Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Who granted Boehner a ten year term?

Posted on 07/23/2011 5:12:06 PM PDT by JimWayne

Can someone please explain what authority Boehner has to determine the budgets of future governments? Has he been granted a TEN YEAR term to the House of Representatives? He keeps talking of cutting spending in ten years time. Clearly, he was not voted for a ten year period. He needs to prepare the budget for his term, not for all eternity.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: debt; debtceiling; obama; palin; speakerboehner
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

1 posted on 07/23/2011 5:12:08 PM PDT by JimWayne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Are you sure it wasn’t Boehner saying that any offer of cutting spending over ten years was bogus because no future congress can be bound by the actions of a previous congress?

The whole point was that both Reagan and GHWB were, in their turn, skunked by tax-hiking, spending-reduction deals where the tax hikes went right through but the spending reductions were laughed off.


2 posted on 07/23/2011 5:14:54 PM PDT by sinanju
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne
This whole thing is a CHARADE!
3 posted on 07/23/2011 5:16:35 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Woah, Obama will appease Trump, but not Lakin? Thanks LSM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

He’s a RINO but are you saying a politician can’t plan for more than six years down the road? Sort of limiting, isn’t it?


4 posted on 07/23/2011 5:16:47 PM PDT by conservaterian (Sarah/DeMint '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

They have to make it appear that they’re doing something significant. Oddly, nobody in the public is fooled. We all understand that the only cuts are cuts to the scheduled increases of this year’s budget.


5 posted on 07/23/2011 5:16:57 PM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

You see, there are a few suckers here who think a 10 Cut plans sounds reasonable. But history tells a different story. Reagan was promised cuts that never happened, Bush1 Promised cuts that never happened. Bush 2 Never made any cuts, even though the GOP held all three branches of Govt.

In addition, look at the recent CR deal that was supposed to deliver 36 Billion in cuts and only delivered @350 Million in real cuts.
Plus future DC hacks are not bound by Boneheads deal.


6 posted on 07/23/2011 5:17:52 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; JimWayne
No one and any "long term deal" is a fraud. They can only lock in spending for fiscal years that start during this congressional term. That means 2012 & 2013. Anything else is bogus.

http://www.speaker.gov/Contact/

Office of the Speaker
H-232 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-0600
Fax: (202) 225-5117

U.S. Capitol Switchboard, (202) 224-3121

7 posted on 07/23/2011 5:20:27 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

This “10 year plan stuff is utter nonsense!” I’m surprised no on questions it.

What is “agreed on” today means nothing - Obama can, and will, probably ignore or radically change any “deal.” In addition, this Congress only has 1+ year more, and then a new one begins, with its own members and plans. Whatever they “agree to” for 10 years now is just sheer show and fantasy.


8 posted on 07/23/2011 5:20:40 PM PDT by PGR88 (I'm so open-minded my brains fell out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian

“He’s a RINO but are you saying a politician can’t plan for more than six years down the road?”

Actually, no, they can’t. Each year’s budget is that year’s budget. It mostly continues to fund what was funded last year. The rest of it is Christmas shopping for powerful constituencies. Pork. They can say, this project is funded for 10 years; F-35 procurement, for example. But the budget for that procurement is approved on a year-by-year basis. The only planning is: was it in there last year? Did they send us a campaign check? Okay, fund it this year too.


9 posted on 07/23/2011 5:21:38 PM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

You are correct. No agreement to bind a future congress to cutting is enforceable. But any tax increase continues until a future congress passes a bill through both houses, and the President signs. Similarly, debt incurred today will need to be paid in the future.


10 posted on 07/23/2011 5:21:56 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (When you've only heard lies your entire life, the truth sounds insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian

He can’t plan past 2012. They can’t make a future Congress do anything.

And if he caves he is going to feel the heat in 2012.


11 posted on 07/23/2011 5:22:05 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

It is how it is scored by doing a 10 year scoring... if you pass a budget with certain cuts then you track that out over 10 years to see how it would work out... pretty straight forward so I’m not sure why you are so amped up about it... next year they can come in and make a new budget that wipes out this years... that is how it is.


