The partisan grandstanding that has replaced reasoned compromise in Washington
is a pathetic outgrowth of an apathetic nation. A minority of citizens even vote
- what did you expect? Our elected officials over the past 40 years have raided
our Social Security system coffers thereby putting a good safety net for our
citizens in jeopardy. This system was put in place by a caring population and is
a Godsend to millions after decades of contributions to the nation. It should
remain.Senator Hatch first ran on a TERM LIMITS platform. Odd that
he is still in office these many decades later. He then, as now, panders to the
political winds of the day. Does anyone remember that he was best friends with
Ted Kennedy, and that they co-authored much legislation? Or that he was known as
a good collaborator because he could get things done for the good of the
country, not just his party? It is time for him to retire. However, I do not
begrudge him gratitude for the efforts that he made in his career - even if he
became just one of the good ol' boys.
I commend Senators Hatch and Lee for taking a tough stand on this issue. The
"cuts" made in this bill were mere decreases in future spending.
Unfortunately, the rating agencies want to see cuts in CURRENT spending;
otherwise, we really face the threat of a downgrade and higher interest rates.
Our Utah Senators understand the importance of righting our fiscal ship with
meaningful reforms as opposed to cheap Washington DC lip service.
Bluejean, problem with your whole "were socking it to the rich" is
that as my income has risen, my nominal tax rate has decreased. For example,
for most of the year I don't pay any social security taxes. I right off the top
pay 4 percent LESS than the average middle class worker - and my employer pays 6
percent less tax. So even though my rate is supposed to go up, it actually goes
down once I cross over 106k in income.Add to that the deduction I
get for second home, my tax deferred income, I am doing just fine, thank you
very much.Do I want to pay more? Not really. But I am hardly being
soaked. I mean, come on. Lets stop the pity party for the poor overly educated
and financially well to do. It am perpetually amazed by how many people have
bought off on this line. You can't tax someone into poverty.... or equality.
Where in the world did this come from. Show one example of this ever happening.
OK, lets increase taxes, on those who have worked hard and educated themselves
more to have a higher income, into the mix and mess- then sit back and watch
what happens. Results: revenue will decrease even more as the rich take their
business elsewhere and lobby for more loopholes. Guess what? Business isn't
motivated by lousy profits swallowed by high taxes and socialist-esque
principles. What this argument is all about reveals the
fundamental core of the American spirit. Shall we provide opportunity to the
poor to raise them to a higher financial level and then, when they get there,
allow government to tax them into equality? If you really want to
destroy free enterprise, and make us financially equal, then for sure, continue
to support the Democrat's idealogy. Sit back and observe as you contribute your
paycheck willingly to the poorly administered agenda that your elected
officials decide is best. What a utopia! You won't have to think anymore, just
work, pay taxes and play on facebook! Individuality and intelligence would only
be needed at the highest levels of power. Clearly, this leads to
the end of the American Spirit, integrity, industry, ingenuity. Selfish
millionaires aren't the problem.
In the end, the system worked as designed by the founders, and neither side got
what they wanted - which is just fine. It is unfortunate we will never truly
know until Hatch is out of office the convictions of his heart on this one as he
voted soley to match what his voting district wanted. He may have beleived how
he voted, but I doubt it.Alan Simpson said it best when he took both
sides to task. The dear Speaker of the House' plan to have a bipartisan
commission make recommendation on spending cuts, when only just months before a
bipartisan commission had done just that, showed that this was more about taking
credit than actually achieving results.Mr. Reid was no better,
forcing his Republican counter part in the house to play his hand first, and
expose the lack of support he actually had. It was politics at its finest, but
hardly our country at its finest.And to the Republicans tha blame
Obama for the budget, yet fail to recognize that their party owns the power of
the purse, show that this is about team upmanship, not the country they care
most about. Patriotism at its lowest.
Yes Orrin and you were right there when Bush got us into costly wars based upon
lies and cut taxes. And of course you voted for each! And dear Orrin where
were you when congress failed for 12 years to solve the immigration issues?
My support for Pres. Obama is now officially over. He once again showed me how
little he cares for his "base" and caved in again to the tiny minority
of tea party nutjobs. How can anyone with a shred of honesty in their brain not
see the need to find at least some new revenue in tackling the debt issue? No
one has to like it, or even support it, you just have to acknowledge the
necessity of it. You have a huge amount of debt? Stop spending so much and try
to find a way to bring in more money - its a simple economic principle that all
Americans understand. I will never vote for any of the current crop of
republican presidential contenders but I will certainly not vote for Pres. Obama
We as a nation now have more people getting handouts than we have people paying
into to pool. We have run out of money, and yet we are unable to stop the
entitlements that we promised.Our fate is sealed. Our government
will collapse as a result of corruption, over spending, and poor management. Everyone hold on and enjoy the ride.
With all the negativity registered here, we sometimes devalue the privilege to
come into an online forum board like this and spout off to our hearts' content.
