Quantcast
U.S. & World

House OKs debt; Giffords brings down the House

Comments

Return To Article
  • one day... South Jordan, UT
    Aug. 2, 2011 6:41 a.m.

    The gobernment spend money like americans spend money, without brain and not thinking about the future, the spending problems started years, years ago not with Obama (he is helping to add more).
    Politicians don't care, because we will pay, they will get their paychecks without any problems.
    Maybe another loan from China will help!!! ha ha that was funny

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 2, 2011 5:15 a.m.

    Resolute Voice,

    To question Rep. Giffords motives speaks to the problem we have in this country. To imply that her motives were political is inappropriate. America, both the right and the left should celebrate her courage and her perseverance. But it seems we have a need to politicize and demonize any action by the "opponent" what a sad commentary on our society.

    You are right that our children's future is being sold down the river, as is our own future. Blame however is not owned by liberals, it is owned by all of Washington. This problem did not happen in the last 2 years, it has taken years of mismanagement by career politicians to get us to this point. It is time for grown-ups to sit down and solve the problem. That means both sides working together, that means both sides compromising, that means the extreme positions of both parties need to be marginalized, and real solutions need to be generated. The blame game is not the answer. someone, anyone needs to come up with real solutions, not sound bites that are designed to advance a political career not solve a real problem.

  • MormonDem Provo, UT
    Aug. 2, 2011 2:08 a.m.

    The Tea Party approach to avoiding an economic apocalypse sometime down the road is to have a preemptive economic apocalypse now.

    The Tea Party is truly dangerous to American ideals of compromise: they say "Give us what we want, or we'll take the whole country down with us." It's hard to win in a game of brinksmanship against an opponent who isn't really afraid of taking the country over the brink.

    You have to admit, though, the Tea Party is getting more efficient: it took them two years to determine if Obama was a citizen. They almost destroyed the economy in a matter of days.

  • Wastintime Los Angeles, CA
    Aug. 2, 2011 12:32 a.m.

    re:Resolute Voice
    CA was not "destroyed" by liberals. In fact, CA had a surplus until the Enron debacle (courtesy of Rep Phil Gramm) which cost the state $40-$45 billion. CA also suffered when the dot-com bubble burst. It is difficult, nearly impossible to raise taxes due to the requirement of 2/3 majority in the legislature for approval. CA has had to deal with its recent budget issues without raising taxes. It was actually a Utahn, Howard Jarvis, who added to the budget constraints with Prop 13 in the 70's.

    I would assume the "bunch of people" you are outraged at include Bush and Republicans...

  • Resolute Voice Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 11:24 p.m.

    To:KJB1

    Rep. Giffords was shot in the head by a maniac. She has suffered a certain degree of brain damage. Questioning her mental ability after only seven months of intense rehab is not out of line. Her vote was not needed. The numbers were there to pass this bad deal. Her handlers should have known better than to use her in such a pawltry way.

    As for my "tantrum" every American should be outraged. The future of my children and my state have been sold down the river by a bunch of people who have no idea what living within their means really is all about. I do not want Utah to go the way of California, Oregon, Washington, Michigan, Illinois, and New York. Taxed and regulated into oblivion. Liberals are destroying this great country. All this deal did was give a bad President another blank check now and cuts later. That may play well in liberal California or Oregon, but here in the real West our way of life and our Western values are under attack. Classy is standing firm and holding the line as opposed to the west coast plan, cave, capitulate, and spend.

    No thanks.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 11:12 p.m.

    @Resolute Voice

    "...force the liberals and Rinos to live within their means..."

    So the tea party can ram their budgets through for increased military spending, more aircraft carriers, more tanks, more bombers.

    All the tea party does is yell CUT and CONSTITUTION yet offer nothing concrete to cut. How about act like adults and actually tell us what to cut. How about farm subsidies, how about base closures, how about tax breaks for oil companies, what about bonuses for congressional staffs? No, it is much easier just to shout CUT.

    No thanks - I'll take the balanced approach any day.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Aug. 1, 2011 10:43 p.m.

    Banks,Wall Street, and business are going to have to look long and hard at the 2 parties and figure out if it makes sense to keep backing the party that put the country's credit rating at risk, causing untold anxiety and uncertainty. The inmates are in charge of the asylum called the Republican Party.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Aug. 1, 2011 10:32 p.m.

