Posted on 07/30/2011 8:21:33 PM PDT by Beaten Valve
Bookmark
I agree, the state legislatures should still be picking the senators.
Regarding our original Founders, my dear (WWII vet) dad always that the only thing they missed the mark on was in not putting term limits on our legislators!
And IMO, he’s right.
“Yes it’ll fail but it puts everyone on the record and people will still be pissed come election time over it.”
I wouldn’t be so sure that it’d fail. Many states are mandated by their constitutions to balance their budgets and those that do are faring much better than those that are now going bankrupt (or already are).
The people will make their wishes known, probably loudly. And coming into an election year, we may very well see the necessary majorities vote for a BBA.
“Don’t raise the debt ceiling.”
Then Tim Geithner would get to make the call on where to spend and where to cut.
And who do you suppose he gets his orders from?
BHO et al have so scared the uninformed masses with threat of default that they’d still hate the Repubs as they step into the voting booth next year.
Obama, the Dems and MSM would see to that.
This "deal" is stupid and shows the ugliness that is the Democrat party.
First, Obama gets the thing he craved most of all: no debt limit debate in 2012. Another Democrat shameful sham exposed right there, just as Republicans said: the election was his priority.
Second, this outlined deal is similar to Boehner 2.0 which Democrats demagogued as "Tea Party extremism." So they lied; Boehner 2.0 *was* the compromise bill he claimed it was.
Dems lie? I'm shocked! /s
I notice the "cuts" don't exceed the debt limit increase as they would under the Boehner plan if ABCNews' outline reflects the "deal." I'll wait and see if that holds in the final "deal" which we'll see at the last minute without opportunity to fully digest or provide feedback.
There's still the commission which could be an EID waiting to go off. It depends on the details.
It isn't clear yet if the "cuts" are double-counting Reid "war savings" cuts or actual reductions in increase "cuts."
Tea Party Freshman lose the required passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) so the element Boehner added in 3.0 to win passage by House GOP is gone.
So... they wasted a day, embarrassed the Speaker/leadership and have absolutely nothing to show for it in the "deal." They'll vote against it but if Obama's on board, Dems will vote in lockstep and only a few dozen GOP votes are needed to pass the House version of this bill.
This is worse than Boehner's bill 2.0 or 3.0, it's much worse than "Cut, Cap & Balance."
In the most favorable light, all you can really say is there'll be a (meaningless) BBA vote, may not be tax hikes but, for once, a debt ceiling increase may have offsets.
I'm thrilled. Victory is ours. /s
Boehner isn't the problem. REID. OBAMA. They are the problem. They need to go in 2012.
CA Assembly members are limited to six years in office, 3 terms, and Senators to eight years in office, 2 terms. After that they are banned from that chamber for life.
Fourteen years in state legislative office seems like ample time but there are those who argue there's a problem with "institutional memory" in the CA legislature. I haven't read up on recent analyses but know they've been done.
Hold on... they haven't voted on it yet.
You never fool with Department of Energy. They bring home our energy resource that fuels the economy!
I'll take it as a start. What I don't see is the revenue issue, but I'd bet it is still in there hiding in legalese.
Second, finding their own cuts, how is that any different than them demanding the "loopholes" be closed on corporate jet owners? Although it gives the republicans a hill to stand on.
Lastly the Moody's downgrade is expected in the next 60 days...long before the automatic deadline. Spending cuts and loophole closing after the downgrade won't reverse it.
Strange, strange, strange, during all this debate over the budget, not once has it been suggested that the gov’t sell off some of it’s property, oh don’t worry the taxpayers will foot the bill,,,suckers.
If the debt ceiling is raised, I bet taxes are gonna have to pay for it. Any increase in debt is an increase in taxes.
But I am sure that the next time this issue comes up, the decisions will be much easier. Debt will be lower, the economy will be rolling along, better/wiser folks will be making the decisions, and no one will have to feel any pain.
“A nay vote will be an albatross around the neck of RAT candidates up for re-election next year. This is good”
Bingo
>> I’m having a hard time seeing ANYTHING Hussein wanted. <<
He got it to look like the republicans want to cut Medicare.
This is so true. We simply won't win these battles until FReepers are the people making these kind of decisions...
“And, what if we win the Senate in 2012 by partly losing now”
We have already lost the Senate and probably the House, too. The campaign and PR battle has already started. A letter sent by the GA Democrats this AM stated that only Johnny Issackson reasonable Republican who would negotiate (and capitulate) with the Democrats to save this country from the inevitable disastor being caused by the Republicans.
I think the BBA may get to the States.
The downgrading of our credit rating will be the great unassailable impetus to keep the log rolling, otherwise we will go from oshi-no-GDP Japan (now) to bring-your-hyperinflated-money-in-a-truck Zimbabwe (by 2013).
Any Donk who votes against BBA will be 2010'd in 2012.
I stand with Congressman Allen West.
Hey if you ever do a study on that or just collect some links ping me please.
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.