12 posted on 07/23/2011 5:23:53 PM PDT by djl_sa (Looking forward to 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

It works that way because he realizes people like me in their 50’s will have a hard time remembering him in 10 years.


13 posted on 07/23/2011 5:27:26 PM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Though it’s certainly a sign of leadership to have a long term plan, these days it is imperative to show progress in the 2012 FY.


14 posted on 07/23/2011 5:31:02 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

WHO IN THE HELL Foisted this doddering cry baby and RINO on us?? They NEED Punished,severely!


15 posted on 07/23/2011 5:31:32 PM PDT by Cheetahcat ( November 4 2008 ,A date that will live in Infamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian
They can plan, according to clintoon about 12 years back, were all going to be on easy street and have a golden goose and a Lewinsky on the side about now, go look under your bed.
16 posted on 07/23/2011 5:33:03 PM PDT by org.whodat (Speaker West, name sounds good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Amen.

Bohner has as much say over the next congress as Pelosi has over this congress.

That is why I was so disappointed with the continuing resolution with $358million in cuts and the Ryan plan that balances the budget sometime around 2035.

So far, these arguments in DC are over next to nothing of any meaning.


17 posted on 07/23/2011 5:41:39 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi (Moutaineers are Always Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

This is the one thing I do not like about FR.

The blatant racism that tries to be passed off as politics.

Every time Boehner tries to make a sensible argument, he is attacked by people here, just because of his skin color.

If he was white, everyone here would be applauding him.


18 posted on 07/23/2011 5:42:24 PM PDT by 11johara28
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 11johara28

What the sam hill are you talking about??


19 posted on 07/23/2011 5:49:49 PM PDT by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 11johara28

lol


20 posted on 07/23/2011 5:51:03 PM PDT by TwoSwords (The Lord is a man of war, Exodus 15:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne
Bonehead is a butt head. This ten year plan only cuts 370 billion a year which will never happen. Workarounds will nullify it and the debt will just go on. Not to mention the rest of the stupid plan in the works.
21 posted on 07/23/2011 5:52:41 PM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

So true. If you think anything meaningful is going to come out of this Congress prepare for disappointment. We are on our way to credit downgrade no matter what transpires.


22 posted on 07/23/2011 5:55:54 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Bonehead is a butt head. This ten year plan only cuts 370 billion a year which will never happen. Workarounds will nultify it and the debt will just go on. Not to mention the rest of the stupid plan in the works. The balance budget will never be law because it will never get the States to pass and will be years down the road just to find out it failed. These Washington nitwits are totally worthless.


23 posted on 07/23/2011 5:57:48 PM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian

House members, including the speaker, are elected every two years, senators have 6 year terms.


24 posted on 07/23/2011 5:57:50 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Gov. Sarah Palin. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
They can only lock in spending for fiscal years that start during this congressional term. That means 2012 & 2013. Anything else is bogus.

I think you are correct. As I recall, fiscal years begin in October so the current Congress would/could set the budget and allocate funding for FY13. That would begin in October 2012, a few months before the new Congress, elected in November 2012, is seated.

25 posted on 07/23/2011 5:58:02 PM PDT by InterceptPoint (w)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

It needs to be cut more than $15 trillion over the next ten years.


26 posted on 07/23/2011 5:58:15 PM PDT by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in a noisy avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne; All

WOOOHOOOO! HOORAY Jim Wayne! (nice take)

DEFUND socialist collectives, foreign AND domestic. NOW!

OUTSTANDING thread!


27 posted on 07/23/2011 6:00:45 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne
Congress, the Administration, and the Bureaucracy are strung-out junkies, searching desperately for a fix. Just one more fix and then they will have their addiction licked. Sure they will. Just like all junkies.