    Resolute Voice,

    Feel however you like about the debt vote, but Rep. Giffords has endured more in seven months than most of us will have to deal with in a lifetime and for you to question her "mental competence" just so you can throw a partisan temper tantrum is just sad to see. Stay classy.

    As for the particulars, they say that if the extremists at both ends of the spectrum are angry at you, you've probably made a decent deal. Based on the reactions here and at uber-liberal sites like Daily Kos, I'd say that sounds about right...

  • Resolute Voice Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 9:46 p.m.

    Time will tell if Rush and Beck were wrong, I doubt that they are. This deal stinks and should be killed. Obamacare needs to be killed; no new taxes, cut all discretionary spending, cut redundant programs, refund left over porkulus money, force the liberals and Rinos to live within their means, eliminate base line budget gimmicks, and get serious. This "plan" is not aggressive or hard enough.

    Nice to see Rep. Giffords but I question her mental competence to cast an informed vote. This is no time for symbolism or showmanship. She needs to heal not be part of a photo opportunity by a liberal and complicit media.

    2012 matters folks and if you want to repeal this crap then real Conservatives need to be put into office with veto proof majorities in both houses and the Presidency.

  • Richard Saunders Provo, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 9:41 p.m.

    @Fred44 I'm a registered Republican and I would like to see Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid cut but also major cuts to Defense spending. Luckily there is a candidate that I agree with in this regard, Ron Paul. One Republican who is serious about balancing the budget and not needing a balanced budget amendment as political cover. One Republican who is serious enough about the budget to talk about all the money poorly spent overseas and the trillions that the wars cost us, along with the invaluable loss of life. It's time to say no to compromises that punish unborn generations and prolong the inevitable. Ron Paul 2012

  • peter Alpine, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 9:06 p.m.

    How do you solve a borrowing/spending problem by borrowing and spending some more? This is like placing a bandage over a gaping wound. Lending institutions would have to close their doors. No correct thinking parent would give their child a new credit card if that child maxed out another card. No wonder the world despises America. This is utter stupidity to even conceive such a plan, let alone go along with it. The blind are leading the blind. It's time to find and vote in new leadership, ones who can actually lead with vision and common sense.

  • The Politics of Listening A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Aug. 1, 2011 8:42 p.m.

    Don't ya just love those 2 RINO's from Utah that can't get enough Pork and Earmarks and know how to play that game very well, and can't stand a Constitutional balanced budget amendment, Sen. Orrin Hatch and Sen. Mike Lee will both vote against the legislation when it comes before the Senate. I say it's time to retire them both come 2012. The last few weeks are proof that politicians are incapable of solving anything.

    My outsider view.

  • Just Do it OREM, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 8:34 p.m.

    Re:Fred44

    "For those who want cuts, what are you going to cut? Defense, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare account for 80% of the budget. If you don't raise any taxes, you will not be able to cut without touching the big 4. The Republicans want to cut, but they don't want any defense cuts, so that means we are down to the big 3. Republicans you cant get us out of debt with cuts only unless you hit the big three its time to put your plan for cutting social security, medicaid and medicare on the table."

    Those who want to reduce the national debt need to look at seriously cutting defense spending if they want to rely on cuts and not raising revenues. They simply don't understand that Defense spending represents 54% of all spending by the federal government and 80% of all interest on the National Debt is the interest accrued on defense spending. So the bulk of the interest on the debt is defense related so increases in the debt itself are primarily defense and not entitlement programs.

    Removing defense spending from the table means we must eliminate 100% of all other government spending to reduce debt

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 8:23 p.m.

    After reading the anger in the above posts, I would like to ask this question: "With their storied history, why would anyone expect the US Congress to solve any problem?"

  • Just Do it OREM, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 8:15 p.m.

    Spitvalve | 6:22 p.m. Aug. 1, 2011
    Denton, TX

    "This bill is all smoke and mirrors and DOES NOT address the problem. When we rank and file people run up our credit limit, we can't use our credit cards anymore. Why should our leaders be held to a different standard?"

    Your analogy is seriously flawed. This bill' sole purpose (with all the added nonsense necessary to get certain people to agree to it) was to raise the debt ceiling so the Treasury would have authorization to pay current debts. This is comparable to authorizing your bank to pay your creditors what you already owe them.

    It's not about whether the government should continue to spend more money so the the government wasn't held to a different standard. All arguments about cutting spending and raising taxes were not central to issue and were only political theater. Over the long term we will need to cut spending and raise taxes and those who refuse to do either are pathetic. Try that with your creditors in your personal life and you won't need a second job because you will be homeless after they seize your assets and garnish your wages.

  • Just Do it OREM, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 8:08 p.m.

    patriot | 3:26 p.m. Aug. 1, 2011
    Cedar Hills, UT
    re:ER in EUR

    your numbers are bogus. The spending over the next 10 years is nearly 5 times the amount of cuts proposed and that is why Moody's and others are not impressed with the bill.

    "Moody's expects us to get serious about cutting spending and controlling it long term and it is quite obvious that Obama is not serious about either."

    The reason our credit rating is likely to be reduced isn't spending because most credit rating organizations understand that spending isn't the problem. Most credit ratings are based on the fact that you spend money. Those who do not spend money have LOWER credit ratings. Its on our ability and willingness to pay and to do what is necessary to pay all current debts that the credit rating organizations consider.

    Once you spend money the question they ask is "are they willing to do whatever is necessary to pay bills." We recently saw talk of deliberately defaulting on current government debts and a Republicans argued that finding more income was not even an option and we would default before finding more income.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 1, 2011 8:07 p.m.

    For those who want cuts, what are you going to cut? Defense, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare account for 80% of the budget. If you don't raise any taxes, you will not be able to cut without touching the big 4. The Republicans want to cut, but they don't want any defense cuts, so that means we are down to the big 3. Republicans you cant get us out of debt with cuts only unless you hit the big three its time to put your plan for cutting social security, medicaid and medicare on the table.

  • The Politics of Listening A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Aug. 1, 2011 6:52 p.m.

    There you have it, Dave Ramsey was right, the debt ceiling debate in Washington D.C. is just the kind of doomsday scenario the media loves. The story goes like this. Congress must raise the nation's debt ceiling or the U.S. will, for the first time ever, default on its debt payments, possibly causing a downgrade in the U.S. credit rating, a stock market crash and skyrocketing interest rates. "Financial experts" are lined up, waiting for their chance to warn us of the coming "debt-pocalypse." Even if Congress doesn't raise the debt ceiling, the U.S. is not going to default on its debt payments. Thats not a hope. Not positive thinking. It's a mathematical fact. The U.S. government takes in $2.6 trillion a year and its debt payments are $400 billion. That's like a household that brings in $260,000 having to make a $40,000 payment. Our country is facing a bigger problem than the debt ceiling "crisis." It is the idea that the government will solve our problems. The last few weeks are proof that politicians are incapable of solving anything.

    Glenn Beck was wrong and so was Rush.

    My views.

  • Spitvalve Denton, TX
    Aug. 1, 2011 6:22 p.m.

    This bill is all smoke and mirrors and DOES NOT address the problem. When we rank and file people run up our credit limit, we can't use our credit cards anymore. Why should our leaders be held to a different standard?

  • Wastintime Los Angeles, CA
    Aug. 1, 2011 6:09 p.m.

    In 2007-2008, Hamilton College analyzed the predictions 26 individuals who wrote columns in major print media and who appeared on the three major Sunday news shows Face the Nation, Meet the Press, and This Week and evaluated the accuracy of 472 predictions made during the 16-month period.

    Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize winning economist was the most accurate.

    Krugman's take on the debt deal?
    "We shouldnt even be talking about spending cuts right at all now. We have 9% unemployment. These spending cuts are going to worsen unemployment. Its even going to hurt the long run fiscal picture, because we have a situation in which more and more people are becoming permanent long term unemployed, and if you have a situation in which you are going to permanently raise the unemployment rate, which is what this is going to do thats actually going to reduce future revenue, so these spending cuts are ever going to hurt the long run fiscal position... we used to talk about the Japanese and their lost decade. Were going to look to them as a role model."

  • ? SLC, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 6:00 p.m.

    Welcome back Rep. Giffords. Good to see you're doing better.

  • dlw7 LOGAN, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 5:34 p.m.

    This "compromise" meets neither Republican, Democrats or the American peoples needs. It solves nothing, merely give Pres. Obama more money to find places to spend it for the time being. Then, when the "new committee" is unable to agree on spending cuts to match the hike in the national debt, we will replay this scene all over again. Somehow, no body in Washington gets the idea we have to STOP spending. That's all, just stop. Everybody will suffer some if this happens, but this mess can be fixed by financial responsibility on every part--the House, the Senate, the President and us. It doesn't matter what happened in the past and who was President we need to learn from the past and MOVE ON.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 5:19 p.m.

    I wish we had a GOP senate majority leader rather than prince Harry. With both the House and the Senate passing a balanced budget amendment coupled with a cut cap and balance bill I think the pressure would be too great for Obama to veto because he would then have to show his cards - his plan for resolving the debt crisis which would present a problem since he has no plan. America is in BIG trouble if we lose our AAA rating and we will all suffer. Obama talks about how the poor will suffer if we adopt the GOP balanced budget plan but I would say the poor will suffer much worse with the soon-to-be higher interest rates and stiffer loan qualification requirements.

  • twoartistic Draper, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 5:07 p.m.

    This bill cuts nothing, less than nothing. In fact it adds $6,000,000,000,000 over the next 10 years (that's $6 trillion for those of you who can't count zeros). Ever hear of baseline budgeting? This bill does nothing to fix the expansion of spending. 100% window dressing, that will be heralded as the saving your way of life.

    That is bad enough, but wait until obamacare and the rapidly expanding costs of social programs and public sector unions are added in.

    My grandpa used to call spreading manure "spreading a little sunshine", we just got an overdose of solar radiation, from Washington.

    Here is the good news, perhaps enough of us are engaged and get it. 2012 is coming, and we need more Tea Party candidates to throw a wrench in the gears of beltway establishment.

    Carl Wimmer just announced he's running for Congress, that would be a good start.

  • IdahoStranger NEWDALE, ID
    Aug. 1, 2011 4:58 p.m.

    The Best Deal would be No Deal!

    Its time for the House of Rep. to take back control of America's money.
    Abolish the Federal Reserve and quit paying interest to have someone else control our money.

    Bring back the Gold and Silver Certificates and actually redeem them with
    that when presented and then we won't have this "toilet paper with green ink" on it that is becoming worth less every day.

    America has a two party system and the Republicans and Democrats are one of them. Not a dime's worth of difference between them. They are both Socialist.

    Three cheers for those who have the courage and common sense to vote NO!

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 4:50 p.m.

    "Smoke and Mirrors" just LOTS MORE of the same that we have come to expect from the people we thought were representing us.

    IF the latest compromise passes, expect your taxes go to up sometime in the next year. The ONLY ones who won't see a tax increase are those who pay nothing now.

    Pres. Obama has DOUBLED the number of federal employees who "earn" (I use the term loosely)over 150k per year.

    He's intent on getting the highest numbers of citizens on the public payrolls or assistance. The more he can attract to his EVER GROWING federal bureaucracy the more votes he can get.

    We can HOPE to turn things around in the 2012 elections, but the more the Congress gives in the more this administration will spend.

  • twoartistic Draper, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 4:29 p.m.

    Ruled from the center and wisdom of the establishment, smells like the leavings from the north end of a south bound bovine.

    Here is a tip, stop spending money that has yet to be earned. If you keep it up, the rapidly shrinking production of this nation is going to vaporize the US to a 3rd world nation.

  • CougarKeith Roy, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 4:29 p.m.

    My first question with all the "Cuts" in spending is this firstly, HOW MUCH OF YOUR SALARIES DID YOU CUT??? Everyone gets a hack job except them! I say pass this deal, and bring out the Gilloutine!!! Our Credit rating is going to take a hit! Why, because these guys are playing games with us, that is why!!! They are crooks, everyone who votes YES is a crook!!! They cut Defense and intelligence, which should be the last thing to cut! We are so close to colapse nobody has a clue! It's time for America to stand tall again!!! No balanced budget agreement??? These guys are crooks, and they have the gall to not even take a pay cut themselves because they are so much more important to us than even our Defense! I say "Boo! Boo! and Boo!" I also say "Shame On You Congress!!!" This is sickening!!! It makes me sick, it makes me want to vomit! This is our country they are dismantling slowly but surely, at least I will be able to fall back on our "Lovely Deseret"!!! Prophecy is becoming fulfilled!!! This is a disaster!

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:58 p.m.

    There is NOTHING in the Senate bill to fix the problem. They assume that the Bush tax cuts will end. If those tax cuts do not end, there is a provision to INCREASE taxes to make up the difference!

    They assume that the government OWNS everything we have and that we OWE them everything that they want. That is opposite of what America is. The government is OUR servant. It operates to serve US. We are not slaves of that government. We owe it nothing except what we have already agreed to pay.

    Using a "gimmick" to increase spending by an automatic 7% per year without calling that "increased spending" shows how corrupt the government has become.

