WP: Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Here's my take...feel free to call me biased
GOP House Budget: Cut Social Spending as low as humanly possible...Don't touch out of control Defense Spending
Obama Budget: Cut Social Spending in areas of accountability, increasing in others, close tax loopholes and increase taxation in areas where there is imbalance.
Gee wonder why the GOP won't pass Obama's and I wonder why the GOP's won't get a vote in the House.
Just as the Conservative Op/Ed authors stated, the GOP aren't coming to the table looking to negotiate, they are coming to dictate.

Untrue. Defense Spending was accounted for in the GOP Budget. In fact, Defense Cuts have already been enacted. If it's the GOP that is to blame, why then did the Presidents Budget (Both Submissions) not get a single vote on the Democratic side either? If the President's budget is a good plan, why didn't the left vote for it?

[PeterMP]

Untrue. Defense Spending was accounted for in the GOP Budget. In fact, Defense Cuts have already been enacted. If it's the GOP that is to blame, why then did the Presidents Budget (Both Submissions) not get a single vote on the Democratic side either? If the President's budget is a good plan, why didn't the left vote for it?

They didn't vote on his budget. A Republican put forward something that contained the top line spending and revenue items as his budget, but w/o the numbers of how they were going to get there.

For example, Obama's budget might say we are going to raise X% by the Buffet tax increase.

What was put forward was that we are going to raise X%, which could be (spun) later as a tax increase on the middle class.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mone...get-as-gimmick

The defense cuts haven't been enacted any more than any other cuts.

And the house GOP is trying to stop the ones that are suppossed to come.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-defense-to-e/

[JMS]

Untrue. Defense Spending was accounted for in the GOP Budget. In fact, Defense Cuts have already been enacted.

Your information is old..


http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ense-cuts.html

Spending Deal Unravels as House Democrats, Republicans Collide Over Defense Cuts
May 10, 2012 12:22 AM EDT

Congress struck a deal last August for trillions in spending cuts, including in defense. But House Republicans are now trying to head off the Pentagon cuts and instead apply the ax to domestic programs like food stamps

If it's the GOP that is to blame, why then did the Presidents Budget (Both Submissions) not get a single vote on the Democratic side either? If the President's budget is a good plan, why didn't the left vote for it?

Why do yuu think? Maybe because the Democrats realized Obama's budget didn't have a prayer of passing the republican house and that even holding the vote was a political inspired farse which they declined to participate in. Seriously, can there be any other explaination?

[ABQCOWBOY]

They didn't vote on his budget. A Republican put forward something that contained the top line spending and revenue items as his budget, but w/o the numbers of how they were going to get there.

For example, Obama's budget says we are going to raise X% by the Buffet tax increase.

What was put forward was that we are going to raise X%, which could be (spun) later as a tax increase on the middle class.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mone...get-as-gimmick

The defense cuts haven't been enacted any more than any other cuts.

And the house GOP is trying to stop the ones that are suppossed to come.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-defense-to-e/

You are speaking of the cuts automatically triggered from not reducing the budget. I am speaking of defense cuts that were already in play from the start of 2011, way before the automatic triggers were ever dicussed or even proposed. Those were a separate set of cuts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010603628.html


There was another cut in April of 2011 I believe and now the proposed triggered cuts that were to go in effect. These last cuts (triggered) are not what I am talking about. The two prior DoD spending cuts are what I am referring to. In the last triggered or forced cuts, I have yet to see anything other then Defense cuts outlined as something that is to be cut.

What of the President's proposed budget? Are you saying that there was never a budget proposed by this administration? In truth, the Right can not block a budget resolution. The left can not block it through Filibuster either so you can't really say that the Right is preventing a budget from being passed. If you can get 60 votes, you can pass a Budget Resolution. That's how it works.

---------- Post added May-14th-2012 at 12:09 PM ----------

Your information is old..


http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ense-cuts.html


Why do yuu think? Maybe because the Democrats realized Obama's budget didn't have a prayer of passing the republican house and that even holding the vote was a political inspired farse which they declined to participate in. Seriously, can there be any other explaination?

So then, what would be the excuse for not trying to pass one when you had a Super Majority in both Houses? What's more, every President has to deal with this. Why is it that only this Administration can not bring a budget forward to get passed and why is it that nobody voted in favor of the Presidents submission? 414 against. Even if what you say here is true, why did not one Democrat vote for it? How can you say it's the fault of the GOP when nobody on the left will support it either?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Untrue. Defense Spending was accounted for in the GOP Budget. In fact, Defense Cuts have already been enacted. If it's the GOP that is to blame, why then did the Presidents Budget (Both Submissions) not get a single vote on the Democratic side either? If the President's budget is a good plan, why didn't the left vote for it?

Because the President's Budgets are just recommendations, no one looks at them and says, "Oh great one...thank you for your almighty voice on high".
In the end the GOP are not coming to the table with good motives, they want to reject Obama at every turn and they have stated as much.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Because the President's Budgets are just recommendations, no one looks at them and says, "Oh great one...thank you for your almighty voice on high".
In the end the GOP are not coming to the table with good motives, they want to reject Obama at every turn and they have stated as much.

I see. So it's not the President, it's the Democrats who will not put together a Budget and get it passed, is that what you are saying? So because the Right does not agree with all the Defense cuts and all the additional spending, it is not incumbent upon the President or the Democrats, who are in office, to try and pass a budget, yet it's the fault of the GOP? And this is a unique situation in all of American History, unique only to this Administration?

