Comments about ‘Democrats to unveil bill to replace budget cuts’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Feb. 14 2013 12:33 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

Sorry, after barack said that he would cut the deficit in half and keep unemployment below 8% with all of his spendathons and then failed miserably to do either,

his "math" clearly doesn't equal math anymore.

Barack could tell us at this point that 1 plus 1 equaled 2, and I would begin to doubt it, ONLY due to barack's history with numbers.

regis
Salt Lake City, UT

You mean the U. S. Senate is actually serious about coming up with a budget? That's amazing. I thought they did away with those silly details of governing years ago.

md
Cache, UT

Failed policies from the past 4 years don't give me much faith in the Democrat plan for replacing budget cuts. I imagine it will go something like this:

1- Raise taxes, only on "the rich".
2- Propose more entitlements.
3- Spend more money on stimulus programs.
4- Print more money.
5- Blame any and all failures on George W. Bush.

This plan won't work any better than the prior Obama plans have worked.

IDC
Boise, ID

Cuts must happen. If our leaders cannot lead, sequestration may be the only solution. I only wish someone could reform entitlements.

mightyhunterhaha
Kaysville, UT

What it boils down to is there will not be 3 people doing the job of what 1 person should and can be doing. If doesn't matter if it is in defense of domestic areas. It's time to cut spending and reducing the size of government. The govenrment unions will have to be brought into line so the don't bankrupt the country.

Fred44
Salt Lake City, Utah

I am sure that the republican house will be excited, and they will debate this bill on the floor, give it an up or down vote, and then Mr. Boehner will walk over and talk to Mr. Reed and they will come up with a compromise bill and the country will be saved!

mcclark
Salt Lake City, UT

Before the Bush tax cuts we were running a surplus, ever since we have been running a deficit.

m.g. scott
LAYTON, UT

This government has spent about 1 trillion dollars per year more since Obama became president. You can't tell me that there is necessity in all of that borrowed money. Lots of things could be cut without much pain anywhere. The Democrats only say it will take food out of childrens mouths and reduce important jobs. Truth is, those things were paid for before Obama came on board and increased spending by that extra trillion per year. And if the cuts happen, the essentials will be paid for now. There is so much fat in our government you can barely see the meat.

md
Cache, UT

Thank you McClark,
You just proved my final point.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

McClark, MD

from the US treasury
gross federal debt at the end of fiscal year (millions):
1997 - 5,369,206
1998 - 5,478,189
INCREASE of 108,983 million
1999 - 5,605,523
INCREASE of 127,334
2000 - 5,628,700
INCREASE of 23,177

Tell me which year there was a surplus since gross federal debt increased EVERY YEAR.

Treasury changed the way it is reported since BO was elected, but from the treasurydirect webpage (US Treasury), you can get day by day tallies of gross federal debt.

Gross federal debt increased on average $491B when bush had a repub congress
it increased on average $977B when bush had a dem congress
it increased on average $1.7T when BO had a dem congress, and
it increased on average $1.2T when BO had a repub congress.

what was your point, again?

Were you calling for a repeal of ALL the bush tax cuts?

David
Centerville, UT

It is plain to see that the Obama playbook reads: "Every crisis that arises, propose taxing the rich and more spending on government programs."

Hundreds of billions of tax revenue was passed in January. Now they want to raise taxes again?

xscribe
Colorado Springs, CO

There will be a compromise, because neither party wants to gamble on who this will hurt the most in upcoming elections.

David
Centerville, UT

It is interesting that one reason Obama criticized Romney as not right for the job of president was Romney had money in the Cayman Islands.

But here we have Jack Lew, Obama's choice to serve as Treasury Secretary, and Lew has money in the Cayman Islands.

I am sure Democrats will find nothing wrong with this.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments