Well said.
Posted on 03/14/2011 3:25:19 PM PDT by mnehring
I would stand tall with ya Canks,
but even during Revolutionary times, only about a third of us were up to the fight.
Regards,
crosdaddy
Confine it to the ash heap of history along with those stone tablets containing the Ten Suggestions (Commandments). It would be Nirvana for the Communists.
Much smarter'n them-thar RINOs, anyway.
Fine. This sets us up for another batch of Tea Party candidates in 2012.
Let’s see if I understand this:
I save for 2 years to make a one-in-a-lifetime trip to somewhere ——like NOrway, where all my ancestors came from.
I have the money ‘allocated’ by setting it aside.
Then, for any number of last minute reasons, I cannot go.
Does that mean that I have to send the money to Norway anyway, even tho I didn’t make the trip?
The airlines—the restaurants—the hotels—the sightseeing tours still get my money.....even tho I am not going to go?
Please clarify this.
The money wasn’t to be spent until 2014——but it got set aside in language in a bill that Pelosi said ‘We can find out what is in it AFTER it passes”?????
Now we cannot stop the funding of over 105 Billion Dollars???????
Time for the revolution, folks.
AMEN
Nothing is impossible...DE FUND IT NOW
Bret actually did not bash her. It was the leadup to her Facebook post where she responded to her own gaffe with dignity and humor. She posted that she would never borrow obama’s teleprompter again.
Baby gets back!!!
Call these SOBs like this KY idiot on Tuesday and demand they strip the bill.
No congress can bind a future Congress.
Web are being lied to by our lobbyist thugs like BONER.
I must say that I found the exercise of reading through the "appropriations" section to be nauseating. In various little (2-3 sentence) paragraphs filled with meaningless government buzzwords, millions and billions of OUR dollars are doled out to various entities that have failed miserably from their inception, or to new entities that will be established to further build-out the beast. How many times do we see the phrase: "to remain available until expended." IOW, don't worry if you can't spend it fast enough, it will still be there to spend.
I do not understand how the act of that prior congress can establish these fiscal burdens for years into the future. (I always thought that there was something about one congress not being able to assume appropriations for a future congress? Maybe that was wishful thinking on my part?) It is disgusting. As a matter of fact, it appears that $105 billion is the minimum amount since I see that the (new) PPHF is established and "appropriates amounts to the fund in perpetuity." (All this at a clip of "FY2015 and each fiscal year thereafter = $2 billion.") WTF?
This monstrosity must be REPEALED in total. None of it can be allowed to stand.
An even more chilling thought -- I suspect that there are scores of similar legislative pieces that have done the same in terms of cavalier misappropriation for unconstitutional purposes. Is it any wonder that we find our "government" operating at such obscene levels of deficient spending that are growing larger with each passing month and year.
The problem that we have here with this specific aspect of the monstrosity is that this "act" is a mishmash of "Appropriations" and "Authorizations" mixed in with the establishment of a new set of "Entitlements."
Using this Glossary of Political Economy Terms, we can distinguish:
Entitlement program:
The kind of government program that provides individuals with personal financial benefits (or sometimes special government-provided goods or services) to which an indefinite (but usually rather large) number of potential beneficiaries have a legal right (enforceable in court, if necessary) whenever they meet eligibility conditions that are specified by the standing law that authorizes the program. The beneficiaries of entitlement programs are normally individual citizens or residents, but sometimes organizations such as business corporations, local governments, or even political parties may have similar special "entitlements" under certain programs. The most important examples of entitlement programs at the federal level in the United States would include Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, most Veterans' Administration programs, federal employee and military retirement plans, unemployment compensation, food stamps, and agricultural price support programs.
Authorization bill:
A (proposed) formal act (or “law”) of a legislative body (such as the U.S. Congress or a state legislature) that legally establishes a new government agency or program or else renews or extends an existing agency or program whose previous legal authorization to exist would otherwise expire with the passage of time. Authorizations may be for one year or more than one year — about one-half of current Federal spending is by agencies or programs subject to annual re-authorization, while the other half gets its legal basis either from longer term authorization bills or from permanent laws that provide spending authority automatically to ongoing "entitlement" programs like Social Security. Authorization bills also include specific figures as funding levels for the agencies and programs, but these sums are upper limits only (for the guidance of the appropriations committee) — no money can actually be spent or committed by the agency or program administrators until after a separate appropriation bill has also been passed and signed into law, legally enabling the Treasury to disburse the money.
Appropriation bill:
A (proposed) formal action by a legislative assembly (such as the U.S. Congress or a state legislature) that specifies exact amounts of the government's money that the Treasury may legally pay out (through new hiring, contracts for purchases, findings of individuals' eligibility for income transfer payments, etc.) for each of a list of particular pre-authorized programs carried out by governmental agencies over a specific period of time (normally one year).
There are so many aspects of this goliath that are clearly NOT Entitlements (as commonly defined and used), and are enacted via Authorizations contained within, but are clearly NOT to be funded beyond the prior FY (when it was enacted) without the passage of specific Appropriations bills. They simply can not be allowed to mash all of this garbage into this one bill and assume that they have going forward funding (especially into perpetuity like the example mentioned above!).
I don't think it would be difficult for the current House to put the kibosh on this illegal spending if they set their mind to it (and are willing to suspend a damn rule!). Hopefully disallowing the spending for the current FY will hold off implementation, until the whole thing is sent into the trash-bin by SCOTUS later this year.
Sorry I missed it! Thanks for filling me in!!!
Come on people, if the Republicans don’t play by the rules that the democrats set up in the last congress (where they were busy breaking the rules/making em up as they went along) it will just show everyone that Republicans are meanies, and, even more importantly, might make Madame Speaker Boehner cry a river and make his makeup run. What a mess that would be!!!!!!
Watching her now on live stream at foxnews.com, she’s on fire. Should be a thread here but where?
Hmm. The way I learned it was just the opposite — appropriations cannot exceed authorizations. A program could be authorized for $100 billion but if it receives only $1 million in appropriations it can spend only $1 million.
Are there any insiders that can comment further.
Well said.
Trump is a salesman. Nothing else.
Trump has no core beliefs. He supported Obama.
Trump is not an independent thinker. Except when he’s thinking about his personal finances. But Trump would never do the right thing for its own sake.
Most important, unlike Palin or Bachmann, Trump would never have the cojones to do the right thing when it’s unpopular.
Oh...so my initial thoughts on him were right. In that case, the heck with him.
As president, you need solid values, given the pressures of the job...we’ve all seen what happens when that isn’t the case, especially on the Republican side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.