    Picking and choosing specific "dates" at base line dates to avoid factoring in the huge deficit caused by Mr. Obama's endless spending borders on criminal.

    Any Congressman who votes for that budget should be held in contempt and thrown out of office at the earliest opportunity.

    The Senate bill resolves NOTHING. It does not cap spending. It does not decrease our debt. It does not force a balanced budget. It DOES show the contempt that Mr. Obama has for America.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:52 p.m.

    re:DeltaFoxtrot

    it is more likely that our AAA credit rating will be downgraded than not. The reason - our debt is too high, our spending is too high and there is no long term plan to address either even after this recent compromise. The ONLY hope we had was the cut cap and balance bill coupled with the balanced budget amendment but those were both shot down by Obama and Reid. The cut cap and balance bill gave Moody's the numbers they were looking for plus the long term assurance that we were serious about our future spending and debt. Obama and Reid wouldn't consider either because spending is their life line to power - it's all they know and without all the borrowing and spending they have nothing to offer their welfare crowd in the coming election cycle.

  • Utes Rock! Santaquin, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:43 p.m.

    Based on the response of ER in the EUR, I assume he or she is a governmnet EE at risk of having wages/benefits slashed as a result of the budget negotiations. I know it sounds insensitive, but I think I am safe in suggestingt that ONE of the largest (if not the largest) categories of government expense, is payroll. Payroll is the highest cost in virtually every business, and if you are talking about a government agency that does not generate any income, then it is really difficult to imagine where else the budget can be controlled in any significant way, without payroll cuts. Unless, of course, people are layed-off, which (layoffs) might be the only viable long-term solution. Even though a $434 decrease per paycheck is severe, it is certainly better than no paycheck at all.

    The Federal government is way TOOOO big, and cuts need to happen somewhere. Payroll is a large and easy to hit target.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:42 p.m.

    Hear me and hear me well. The day is coming, oh yes, that day is coming where an evil depression will blow through Americas little fantasy world and eliminate that false sense of security these sheeple harbor, and I'll be there in all my glory, laughing, laughing as it all come crumbling down. Bwahahahahahaha!

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:26 p.m.

    re:ER in EUR

    your numbers are bogus. The spending over the next 10 years is nearly 5 times the amount of cuts proposed and that is why Moody's and others are not impressed with the bill. Moody's expects us to get serious about cutting spending and controlling it long term and it is quite obvious that Obama is not serious about either.

  • ER in EUR Belgrade, Serbia
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:17 p.m.

    Yeah, it may not preserve ou AAA rating. The reason it does not is because when the plan with 4.5 trillion cuts and 2.5 trillion in revenue increases was presented people like Lee shot it down.

    Without the increases that would have been fair across the board we very well may not keep our rating. Shame on the TPers.

    And I can be very indignant about this becaue I just opened an e-mail informing me I will very well may take a cut in pay of $434 a paycheck because of the cuts. So because you avoided the tax increases you can be happy. Your welcome.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 3:09 p.m.

    I don't want the debt limit problem pushed off to 2013. That's just a ploy by the folks in DC to cover their tails for election time. This issue needs to be solved and solved now. We don't need another band-aid that pushes things off for a few more years, whether it promises cuts or not.

    Even with the cuts we're still going to be running at a deficit. Without increased taxes there isn't going to be any revenue to fund all these programs. If this bill passes we'll be right back in the same situation in 2013.

    I still don't think the credit rating agencies will push the button and kill America's AAA rating. To do so would be economic armageddon on a global scale. All the fat cats on Wall St don't want to lose their money when the dollar tanks and the markets go belly up, so I don't think Moody's and company have the nerve to do it.

    It's just like in the Cold War. Both sides had their fingers on the button several times but neither one pushed it b/c it would have ended the world as they knew it.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 1, 2011 2:49 p.m.

    Liberals hate the deal because there is no automatic tax increases. Conservatives hate the deal because there is the possibility of using tax increases to meet the spending cuts necessary. There is old rule that if it smells like a pig it probably is a pig and this deal is 100% certain to be a pig that no one likes... including Moody's and the other agencies considering our credit rating which is really all that matters at the end of the day. Yes go ahead and sign the bill then watch our AAA credit rating go down in flames with all the ugly aftermath that follows. Mike Lee says that this bill is not worth voting for and you have to agree with him. The bill fails with the most important thing - preserving our AAA rating. This rating will KILL or SAVE us and it appears that Obama and Reid either don't understand or don't care... or both.