Promising to cut expenditures in the future is nothing more than junkie talk. Heritage Foundation economist JD Foster explains that a promise to cut spending is nothing more than a promise:
When discretionary spending totals are cut immediately, that’s a spending cut. Such cuts are demonstrably not “pie in the sky,” so it’s fine to tally the effects over the next ten years.
“Similarly, when entitlement programs are altered in law, that’s a spending cut. Again, it’s perfectly appropriate to add up the resultant budgetary ramifications for a reasonable period to give some context for budgeteers.
“But even statutory spending caps, necessary and beneficial though they would be, are ultimately only promises to cut spending, unless they are backed by inescapable, automatic cuts if the caps are breached. Just about everything else is only a promise, and Washington breaks promises with breathtaking regularity.

No kidding! Ya think?

28 posted on 07/23/2011 6:01:07 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bonfire
What the sam hill are you talking about??

C'mon man! That P.C. B.S. only goes so far. I know that we're all really the same and all that, but I can't stand it when someone tries to pretend that you can't tell that Boehner is orange!

Grow a pair man and say it like it is!

Do I need.../s

29 posted on 07/23/2011 6:04:04 PM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian

1. Yes
2. We believe in limited government.


30 posted on 07/23/2011 6:04:14 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 11johara28
"If he was white, everyone here would be applauding him."

It's not his race people don't like, it's the fact that people think he's Muslim. The only thing worse than that would be if he were a Catholic. /sarc

No matter what Boehner does it seems like there's a crowd ready to slam him without so much as skipping a beat from the last line of dung that was posted. First predicting how he'd fold as soon as President Jello walked into the room. Then, there was the series of posts about how he'd never pass the CCB and send it to the Senate. Then there was how he'd never stick to the CCB once the Senate shot it down. Now, it's about why is he looking ten years out.

Fine, then don't talk about what the deficit he can deal with is other than the deficit between now and October. After that he can make a new budget and deal with the next year. You can't have it both ways and pretend that SS and the other stuff is a single year issue, that's dividing the issues exactly the way the democrat fascist party always tries to, deal with some little things "for now" and work on the big issues after some commission meets or after blah, blah, blah. Divide and conquor, that's the ticket, whatever Boehner does, change the topic to come up with some other measure to use so you can keep saying he's no good.

So far he's made Mr Jello look like that infant he really is, gotten the RATS to start backpeddling on when the deadline for catastrophe is, forget the bunk about not paying SS because Barry knew Boehner wasn't falling for it, and now Boehner is too big for his britches. Perfect democrat technique.

JMHO

31 posted on 07/23/2011 6:04:20 PM PDT by Rashputin (Obama is insane but kept medicated and on golf courses to hide it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Who gave Pelosi and her Democrats the right to start Obamacare in 2013?


32 posted on 07/23/2011 6:04:24 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Any discussions about the budget extending past 2012 are worthless and meaningless.

The only items that can be considered authentic and that will possibly have any actual impact are those that are immediate and specific.

The rest is the same kind of lying double-talk that typifies almost everything politicians say or do.


33 posted on 07/23/2011 6:05:14 PM PDT by Iron Munro (The more effeminate & debauched the people, the more they are fitted for a tyrannical government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

You can start a program at a certain date.You can’t say that Congress can never repeal it.

You can’t force a congress in 2014 to implement a Trillion dollar cut.

” The problem is partly legal, partly political. Courts have long held that Congress cannot “bind” future Congresses—that is, it can’t force a future session of Congress to carry on its own policies. That practice, formally known as “legislative entrenchment,” is seen as privileging one group of lawmakers over another, “binding” future to the priorities set in the present”

http://www.slate.com/id/2260476/


34 posted on 07/23/2011 6:09:29 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 11johara28

“If [Boehner] was white, everyone here would be applauding him.”

That was very funny. A good laugh is essential now and then, especially with all these DC shenanigans going on. Thanks!


35 posted on 07/23/2011 6:09:54 PM PDT by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

“You are correct. No agreement to bind a future congress to cutting is enforceable. But any tax increase continues until a future congress passes a bill through both houses, and the President signs. Similarly, debt incurred today will need to be paid in the future.”

Outstanding post and most succintly put. Why can’t just one of our guys put it this way when some talking head on national TV gives them the opening?


36 posted on 07/23/2011 6:11:28 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
"Who gave Pelosi and her Democrats the right to start Obamacare in 2013?"

That's why 0's in such a hurry to get the funding underway. He knows that the next congress could just as easily pull the plug on his obamacare as it could fund it. He wants to have a ton of money already invested in the monstrosity in hopes that that may cause the next congress to go along.

That's why we need MORE real conservatives to land in D.C in January of 2013 practicing their mantra-FUBO!

37 posted on 07/23/2011 6:11:40 PM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Thanks. It just seemed like a slow news night.


38 posted on 07/23/2011 6:13:57 PM PDT by 11johara28
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Thanks. It just seemed like a slow news night.


39 posted on 07/23/2011 6:14:12 PM PDT by 11johara28
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

This is nothing new Congress and presidents have been using those paper games for a very long time to pretend to make cuts that they really have no control or power to actually bring about. Even immediate “cuts” voted in are only valid if they are carried out, and not somehow funded in another way and/or need really cut in the first place.

Clinton’s supposed “balanced budget” that was much vaunted for creating a surplus never actually came to be beyond the paper it was printed on. How? by kicking the cuts down the road.

You see - what it comes down too - by pushing scheduled cuts out to other administrations, to other Congresses, to other people’s shoulders - it is a form of “passing the buck”. You can say you scheduled all sorts of cuts. That is how they can lay claim to making Trillions in cuts to spending... so what if the only REAL cuts (those that happen in the short-term) are minuscule - they CLAIM those big numbers for political reasons. It is a way of playing “wag the dog”.

The only thing that matters right now is... right now. That is why even Boehner is talking about including a raising of the debt limit in the negotiations. With any meaningful cuts, such a raising of the nation’s credit line would be completely unnecessary. This is the key, in my mind, to seeing through the smokescreen on BOTH sides. By playing this game, we are just continuing on the rail to the Greek problem. Raising the debt limit is proof that none of the politicians are serious about cutting spending NOW.


40 posted on 07/23/2011 6:14:35 PM PDT by TheBattman (They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne
By law, all spending legislation must be scored in terms of its probable cost over the next ten years.

At the same time, it is true that what one Congress passes is not binding on a future Congress.

But the ten-year budget plan provides a baseline for planning purposes.

It's good policy.

41 posted on 07/23/2011 6:16:14 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/23/hold-fast-in-the-face-of-fear/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


42 posted on 07/23/2011 6:18:14 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bonfire

It is called satire.


43 posted on 07/23/2011 6:19:42 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 11johara28

Good one! “Racism” raises its ugly head again,this time before zero could claim it!! LOLOL!!!


44 posted on 07/23/2011 6:20:51 PM PDT by rodguy911 (FreeRepublic:Land of the Free because of the Brave--Sarah Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ngat

“You are correct. No agreement to bind a future congress to cutting is enforceable. But any tax increase continues until a future congress passes a bill through both houses, and the President signs. Similarly, debt incurred today will need to be paid in the future.”

A Constitutional Amendment sure is binding.


45 posted on 07/23/2011 6:24:11 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

“The only thing worse than that would be if he were a Catholic. /sarc”

The way he smokes and drinks, I thought he was a Catholic./No sarcasm.


46 posted on 07/23/2011 6:25:08 PM PDT by 11johara28
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

“The only thing worse than that would be if he were a Catholic. /sarc”

The way he smokes and drinks, I thought he was a Catholic./No sarcasm.


47 posted on 07/23/2011 6:25:15 PM PDT by 11johara28
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

yes.


48 posted on 07/23/2011 6:30:02 PM PDT by ken21 (liberal + rino progressive media hate palin, bachman, cain...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon

More binding than one congress “promising” to cut future spending, but if a Constitutional Amendment to Balance the Budget is what you are referring to, that says nothing about lowering Federal spending. Anyway, contitutional amendments aren’t all that binding on the future either. 18th amendment only lasted 14 years before it was reversed.


49 posted on 07/23/2011 6:40:40 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Silly goose, the joke’s on you. The future years spending “reductions” won’t happen. It is all just for your entertainment.


50 posted on 07/23/2011 6:44:44 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson