how does a panel generate its own report but not pass it. Only in Washington.
What a pointless exercise.
Mr. Stern was ultimately one of the seven no votes among the panel members, but he urged lawmakers and the administration to continue the debate on how to rein in federal spending.
These two statements are completely at odds with each other. The plan would have been sent to the House and Senate for a vote if it had been approved by 14 of the 18 commission members . . . but Stern was one of those who voted against it.
He's not even being coherent about this.
Job 40: 15-19
“Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron.
It ranks first among the works of God,
yet its Maker can approach it with his sword.
A 33% across the board cut in federal spending, federal wages, federal workers, and federal work hours should be implimented. Furlough days would also be mandated. This affects the entire government minus the military side of the Dept. of Defense, and the intelligence apparatus, along with the FBI and US Marshals service ( which the other LEO agencies would be merged into).
Also, the EPA, DEA, ATF, and other unnessary agencies would be eliminated.
Revenue would be raised using tariffs, about 6-10% of the import cost of the good. A flat tax and low national sales tax would also be implemented. These recommendations would stay in effect until the surplus equals the highest point of deficit, indexed to inflation.
I was thankful their was some good, frank discussion about the choices that must be made...and it looks like all acted like adults. Iwas ready to let it at least get out of committee...but when I read Paul Ryan’s opinion (Can’t have the discussion with repealing healthcare) then I defer to him. He said the other day that he was going to introduce many of the measures in upcoming bills...but that we can’t have a seious discussion about deficity reduction unless it includes HC, something most members weren’t willing to touch.
This news will be played all kinds of ways...but I’ve got my money on the young guns; Paul Ryan is my top guy. He is one of the few that I trust know what he’s doing.
From what I saw of it, this “bipartisan” plan was another left-wing, big-government boondoggle. It was mostly raise taxes and cut benefits to taxpayers—but not to welfare recipients or illegals and the like.
In other words, screw the taxpayers and working people one more time, in order to save their government perks and the voters they have put on the Welfare Plantation.
NO. Cut the subsidies for PBS and Planned Parenthood.
This was a complete waste of time from the very beginning, and it has produced exactly as expected. This gives Democrats time to get out of town for Christmas, and come back in January to start shoving this up the Republican’s collective asses and demanding that they implement every item on it, regardless of what it is, what it would accomplish or with any regard to the consequences.
Pure politics.
I don't even want to get into how SEIU (former or not) got on this commission but if he believes it deserves a vote in the Senate and a vote in the House why did he, himself, vote NO? Where's the logic?
How do we reign in overspending?
....by not spending more? That would be a good start anyway.
I gave them that idea for free.
of course, they’ll ignore me.