce a plan expired on 11/23/2011.

The Legislative branch (all of the parties in both the Senate and House) have had 15 months to do SOMETHING! Instead, they chose to go out on recesses (they just did, by the way), campaign to be re-elected and kick the problem down the road. Boehner and Reid are no heroes, they are ineffective leaders of an incompetent bureaucracy!

They ALL should have their salary and benefits witheld until they do their job!

I have NO problem with blaming the President, after they submit a budget for his signature and he vetoes it. Even then, they could vote on the same budget, pass it a second time and override the veto.

HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK:
The Budget of the United States Government begins as the President's proposal to the U.S. Congress which recommends funding levels for the next fiscal year, beginning October 1. However, Congress is the body required by law to pass a budget annually and to submit the budget passed by both houses to the President for signature. Congressional decisions are governed by rules and legislation regarding the federal budget process. Budget committees set spending limits for the House and Senate committees and for Appropriations subcommittees, which then approve individual appropriations bills to allocate funding to various federal programs.

HOW IT WORKS (SINCE NO ONE WILL DO THEIR JOB)!!!!!:

If Congress fails to pass an annual budget (as has been the case since 2009), a series of Appropriations bills must be passed as "stop gap" measures. After Congress approves an appropriations bill, it is sent to the President, who may sign it into law, or may veto it (as he would a budget when passed by the Congress). A vetoed bill is sent back to Congress, which can pass it into law with a two-thirds majority in each chamber. Congress may also combine all or some appropriations bills into an omnibus reconciliation bill. In addition, the president may request and the Congress may pass supplemental appropriations bills or emergency supplemental appropriations bills.

None of us would run our households this way.

We ALL need to stop blaming the "other party"; there's plenty of blame for all to share.-Paul

Gerry Clinchy
02-22-2013, 08:47 PM
Fact is that if sequestration takes place, the govt will still spend $15 billion more in 2013 than if sequestration did not happen, due to automatic increases tied to COLA (or some similar index). So, I'm wondering exactly who won't be getting their paycheck.

Even some liberal media are now taking the tack that maybe it wouldn't be so bad after all. Maybe they've already gotten the word that it probably will happen?

The President has also missed his deadline for presenting his budget to Congress. He notified Congress that it would be delayed ... but no specific date was given. The House has been doing its job, but the Senate and WH have not been doing theirs.

huntinman
02-22-2013, 09:02 PM
Fact is that if sequestration takes place, the govt will still spend $15 billion more in 2013 than if sequestration did not happen, due to automatic increases tied to COLA (or some similar index). So, I'm wondering exactly who won't be getting their paycheck.

Even some liberal media are now taking the tack that maybe it wouldn't be so bad after all. Maybe they've already gotten the word that it probably will happen?

The President has also missed his deadline for presenting his budget to Congress. He notified Congress that it would be delayed ... but no specific date was given. The House has been doing its job, but the Senate and WH have not been doing theirs.


Now that's downright funny! Budget? Does anyone really think Obama or any of the Dems give a FRA about BUDGETS???

Makes me thinks of the Jim Mora playoffs video clip.... Just swap the word BUDGETS for PLAYOFFS...

Brad Turner
02-22-2013, 09:18 PM
If someone dropped into this forum and hadn't stayed current on the facts surrounding sequestration, they might not realize that the supercommittee deadline to produce a plan expired on 11/23/2011.

The Legislative branch (all of the parties in both the Senate and House) have had 15 months to do SOMETHING! Instead, they chose to go out on recesses (they just did, by the way), campaign to be re-elected and kick the problem down the road. Boehner and Reid are no heroes, they are ineffective leaders of an incompetent bureaucracy!

They ALL should have their salary and benefits witheld until they do their job!

I have NO problem with blaming the President, after they submit a budget for his signature and he vetoes it. Even then, they could vote on the same budget, pass it a second time and override the veto.

HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK:
The Budget of the United States Government begins as the President's proposal to the U.S. Congress which recommends funding levels for the next fiscal year, beginning October 1. However, Congress is the body required by law to pass a budget annually and to submit the budget passed by both houses to the President for signature. Congressional decisions are governed by rules and legislation regarding the federal budget process. Budget committees set spending limits for the House and Senate committees and for Appropriations subcommittees, which then approve individual appropriations bills to allocate funding to various federal programs.

HOW IT WORKS (SINCE NO ONE WILL DO THEIR JOB)!!!!!:

If Congress fails to pass an annual budget (as has been the case since 2009), a series of Appropriations bills must be passed as "stop gap" measures. After Congress approves an appropriations bill, it is sent to the President, who may sign it into law, or may veto it (as he would a budget when passed by the Congress). A vetoed bill is sent back to Congress, which can pass it into law with a two-thirds majority in each chamber. Congress may also combine all or some appropriations bills into an omnibus reconciliation bill. In addition, the president may request and the Congress may pass supplemental appropriations bills or emergency supplemental appropriations bills.

None of us would run our households this way.

We ALL need to stop blaming the "other party"; there's plenty of blame for all to share.-Paul

This is where the POTUS is displaying a complete lack of leadership. How can the blame be placed anywhere but squarely on his shoulders? He has yet to propose a budget this year, and has been late with his proposal in previous years.

BTW, it is absurd for anyone to use the argument that "he knows his proposal won't be passed so he is waiting on some grand compromise to be reached in Congress." It is his responsibility to present a proposal. PERIOD!

huntinman
02-22-2013, 09:54 PM
This is where the POTUS is displaying a complete lack of leadership. How can the blame be placed anywhere but squarely on his shoulders? He has yet to propose a budget this year, and has been late with his proposal in previous years.

BTW, it is absurd for anyone to use the argument that "he knows his proposal won't be passed so he is waiting on some grand compromise to be reached in Congress." It is his responsibility to present a proposal. PERIOD!

When he does put one out it is such a POS it gets voted down in the senate 97-0 and in congress 414-0. Obviously he is not serious about putting out real proposals.