For all the problems we face, and the unresolved challenges ahead, let us never
forget, the informed as well as the uninformed, may shout it from the housetops
without fear of reprisal, imprisonment and death.That's worth
celebrating once in a while . . .
The short way to spell HYPOCRITE is HATCH. Whenever a republican is in the
White House, the debt ceiling goes up with his blessing. Whenever a Democrat is
there, he suddenly finds his inner fiscal conservative. Thank goodness he's not
playing politics with this issue, huh?
People people people we as a nation never have to go into debt period. It is a
farce brought on by corporations. We can issue money debt free into the economy
but we gave that authority away to the federal reserve and now we pay interest
they create out of thin air. It's magical isn't it.
In order for us to get control over the budget, we have to freeze spending. That
means what the government got in 2011 is what they get for 2012. Romney proposes
to do that and increase just for inflation minus 1%. Zero base budgeting then,
if Romney is elected, requires each government agency to justify requests for
increases. There is no automatic 8% increase in the baseline budget after that.
Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn has proposed merging all programs where
there is duplication. He says the GAO has found $200 billion per year spent on
duplicated programs. But to listen to the Democrats you would think the Tea
Party wants to kill everyone's dog and throw old people out in the snow. There
is no justification in the attacks on the Tea Party by Democrats other than for
partisan political reasons. There is no truth in what they are saying.
Most folks do not realize that ther eis an automatic 8% increase built into
next years federal budget. Congress doesn't have to do anything for it to
happen. It is the new baseline budget that becomes the floor which Congress THEN
adds additional increases. so when you see the Democrats whining about
"cutting" they are talking about reducing the an additional amount
over that amount. To put it another way, the 2011 base is $100 but
the base for 2012 is going up to $108.00 automatically. Then, on top of the
$108.00, Congress proposes to add more money. The so called cutting they are
talking about comes from the amount Congress proposes to add beyond the new 2012
baseline. So a 3% increase is really an 11% increase from 2011 level. The so
called cutting is nothing but a big lie.
Shame on Hatch. In his head and heart he knows a "yes" vote is the
right vote, but serving one more term is more important than the economic well
being of the country. Lee is a nut; that much he proved during the campaign;
however, Hatch has had his moments of lucidity during his long service.
Tea-partiers may clog the D-News comments, but this eccentric group is a
minority, except, of course, amongst delegates, and this is the contingency that
Hatch unfortunately has to impress.
It is easy for Hatch and Lee to oppose the deal. Their vote is irrelevant.
They knew the bill would pass, so they knew their vote would not matter. Let's
see how they feel when their vote really does matter. Hatch is a
marionette totally having his strings controlled by Lee. It is pretty pathetic
Time for Hatch and Lee to go. They've both been there too long. Oh yeah,
Bishop and Chaffetz too.
Good to see our Senators standing together. It is a bad deal--no real cuts in
Hatch and Lee support two wars but are wishy washy on the funding of them.
Perhaps 9-11 bankrupted us and we refuse to believe it; maybe the enemy did
win. I am confident Hatch is in favor to continue sending Israel 3 Billion
every year just because we should put them up on a pedastal (never mind all the
wars they drag us into).
Hatch hopes to be in office 42 years; same with Mr. Lee. Neither has ever
run a business; their passion is to live off the government, shrink the
government so they have a Tues-Thursday work week and tell the rest of us to
believe in capitolism.
To "Furry1993 | 1:45 p.m." but Clinton never produced a balanced
budget. The best year was about $23 billion in deficits. We haven't had a
surplus or balanced budget since 1963.Here are the figures for the
Gross National Debt during the Clinton years:Year Gross Debt
(millions)1991 $3,598,1781992 $4,001,7871993 $4,351,0441994 $4,643,3071995 $4,920,5861996 $5,181,4651997
$5,369,2061998 $5,478,1891999 $5,605,5232000 $5,628,7002001 $5,769,881A balanced budget or surplus should be indicated
by a decrease in the gross national debt. Where is the balanced budget?
after the dust settles if we still get our AAA rating downgraded then Mike Lee
was correct. Stay tuned over the next few months.
Senator's Lee and Hatch correctly understand that this budget "deal"
solves nothing. All it accomplishes is kicking the REAL discussion down the
road a couple of feet. Without a balanced budget amendment, it's just the same
old rhetoric on a different Washington afternoon. We expect leadership form
Washington, and with the exception of Senators Lee and Hatch, I haven't seen
very much of that. If anything, this whole ruse has underscored the need to
replace Obama and to take the Senate in 2012.Senate Majority Leader
@ Howard Beal et al:It is the defense budget and those troops who
are paid through it that allow social security, medicare, and all the other
programs in the federal budget to exist. Having served 23+ years in the AF I
recognize that waste exists, but to arbitrarily establish a future defense cut
not based on projected threats is absolutely unacceptable. By establishing
"triggers" the WH and Congress have,IMO, recognized that
agreement will not take place so they are going to "punish" each
party's "favorite" part of the budget. That is certainly no way to run
a government. Washington D.C. has failed us, again!
Sens Lee and Hatch are two of the most hypocritical Senators currently in
office. They both know that a great deal of the current debt was created by
republican spending during the Bush years. They also know that a balanced
budget amendment is not practical and would not take effect for at least 2 years
while the states voted on its ratification. They both just want a reason to
disagree with the president and pretend to be "sticking to their
guns." BTW, I was a Obama supporter prior to this deal. He will no longer
have my support due to his unwillingness to fight for new revenue (taxes) to pay
down this debt. Anyone who thinks that big oil should keep getting tax breaks
while our country is trillions in debt needs to have their head examined.
Neither party seems to want to address social security, medicare, or the defense
department, the three biggest slices of the budget pie. With the interest being
so extreme on the budget, any real budget solutions that leave these slices
untouched is smoke and mirrors. It's time to face the reality.
WhatsInItForMe said: "The fact that we are here today to debate raising
America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S.
Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing
financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless
fiscal policies. ... -- SENATOR Barack H. Obama, March 2006Doesn't practice what he preaches, does he?Liberals, spin it
however you want. Won't matter. He said it! And now the rest of the
story...In fact, every Senate Democratincluding Barack Obama and Joe
Bidenvoted against boosting the debt ceiling, while all but two Senate
Republicans voted in favor. It was Bushs fourth debt-ceiling hike in five
years, for a total of $3 trillion.How many times has Obama tried to
hike the debt ceiling?Some people learn from their mistakes while
other continue partisan politics always.
To WellBehavedWomen | 12:38 p.m. Aug. 1, 2011 Actually, no.
President Clinton didn't need a balanced budget amendment to produce balanced
budgets (with a surplus each time) the last two years he was in office. He just
did it because he was a good financial planner (and he had to fight Gingrich and
other Republicans to a standstill to get the balanced budgets). This whole
balanced budget amendment rhetoric is just political gamesmanship. Nothing
more, nothing less.
It is time for all good men to come to the aid of the country. That
means that Romney, Huntsman, Hatch, Lee, Chaffetz and others now need to get on
to a positive track for 2012.They all need to get behind Senator Tom
Coburn (R-OKLAHOMA)'s $9 Trillion deficit reduction plan...or something like
unto it.He would cut $8 Trillion and raise $1 Trillion...a balanced
approach if we ever saw one...over a ten year period.This current
budget deal is a tiny step in the right direction. It is the best we can do at
this moment...with this President and this Senate.But the next
president had better be pointing us to a way to balance the budget.An Amendment would be a grand thing. But we need a vision of how it can
actually be brought to pass. Clearly, Obama has no such
vision.....even out ten years.The GOP must do better.As
someone important once said "It's a vision thing."
Re whatsinitformeObama just became the first president in my
lifetime to make serious cuts in government spending. Doesn't that prove that
Obama was right in 2006? Since he was able to make real change to the debt issue
when no one else could doesn't that mean that he is providing good leadership?
Yes he increased the debt limit, but unlike every other president
since Eisenhower he also reduced spending by a significant amount. Half truths
are half lies too.
@Esquire: Would that be anything like "We have to pass the Bill to see
whats in the Bill"? I like that approach.
@Nick: "The road to serfdom cometh."The GOP and their rich
friends in big business have been working on that plan since the Reagan era.
America's middle class hasn't gained any ground in 30 years, and we've been
losing for the past 5. Extinction of the middle class is all part of their plan
to put all the wealth and power into the hands of those 5% and let them run
things the way they see fit. The real estate market crash was engineered to boot
out millions of homeowners so their houses could be bought up by investment
firms for next to nothing. High gas and food prices put a damper on consumer
spending and a shrinking job market means more and more of us go off to join the
"working poor" at McD's or Wal-Mart. It's class warfare and as it
continues we'll soon all be making just barely enough to rent a roof over our
heads. They want to put America back on a level with China and Mexico so it will
be profitable for them to manufacture things here again.
I am glad Senator Lee's word is his bond. But what the debt limit increase is
really about is the word/bond of the United States Government not Senator Lee's
personal word/bond.The Congress (current and past) has ordered all
kinds of spending. Now the government needs to get in and borrow the money to
pay for those obligations. Doing less would be dishonest. When you don't meet
such obligations, you can expect your (personal or governmental) credit rating
to be down-graded.Holding the debt limit increase hostage so that
the GOP could get the White House and the Democratic Senate to get serious about
the deficit - obviously against their will - was a good plan.But
now, the government needs to pay the obligations Congress has already
authorized.For Lee or Hatch or Chaffetz or Romney to now oppose this
deal is irresponsible. This battle is over.There will be plenty of
fighting to do in the follow-up aspects of this bill as the new committee
reports its recommendations. And the deal requires a Congressional vote on a
Balanced Budget Amendment. But the next real battle about spending
is the 2012 election.
Just like voters will oppose Sens. Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee at the next
This is appalling to me that our senators would rather sabotage our economy than
compromise with democrats. Hatch got my vote the last 2 elections, but he wont
be getting it again.As a moderate Lee never got my vote. I will
never vote for an extremist from the right or the left. People who are not
willing to comprise are incapable of accomplishing anything in Washington.
Raises debt limit $900 billion. Lowers spending this year $7 billion. $7
billion this year when Obama is spending $401 Million dollars a day more than we
take in. The deal doesn't seem like it does a thing. They should vote against
it. And where is the Senate's budget plan. This bill contains a gimmick to
pass a budget, the deem to pass, that doesn't allow for a vote. The same gimmick
they rammed Obamacare through with. This is a horrible bill as it stands now
and should be voted down.
I'm sad that Hatch and Lee work for tea partiers and not for all the Utahns that
elected them. I'll be unable to support either of them. There must be a bump
in the debt ceiling (commitments already made, not new spending) and cuts in
"unnecessary gov't spending" - Mr. Obama. A Balanced Budget Amendment
won't fix it and will pretty much insure that each recession becomes a
depression. Just ask non-political Nobel economists. Cuts aren't going to
happen overnight and tea partiers are ruining the GOP. Sorry...I'm becoming
more and more unhappy with the tea party movement. I guess we'll know for sure
at the next election if Obama gets 4 more years.
Without a Balanced Budget Amendment, we will just be back in this mess in a few
years. We cannot keep spending money we don't have and mortgaging our children's
future. Senator Hatch and Lee are right to oppose this deal, it is a good start
but falls short on real long term reforms.
Quote of the Century on the U.S.'s Big Debt:"The fact that we
are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership
failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can not pay its own bills. It is
a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries
to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. ... Increasing America's
debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the
buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices
today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt
problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."-- SENATOR Barack H. Obama, March 2006Doesn't practice what he
preaches, does he?Liberals, spin it however you want. Won't matter.
He said it!
I support both hatch and Lee thanks for saying no to this joke. My kids as well
as yours are screwed. We better get people in place or this will get so far out
of control the rest of the world will stop wanting to deal with us.
This deal won't do anything. There are ways of saving more money than the
politicians claim to save. There are ways of cutting costs without disrupting
anything that the government currently does.According to Bloomberg's
article "U.S. Auditors Say Duplicate Programs Cost Billions" there are
hundreds of billions of dollars being wasted on redundant programs. Even if
there was only $100 billion saved, that right there is $1Trillion in 10
years.Turning Medicare over to private companies would save another
$30 billion/yr. Currently Medicare loses money to fraud at twice the rate of
private insurance. So, according to "Medicare Fraud: A $60 Billion
Crime" at CBS News, we could save a lot just by getting government out of
Medicare WITHOUT reducing services.Last year the Federal Government
spent $165 billion on long term unemployment, giving people 99 weeks of
unemployment checks. If we cut that back to the original 26 weeks, that would
save us another $100 billion. Plus, it will further save money by forcing
people to humble themselves and to do the jobs that they claim American's won't
do. For every person that starts working, that further cuts unemployment costs.
While I have certainly not always agreed with Hatch it is sad to see him become
the step child of Mike Lee- what irony that the senior senator from Utah now
takes all his political direction from a guy that pursuaded a couple thousand
very conservative Utah voters to support him and thus avoid a real test of his
political power by having to defeat Bennett in an open primary and now Hatch is
little more than a lap dog so he can try and have six more years and not leave
in disgrace- very sad day in Utah politics
The Amendment process of the Constitution was designed by the framers to be
difficult with more than majority and an extended ratification process. Senator
Lee and Representative Jason want to force it be done by a simple quick majority
vote. This is an unconstitutional position.
Mike Lee was already a clown. By aligning himself with Lee, Hatch too became a
clown. Both need to go at election time.This is not a time to hold
the US taxpayer hostage. Both should be listening to the majority of Utah and
vote FOR the proposal. It isn't perfect but that is because they CHOSE to waste
seven months before addressing this crucial bill. They harmed the economy and
public faith by putting it off THIS long.
"My Word Is My Bond"????? BWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!I seriously
did a "Spit Take" with my morning coffee when I saw that quote by
@ouisc"Debt default is merely "fear mongering" by the
Democrats."And economists all over the world.And
Wall Street.And investors all over the world.And Speaker
John Boehner.And Mitch McConnell.Yep, big conspiracy
theory created by the Democrats!FYI - Balancing the budget simply
cuts off further debt spending. How will you address the already existing debt?
While conintuing tax cuts? Simple math says both cannot happen.
We are not in danger of a default. We will still make our payments, though it
may come at the expense of some less-than-vital services. We could shut
government down, if necessary, to reduce expenses so we can keep our loan
commitments. Debt default is merely "fear mongering" by the
Democrats.We simply need to get our spending under control. We
should get our rating reduced, because our debt to income ratio is simply
embarassing.I am not a tea partier, but I do believe Hatch and Lee
are right on this one. We need to balance our budget! In addition, we can't
keep giving this President more money to spend that we simply don't have!
The deal envisions increasing the federal debt over the next ten years from
about $14.3 trillion to $22 trillion. Without the deal, the debt would have
increased to $24 trillion. So, we should all be delighted that we are only
increasing the debt by $8 trillion instead of $10 trillion. If that is all we
can do, then this nation is finished. We do not deserve to be free. The road
to serfdom cometh.
oldcougar,Just a simple question I have invested in social security
for 30 years, so I should get less than you because you happen to have been born
ten years before me? I am ok with that if I can quit paying into social
security for the next ten years.It is interesting we hear the
concept of shared sacrifice, I think the new definition of sharing is don't
touch my stuff, sacrifice everyone else's stuff. Facts r stubborn keeps
pointing out the fact that without cuts to entitlements and defense, as well as
increasing taxes, we will never get a handle on our debt.
Of course they would both oppose it. It's more political grandstanding. They
would rather run this nation into oblivion than accept any sort of compromise.
Remember this, remember their stand against the future of this
nation. Vote them both out when election time comes.
@brent t co,You're pretty generous with someone else's money. Some
of us have been investing in SS for 40 years. Not our fault congress robbed the
fund to pay for other stuff. Paul Ryan has the right idea on this. Fix it for
the future by making changes that don't affect those retired or about to retire
that have figured SS into their planning. Nice to be so tough, but not
practical. Too many of us senior voters to allow such nonsense.
Lastly, I must refute again the warn out contention of many tea party true
believers and others that we can pay all our current obligations without raising
the debt ceiling in the short run. Sorry, the math just doesn't work. Again, in summary, interest on the debt, Medicare, Medicaid and national
defense equal 80% of federal spending. By comparison, NASA is six tenths of one
percent of the budget. Discretionary spending is about 8%. At the same time we
are borrowing 40% of our current outlays. That means 60% is paid for with
current revenues. There is a 20% gap between the cost of entitlements plus
defense and tax revenues. Without entitlement reform, 100% of all other
expenses, (indluding defense), will need to be eliminated in order to balance.
In 1965, entitlements represented about 28% of the federal budget.
Today they are nearly two thirds. In 1975 medical care expenses represented 8%
of GDP. Today, they are 20%. The facts don't lie folks. In a recent
poll nearly 80% of voters want a balanced budget. In that same poll, 84% did not
want any entitlement cuts. Wake up America. We have seen the enemy and the enemy
@ mohokat, the BBA was introduced about 3 days before the house voted on it. No
hearings were held, there was virtually no public discussion on it, and no
consideration of how it would actually work. Your House GOP buddies could
actually propose something real, or they can keep putting forth gimmicks and
then turn around and vote for more spending on their pet programs. They are
just playing political games to deceive in order to gain political power. Who
is going to win under their proposals? Government contractors and Wall Street.
Certainly not those of us in the middle class or retirees.
When will someone come on Fox News and help their viewers and hosts understand
that raising the debt limit is only guaranteeing that the US has the ability to
pay off debt that has already been committed too?This isn't a
"blank check" as Boehner likes to use as his scare tactic. This is
simply allowing the government to make payments on legilsation that has already
been passed.This isn't putting a check on Obama, it's paying for
things that Clinton, Bush and Obama have already committed the country too. It's really that simple.On the BBA, I love the idea, just
don't see a great way for it to exist. What would the Republicans have done to
pay for Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina, etc. with a BBA in place? Clearly, the
large obligations of the federal government, like wars and disaster relief,
would have to be taken into account. And as it has been stated already, what
happens if you put measures in the budget for these possibilities, yet they
don't happen that fiscal year? Some loopholes would need to be worked out, but
it's worth the discussion.
Facts is right -- the big fact here is the conversation has changed, and that's
hopeful. A year ago before the 2010 mid-term elections a $1.9
Trillion increase in the debt ceiling was unopposed by both Democrat controlled
houses of Congress, and even a few months ago there were discussions about a
second "stimulus" bill worth hundreds of billions in more borrowed
debt.Now the conversation is about a BBA and real spending cuts and
caps. The debate about our economic survival can now begin, and the
upcoming presidential election will be less about politics and more about what
matters. When the country elects even more patriots determined to put our fiscal
house in order, we'll all be better served.
Finally, failure to reach a deal at this point, and allowing a default does not
work, and will make it much more difficult to increase revenue through a growing
economy. Failure to honor our current obligations will make it much more
difficult to tackle the real driver of our current deficits, (i.e. exponentially
increasing health care costs, and entitlements, especially Medicare.) Social
Security can be fixed, and must be with relatively minor adjustments to future
retirees retirement ages, means testing or a combination of factors.Medicare is a much more difficult, but not impossible nut to crack. It is sad
that so much of our political energy as a nation is focused on baseless rhetoric
and political demogoguery on both sides of the aisle. The fact is that our
current woes correspond with less cooperation in Congress not more. The idea
that this crisis is the result of "go along, get along", just isn't
factual.We should be focussing on how entitlement programs can be
reformed and re-structured, not not on some broad generalization about cutting
spending accross the board. Every program should be scrutinized, modernized or
eliminated based on the merits.Where is the beef?
Again, the fervor and emotion of the tea party, much like the original one in
Boston, has served as a motivating factor. However, ideals without specific
plans cannot govern anymore than chaotic outbursts could win the revolutionary
war against Britain. Ideologues without pragmatism and and understanding of our
system of checks and balances under the Constitution, do not understand the
Constitution, even if they are attorneys and have memorized every word.The obvious fact is that compromise was necessary between big and small
states, pre-federalists and pre-republicans in order to produce the Constitution
by the thinnest of margins, against all odds.Senator Lee and his tea
party constituency should understand that majority votes are needed in order to
effect real change. While I admire the passion, failing to honor our
Constitutional system will not succeed in the long run. Not every American voter
agrees with a conservative limited government perspective, we are divided. Even
many conservatives defend their benefits.Our system allows for a
majority rule, while protecting the rights of the minority. Checks and balances.
Better to make the best deal possible and position politically for the
Presidency and a Senate majority in the next election.
Just curious.. why are there so many posts about Utah
"representatives" and Utah situations made by an abundance of people
from out of state? Don't they have newspapers in their states?Just
Lane - it is because they don't allow budgets to be carried over, just like
another organization I know uses the same rules. We can't by legislation have
any government being a "profit" center - and yet if they do the right
things and cut cost, they hurt their ability to have budget rolling forward.
It is a very broken, but well oiled machine.
So many ungrounded opinions here again. Fact is Senator Hatch is not pandering
toe the tea drinkers anymore than Senator Lee is, and I would argue, that unlike
Lee, Hatch as the long record to prove it.Hatch as sponsored or
co-signed a balanced budget amendment 17 times, Lee, once. Hatch came one vote
short of passing a BBA in 1998.Hatch has voted numerous times not to
raise the debt ceiling in prior administrations dating back to President Jimmy
Carter. He voted against raising the debt ceiling in the Carter, Reagan, Bush I,
Clinton, Bush II and Obama administrations. Now of course, Lee was not in the
Senate back then, so we don't know how he would have voted while he was in grade
school.I don't agree with either Hatch or Lee on voting no now,
because we have got all we can get this go 'round. I'm a pragmatist and I'd like
to live, (quite literally), both economically and politically to fight another
day in round two. Rome was not built in a day, and Republicans need more votes
in the Senate.But please, folks let's get our facts straight on
Lee is taking this position because he doesn't think - he doesn't have to. He's
the Tea Party darling. Never mind that he voted to force the Air Force to take
the overpriced, unnecessary and unwanted F-35 engine - the Tea Party doesn't pay
attention to what people do, only to what they say.Hatch is taking
this position because he's terrified of the Tea Party - he doesn't want to go
the way of Bob Bennett. He figures that if he can tap dance to the right hard
enough for the crazies he'll survive the state convention, and that once he
secures the nomination he'll coast to re-election because he's the "R"
on the ballot.Both positions are toxic to our republic.
@ Esquire I do not remember anyone saying we should not honor and pay our past
obligations. Attention to balancing the budget? I guess you didn't hear that the
Repubs presented a balanced budget amendment which was shot down by The Great
Pretender and the Dems. And why not. That would handcuff them in the future from
their buying votes spending. Would you please direct us to where we can see and
read The Great Pretenders plan. So we can really understand his involement.And
yes this debate has been good for the American people. More people are now aware
of the direction this Country is headed in. And for the Kool Aiders if it was
not for the Tea Party this would have never happened. It would have been
business as usual. Sorry Charlie hopefully it won't be business as usual
I'm not the least bit impressed with the political deal that has been struck. A
$2.8 Trillion increase in the debt ceiling is not good news.It does
little to address the underlying economic realities with which we are faced as a
country. When the rating agencies signaled they expected $4 Trillion in real
spending cuts, not illusory fictions, what did the politicians do? Gave them $2.8 Trillion in more debt with yet another bicameral bipartisan
committee to "study" how we intend to come up with the balance of cuts
still short of what the rating agencies demanded.That real economic
debate will now begin in earnest, and few if any of us should be the slightest
bit interested in who is scoring political points. The
neoconservative dream of ever-expanding empires filled with democracies is dead,
and so is the dream of progressives that a new era of liberal progress would
become reality by borrowing and taxing. Economic reality will trump
both agendas and the Tea Party desire for smaller government will now become
self-fulfilling because the government we have created has shown itself for what
it is -- unsustainable.Let the real debate now begin.
Thank you Senator Lee. What a hard thing for you to do. Hatch I'm sorry for our
country it took you so long to get on board and it's just too late for me and
hopefully others as well. You voted for so many programs especially while Bush
was in office that put our country in this situation. That is when you should
have stood up and said no more spending when you had the power. To blame Obama
and the dems now is just ridiculous.
I am proud of our senators for sticking to their guns and demanding a balanced
budget ammendment. Sen. Lee ran his campaign on the promise that he would seek
to balance the budget. He should be congratulated for pushing that agenda. It
doesn't matter to me if Sen. Hatch is holding fast in order to gain favor with
people in the party or if he is doing it because it is the right thing to do
because in the end it is the right thing to do. I certainly hope that our
senators and reps will not pay any attention to the lunatic fringe posting here
who are calling for higher taxes and continued high spending. It is they who
will ruin our country.
I am a bit torn really. On one hand, I did write all of my Congressmen and told
them essentially "you made your point, I support your approach more than
most approaches, but it is time to compromise because the risks here outweigh
the possible benefits of holding out."On the other hand, it is
that compromising attitude that has so often been used to drag us where we are
today. For politicians, compromise = both sides spend money they don't have to
buy supporter and lobbyist votes for their next election. The Tea Party IS
extreme (and frankly needs to cave on raising taxes to pay the debt off), but if
they hold the line on spending, their "extreme" views woudl actually
pay off 20 years from now.
IdahoStranger - absolutely. After working for DoD for 35 years and being a
financial manager I am guarantee there were (to use a government phrase) fraud,
waste and abuse in funding of various programs and activities. Flying across
the country for a 30 minute meeting when it could have been done through video
conferencing, sending people TDY (business trips) which turned out to be
mini-vacations, etc. I would much rather have seen many of the 'pork
barrel' funding stopped.
This whole budget mess has been a joke, an excellent illustration of how myopic
and paralyzed Washington has become. They have shown they are not capable of
effectively solving the countrys problems. Shoot, they can't even recognize
them! All the noise about how not raising the debt ceiling will keep us from
going further into debt is baloney. Raising the debt ceiling is about being
able to pay the debt weve already incurred. All this wrangling has been over
whether or not to pay the bills we already owe! This so called hard line stand
against more debt should have taken place months and years ago. Those fool
tea-partiers picked the right fight but at totally the wrong time! Theyve done
nothing more than make economic recovery harder.
I'm a Republican and proud of it, but I'm ashamed of our naive Senators. This
political grandstanding to make their point has to stop! What's more important
is what's immediately best for America. This bill may not be perfect, but it's
the only one that will pass and stop our nation's bleeding. Get on with it and
Anyone else been there and witnessed the same thing? USN Retired-----------------------Absolutely! A colonel here in the
National Guard had not used all his budget for a year and knew if he didn't use
it all and more that he would be cut for the next year - so he ordered himself a
mahogany desk at over $17,000. Not needed and a waste of money, but he wanted
to have more money to spend the next year. Any business that ran like that
would be out of business pretty soon.
Of course they oppose it. They oppose anything that they think will create
havoc for President Obama and ultimately the Nation. They want to assure
their political careers and the way our State elections are operated with
caucuses they don't get a chance to be voted on by the people of Utah. Only the
extreme right wing delegates at convention.Politics should not be a
career.Candidates should be elected by the people and for the people, not
a extreme minority in a party convention with numbers smaller than a high
Get rid of the Bush tax cuts, bring the troops in the Middle East home, pass a
balanced budget ammendment, debt probllem solved.These people who
believe in trickle-down economics are a joke. The money has already been spent.
It's not going to repay itself without an increase in taxes. Likewise, there
must be a balanced budget in order for us not to get into more debt. This is
the easiest mathematical problem in the world. Why does the Tea Party continue
to fight the only solution that will solve the problem, increased revenue? Why
does the far left fail to support a balanced budget ammendment? Neither party
is working in our best interest. We need the Blue Dogs, America!
Isn't it amazing that if anyone even suggests we cut some of the defense budget,
they are accused of being unpatriotic.I have been involved with the
military for some 20 years and its obvious that money is being wasted. Anyone else been there and witnessed the same thing? USN
The Best Deal will be No Deal!No more "using the Credit
Card" - no more increase in the interest payment.Avoid Interest
- it is a fearful master.Get out of debt - the only way to really
restore the good name and credit of the United States.
DN moderators strike again. I posted a comment expressing my contempt for Hatch
and Lee, and they didn't publish it. Let me try again:I don't
support Hatch and Lee.Hatch is doing nothing more than pander to the
tea party so he can be elected. He isn't working for the welfare of the United
States and its citizens, and the people of Utah.Lee is once again
showing his ignorance and incompetence. He isn't working for the welfare of the
United States and its citizens, and the people of Utah. He's just showing
himself (again) to be nothing more than a political hack.Better?
Roland,you missed the part about no balanced budget amendment, yet you say
it has everything the repubs wanted? Why am I not surprised?You
seem to be claiming that hatch and lee comprise ALL the repubs, excluding
Boehner, McConnell, etc, and so forth who will be voting YES. Why am I not
surprised?Everyone knows that were hatch NOT facing a stiff
re-election challenge in 2012 he would be voting FOR this deal.What
about BO's promise that everything would be debated out in the open? I guess he
lied - again.
I love when Hatch says "My word is my bond."Seriously?You mean the guy who has been in office for 30+ years, and ran on TERM
LIMITS, now claims his word is his bond?Priceless!These
two, and DNews posters, continue to prove why Utah has politically become one of
the most radical places in the country.
Give the Republicans everything they want and they still vote no. Why am I not
@ mohokat, you think this debate has been good for the American people, putting
the world economy on the edge? If the tea party kiddies were serious and were
highly principled, they would acknowledge that our past debt has to be paid,
then turn attention to actually balancing the budget. This requires a mix of
new taxes and/or tax reforms, plus cuts. Instead, they vote for their pet
programs benefiting Wall Street and defense contractors and who knows who else
and seek to beat up the middle class (whom they claim to represent). They are
playing a game and it will destroy us if they get their way.As for
your shot at Obama, the White House has been involved every step of the way.
Don't kid yourself. If you don't understand the politics of Washington, then it
would be best to zip it.
we haven't had a single bill to address the debt-limit issue come into the
Senate that has been subject to an open debate, discussion and amendment process
on the floor."There is Harry Reids efforts for you. The Senate
has not presented a budget in over 800 days. Way to go Senate! A bunch of empty
suits.Obama was left ingnored by both parties in the last days of
this sham. Everyone realized the The Leader was in fact The Great PretenderThe only ones who were putting anything on paper was the Republicans
lead by the Tea Party. Face it Kool Aiders without the Tea Party this debate
would not have taken place. It would have been business as ususal..
What a joke. I saw Lee on CNN last night. Wolf Blitzer asked him about the debt
deal. He answered with a plug for his new book. That's not TEA Party, that's ME
They were both passed in the fast lane. They should both exit office and get
someone to help the United States and Utah, not bow and scrape to the
conservative bloggers with cell phone access.
Of course Hatch and Lee are opposed. Hatch is desperate to appeal to the crazy
right/tea party, and Lee is part of that same group which is trying to destroy
the country. Are they trying to create chaos and try to fulfill their own
religious predictions? It is so off the wall. Default will only give us a
permanent de facto tax increase and just make the deficit even worse. Pass a
simple debt increase, then battle over the budget issues. Why the dangerous
games? The faction of Lee and Hatch (sort of) are crazy and will do more harm
I can only vote out four people -- Colorado's two senators, our house rep and
Obama. And if this bill passes that I certainly will. Washington is gutless
again. We needed to just default, pass a balanced budget amendment and as a
start to spending cuts eliminate the Social Security program 1/1/12 assigning
FICA withholding to paying off the national debt... in other words do the right
thing, spend what we have, get out of state and local government, get out of
peoples private affairs (like retirement), drastically shrink central/federal
government and programs, and get out of debt!Instead we just delay
(again) the inevitable, passing folly onto our children and generations to come
rather than facing up to our mistakes and setting things right.
How can this reporter be so far out of touch to say this deal prevents default.
That is dead wrong!! There would have been no default without a deal. He has
either been duped by the histeria or he is a willing participant in perpetuating
the myth of default. There is plenty of revenue each month to avoid default on
debts! The reporter is sophomoric at best. Wise up.
I oppose Senators Lee and Hatch.
Hatch and Lee are right to oppose this deal. It solves nothing except allowing
unrestrained spending as before with a new debt ceiling. Even an
balanced budget amendment is a farce, as it will be unenforceable, with every
year an "emergency" allowing exceptions.Better to defeat
this deal and "eat our peas" until a real deal is done.We
are a nation impoverished by wasteful spending, but it is not in the Defense
Department (although some savings can be made there).Only someone
with little regard for, or understanding of, our national security would agree
to a scheme that will be making massive cuts in defense before all other
possibilities have been exhausted.While I am heartened by the fact
that this bill reportedly contains some significant cuts, I am very troubled
that the debt increase (and resulting tsunami of spending) begins immediately,
while the biggest, and non-specific, cuts are scheduled for the future, and
which are not actually binding upon future congresses to execute.The
immediate cuts, will be mitigated to a very small degree by the reported
agreement to include foreign aid, and Homeland Security within the
"security" area of cuts, not exclusively DOD.