Tators -- FALSE!
I would like to not blame the President for the budget process. However, step one of the President's Budget Request is on or before the
first Monday in February. He submits to Congress a detailed budget request for
the coming federal fiscal year, which begins on October 1. (In years where there
is a change in administration, the budget is submitted later.) This budget
request, developed by the President's OMB, plays three important roles.
First, it tells Congress what the President recommends for overall federal
fiscal policy, as established by three main components: (1) how much money the
federal government should spend on public purposes; (2) how much it should take
in as tax revenues; and (3) how much of a deficit (or surplus) the federal
government should run, which is simply the difference between (1) and (2). Most
years federal spending exceeds tax revenues and the resulting deficit is
financed through borrowing. Second, the budget request lays out the
President's priorities for programs — how much he believes should be
spent on each Department's programs. The third role that the
President's budget plays is to signal Congress what spending and tax
changes he recommends.The President hasn't done this.
That an agreement might be reached is good new I suppose.That much
said, I still struggle with the notion that the way to solve financial problems
is to extract more money from people so that we can continue to spend more than
we have.How nice it would be if to solve my personal financial
struggles, I just had to get my Social Democrat wife to agree to not go out to
so many expensive restaurants and then I would agree to spend more than we have
-- and raise our own debt ceiling.
@jsfdid you read the article? Obama has made several concessions. please
at least read and try to be somewhat truthful in your comments.
@not thinkin and when you already have a debt problem simply cutting
spending is not going to help you pay back that debt. It is going to take both
cuts and revenue anything else is worthless.
JWB,You are 100% correct when you say that the President has
responsibility to submit a budget RECOMMENDATION. The Congress then must pass
(well at least they are suppose to pass even though they haven't in a
couple of years) a budget that may be exactly what the President proposes or
completely opposite or somewhere in between. The President can then sign it
into law or veto it and send it back to congress who can override his veto with
a 2/3 vote. If the Congress doesn't pass a budget the
President really has no power over the purse strings. Since congress
hasn't passed a budget in two years, the President really has had no
control over any spending in the last two years. I know some of you
spend a lot of time listening to the gospels of Rush, Shaun and Glen, but could
you at least kind of be honest instead of simply blaming the President for
everything that happens in this world that you do not like.Mr.
Boehner could come up with a great plan, bet 2/3 of congress (veto proof) to go
along with it and he could bypass the President.
To "One Old Man".It really is you that should do your research.
Please read the Forbes article dated June 16, 2012 by economist Peter
Ferrara:It articulates how "after just one year of the Obama
spending binge, federal spending had already rocketed to 25.2% of GDP, the
highest in American history except for World War II." Furthermore,
"Official figures show federal spending increasing from $2.983 trillion in
2008 to an all time record $3.796 trillion in 2012, an increase of
27.3%."Moreover, "before Obama there had never been a
deficit anywhere near $1 trillion. The highest previously was $458 billion, or
less than half a trillion, in 2008. Obama has since had 4 straight years over
$1.3 trillion deficits... each the highest in world history by far.""Obama has increased the national debt as much as all prior Presidents,
from George Washington to George Bush, combined."Obama truly is
"the world's all-time biggest government spender... by far." He is
in the process of utterly ruining our economy and especially our children's
future. It will next to impossible to recover from.
very concerned: You are right: compromise is a GOOD thing. Pres. Obama needs to
meet John Boehner halfway and realize the Democrats need to also compromise.Before Obama and the Democrats get all the blame for spending too much,
answer these questions: #1 How much money has been spent on the 2
unfunded wars?#2. How much was revenue reduced because of the George
W. Bush tax cuts?and yes, how much has Social Security Trust Fund
been reduced by Obama's reduction in the witholding tax rate?
For those that say, spending is the responsibility of Congress, that is not
necessarily the whole part of the process. The President has his departments
and agencies for months prepare a budget for their various groups and then the
OMB has a part in the process to ensure they have it done correctly in
accordance with regulations, procedures, fiduciary responsibility, etc. Then
the President sends his proposed budget to the Congress and the House and Senate
do their parts and add in their sacred ear-marks and then agree on it for the
President to sign off on.At home or workplace you don't blame
everything on your husband, wife or children on the income and expenditure part.
You have shared responsibility in doing that. Children may not understand the
impact of income and spending but over the years they may eventually grab what
that means.Many people with higher education and jobs that require
specific CPA or Accounting knowledge don't apply those standards. Treasury
Secretary Geithner didn't apply those principles when he didn't pay
income taxes when he was up for appointment. You can lead a horse to water but
can't it drink.
Not surprising to read these comments after Utah joined the Confederacy in the
last election. I don't know of a single economist who thinks that going
over the cliff would be a good thing. Lets try to put this simply, so the
DesNews readers might be able to understand it:You own a small
business. In a good year, you have extra money. If you're a Keynesian, you
pay off previous debts, expand a little, and save some. If you're a
Republican, you start a price war with your competition, cutting profits, and
borrowing. Comes the bad year. If you're a Keynesian, you curtail spending,
and borrow against your line of credit to keep the doors open. You'll pay
the debt off when things improve. If you're a Republican, you keep
spending, borrowing more, and sell your failing business to a Democrat, telling
him to fix the mess. Then you advertise in the local papers telling people not
to buy at his store, hoping to see the Democrate fail like you did.But the Democrat is a Keynesian, so he manages to keep the doors open. You
throw a tantrum.
Our government has a spending problem, not a taxing problem. Yes, Obama likes to
spend more than most but the entire government is the problem. The debt belongs
to all of us and will bury us if things don't change. What is freedom
And the dems and president said no again. Higher taxes on millionaires, debt
ceiling pushed back two years on spending cuts, and the dems said no. Can you
say Obama's my way or the highway, no compromise here. The fiscal cliff
is owned by the democrats.
"Obama's decision not to seek an extension of a temporary payroll tax
cut..." Are these the Bush Era Tax Cuts? I have not heard what is happening
to those. Expiration of those cuts would increase the federal tax rates on the
middle class. I have not heard the status of those cuts in the current debate.
(I think they should have been eliminated when we went to war in Afghanistan).
@Allen#2*Boehner is not a true Republican because he recognizes that both
sides need to compromise.*If you are saying compromise is inherently
bad, I disagree. I think our founding fathers were quite aware that they needed
to compromise for the union to survive. As I remember it from school, there
were significant compromises on significant issues by strong-minded men of high
morals on all sides of the aisle. They knew they had to compromise to get this
dream we call our nation to live. I don’t think compromise
must always be a weakness. Personally, I’m tired of year-after-year
bickering and stone-walling regarding the fiscal cliff. They fight and refuse
to act like mature adults to get the job done. It’s very discouraging.
@ Noodlekaboodle. Yes, Mitt lost but our country lost even more. Our
grandchildren lost the most. Who else is left to pay Obama's entitlement
@JWBMitt lost. Get over it.
It is just as in the time of the Children of Israel wanted their government to
be just like their neighboring countries. The Lord told them no but finally
after many attempts He allowed them to have a King, a very good person to begin
with such as Saul, David and Solomon. However, they took on the pride of their
position and the people suffered due to their wanting to be like their
neighbors.We have had a Constitution of the United States of America
as our guiding light for over 200 years with very few amendments due to that
difficult process. That is good as we can't change the basic document very
easily.However, the executive orders can somewhat subvert that
process. In the past 4 years, this Administration hasn't even got a
proposed budget, even when his party controlled both houses of Congress. The
Republicans didn't have the say so on that. The President pushed Obamacare
and not the budget. He wanted us to spend into delirium without knowing the
intake of budgetary processes. He subverted the parliamentary processes with
his administration to pass and then read. Numbers can be read before passing
Increasing taxes was a symbolic concession, for Obama's principle. Now,
Obama, you've got your symbolic principle. It is time to get serious. Not
some wimply little reduction in the cost of living for social security. Means
tests the affluent for social security. Raise the retirement age. You talked
about $4 trillion in cuts two years ago but you wanted your symbolic tqx on the
rich. Now, you have your symbolic concession, now, cut benefits to the
Obama spending? Did they change the constitution when I wasn't looking?
Spending is a function of congress not the President.
To anyone who has done even a little research into the REASONS behind
Obama's supposed spending sprees, the comments blaming him for the mess we
are in is sickening.President Obama has actually initiated far less
new spending than his Republican predecessors starting with Reagan.He has been stuck with the ongoing effects of tax cuts that were permanently
etched into granite by previous administrations and by two of President
Cheney's unfunded wars.Why does it seem to be so difficult for
some people to do a little simple research before spouting off?
This President could have done this type of movement a year ago when the
Republicans offered him a budget, several times. Instead, it was the political
side of this President, which is the only side he has, that kept him from doing
it. If he had done this type of move with Mitt Romney at his
doorstep, it would have played into Mitt's abilities as a business person.
Budgets, income in and payments going out, is what government is also to be
about.It takes both income and payments to make a government move,
with fiduciary responsibility. It is good that the President is finally
attempting, after 4 years to move forward on a budgetary process. If it
actually happens, it will be a miracle. He still plays the make a crisis and
take advantage of it to show his power to make and for people to fear the
consequences.The United States of America has been on this road to
fiscal ruin with a Democratic Congress for more than 50 years with some moments
of Republican input. People like to think that they are fiscally responsible,
but that means taking in the reigns of spending, which they don't like.
Boehner is not a true Republican because he recognizes that both sides need to
compromise. Would residents of Utah be happy if Hill Air Force Base
closes because of "No New Taxes"?
When you have a spending problem, more income will only result in a bigger
Big whoop.Our boat is sinking from excessive spending. Obama and
Boehner may agree on a slightly larger bucket to bail with. But it really does
nothing to fix the spending holes int he boat which are causing it to sink.And, as has been proven over and over again, Obama simply cannot be
trusted to do what he says. No verbal "agreement" is worth anything at
all, and we are at the point where converting a verbal agreement to specific
legislative language in the next 13 days is nearly impossible to do and still
have time to see what is in it. Never again should we have to "pass a bill
to see what is in it" as happened with Obamacare.In any case,
Obama will continue to spend trillions of dollars more than we take in every
year for the next four years. When the Chinese grow wary of lending us more
money, the interest alone on our debt will finish the destruction of our
economy, savings and earnings.Obama won the election, but this
"fix" repairs nothing although the liberal media will say it has.Stop the spending!
this plan does nothing. 1.3 trillion over ten years and budget cuts that are at
best 1.2 trillion over 10 years? that's only 2trillion dollar difference
over ten years. are you kidding me? that's nothing. our national debt is
around 16 trillion. at Obama's spending rate it'll be well above 20
trillion when he is done and people are happy about an additional 1.3 trillion
over 10 years? can anyone in the Washington do math, listen to an accountant or
accept the fact that their ability to do budgets(90%of a politicians job) is
seriously below par?
Frankly, the "fiscal cliff" would be the best thing for the US.- It would provide much needed spending cuts and tax increases.- It
would show the spendthrifts on Capitol Hill that our economy CAN handle
austerity measures.- It would provide REAL impetus to revamp the tax code,
health care and the role of the Federal Government.This cat and
mouse will end up in nothing but more disappointment for the American people.
Too little, too late of the wrong actions.
I feel sorry for the makers of Turbo Tax. Whatever the tax laws will be for this
next year, they'll have precious little time to get it into their programs
before it's time for people to start filing their taxes. Poor programmers.
Finally, a potential agreement on both sides that those most able to carry the
burden ought to be those who most carry it.Goodness knows
Republicans aren't against higher taxes, for they are fighting that those
at the lower end, who pay state and local taxes also pay federal taxes. .. i.e.
they are fighting to raise taxes on those at the lower end while fighting tooth
and nail that those on the higher end don't get a tax break.We
have dug ourselves into a debt hole and getting out will require sacrifice (i.e.
pain). It was really stupid for our national leaders to suppose that all this
debt would not hurt our country. That we could get into costly and needless wars
and this would somehow be good for us. If those at the lower ends are going to
be called on to sacrifice to pay for the stupidity of our elected leaders, then
those at the upper end are going to have to sacrifice too.Its always
those at the lower end whose kids are tempted by recuiters, not the wealthy
kids. We need to keep this in mind.
I am so thankful that my corrupt government FORCED my to contribute to Social
Security all of my life. It is such a rewarding investment. I have had no
control over it. It was forced upon me. At my death my family gets nothing. And
now there is no increase in earnings. I do not mind paying my share but I hear
no cuts for the takers in our society. How about no cell phones. What a scam the
U.S. Government is.
Can House Speaker John Boehner be trusted to strike a correct fiscal cliff
accord with his private negotiations with President Obama? Boehner wasted two
years of control of excessive spending and national debt limit increases.
Speaker Boehner is a hypocritical paper tiger Republican In Name Only RINO!
Boehner talks a good game prior to his usual last-minute caving to Obama as his
two year tenure as Speaker proves. At the beginning of the Speaker’s House
majority, Boehner caved numerous times so that in his own words, “He would
live to fight another day;” the day the GOP would control the House,
Senate, and Presidency. That did not happen so how is going to conduct the fight
against the fiscal cliff without his gang of all three branches of government?
I don't know how Boehner will sell this to his Republican colleagues. He is
giving the Democrats about everything they want without anything of much
consequence in exchange. These are job-killing proposals and I would imagine few
Republicans will buy this. What the President wants is the ability to raise the
debt limit without Congressional approval for two years. If Boehner gives him
that, he will bargain away the only chip the Republicans have to restrain the
Democrats. In all of these talks, there is still no recognition of the spending
problem in Washington. Boehner seems content to come up with an agreement
regardless of the fiscal consequences or his party's base. I think he
should walk away from these talks and let the Democrats own the mess they are
Perhaps the Republican has remembered what "We The People" really means.
More smoke and mirrors. Until we have a 'done deal" no one knows what
we will have. Anyone remember a little program called
"Obamacare" and how many pages there were that no one had even read
before it was voted in?
It will be great if these two gentlemen can come to an agreement that lets us
move forward, avoiding the escarpment. Here's hoping they can, and that it
forms the basis of cooperation moving forward. Best christmas present ever.