Is this what you are saying?

[AsburySkinsFan]

I see. So it's not the President, it's the Democrats who will not put together a Budget and get it passed, is that what you are saying? So because the Right does not agree with all the Defense cuts and all the additional spending, it is not incumbent upon the President or the Democrats, who are in office, to try and pass a budget, yet it's the fault of the GOP? And this is a unique situation in all of American History, unique only to this Administration?

Is this what you are saying?

Well that certainly is the strawman you're building....a mighty fine one at that if I do say so myself.
My statement is that the GOP are not acting in good faith, and they've said as much...

How you can say they are, in spite of the very words they have said, acting in good faith is beyond me and would truly be a nice case study for cognitive dissonance.

[JMS]

You are speaking of the cuts automatically triggered from not reducing the budget. I am speaking of defense cuts that were already in play from the start of 2011, way before the automatic triggers were ever dicussed or even proposed. Those were a separate set of cuts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010603628.html

Cuts? Since when does the Secretary of Defense pass his own budget? What you are reffering to is Sec Def Gate's wish list, which truth be told didn't "cut" a dime. Rather he re-organized his budget to super fund what he liked and defund what he didn't like.... Key phrase you missed in that story..

The changes mean that the military would see annual budget increases that barely exceed inflation in coming years and that its budget will effectively remain frozen in 2015 and 2016

So then, what would be the excuse for not trying to pass one when you had a Super Majority in both Houses?

Because the House has the primary responsibility to pass a budget not the senate. The senate just ratifies it. Thus the GOP majority in the house was more determinitive to the failure of congress passing a budget since 2009 than the Democrate brief supermajority in the senate which evaporated early 2011 when Scott Brown was elected to the senate in a special election.

Congress has now been relying on stopgap measures to fund the government for more than two years, ever since the GOP took the House. The last time it passed a full-fledged budget resolution through the normal legislative process was in April 2009 — without a single Republican vote — and it’s been using short-term CRs and bigger omnibus packages to keep the government running ever since.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...1dAL_blog.html

What's more, every President has to deal with this. Why is it that only this Administration can not bring a budget forward to get passed and why is it that nobody voted in favor of the Presidents submission? 414 against. Even if what you say here is true, why did not one Democrat vote for it? How can you say it's the fault of the GOP when nobody on the left will support it either?

Let me explain it to you. The President has no official responsibility for either submitting or passing a budget. The executive has no vote in the process. The budget is written and passed by the house who has the soul power of the pocket book. The budget is then ratified by the Senate.
The only offical roll of the President in this process is to choose whether he will use his veto against it or not...

Now having said that, The President definitely has opinions, and definitely is the leader of his party and thus can marshal votes for or against.

However to lay the blame on the GOP majority House not being able to pass a budget on the President is a farse. They are primarily responsible for this effort not him. The Presidential budget is merely his suggestions one which house speakers regularly disregard even when the President is of there own party.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I see. So it's not the President, it's the Democrats who will not put together a Budget and get it passed, is that what you are saying? So because the Right does not agree with all the Defense cuts and all the additional spending, it is not incumbent upon the President or the Democrats, who are in office, to try and pass a budget, yet it's the fault of the GOP? And this is a unique situation in all of American History, unique only to this Administration?

Is this what you are saying?

This isn't merely about whether a budget was passed. We're talking about the tenor of politics, and the fact that the two parties agree on nothing on the congressional floor anymore.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Well that certainly is the strawman you're building....a mighty fine one at that if I do say so myself.
My statement is that the GOP are not acting in good faith, and they've said as much...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-A09a_gHJc
How you can say they are, in spite of the very words they have said, acting in good faith is beyond me and would truly be a nice case study for cognitive dissonance.

I am not certain of exactly what this clip says as I can not listen to it but I fail to see how you can accuse me of building anything. I am asking you the questions, not telling you. You can answer yes or not and then justify your response.

At the end of the day, not a single Budget has been brought to the floor of the Senate and why? Because you don't have the votes to pass it? Yet, in the House vote, you ignore the fact the the President's submissions on the Budget have failed to get a single vote on either side? What does Harry Reid have to do with the House Vote on the Democratic Side? How can I build a Strawman on that?

Notice here, I am not saying that the GOP is all good and the Democrats are all bad. I am saying that you can not possibly blame this entire thing on one side in any responsible measure when you have Harry Reid refusing to even bring a budget to the floor for a vote and you have nobody on the Democratic side of the house who votes in support of the Democratic Budget Plan.

Can you say that neither side is willing to compromise? Sure, I could agree with that. Can you say that neither side is doing the work we voted them in for? Sure, I can gree with that. I can not agree with one side calling the other side obstructionists when both sides are equally guilty of using these tactics. That to me, is exactly the same line of reason we are seeing in Congress and in the Administration.

I can not agree with that.

[PeterMP]

You are speaking of the cuts automatically triggered from not reducing the budget. I am speaking of defense cuts that were already in play from the start of 2011, way before the automatic triggers were ever dicussed or even proposed. Those were a separate set of cuts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010603628.html


There was another cut in April of 2011 I believe and now the proposed triggered cuts that were to go in effect. These last cuts (triggered) are not what I am talking about. The two prior DoD spending cuts are what I am referring to. In the last triggered or forced cuts, I have yet to see anything other then Defense cuts outlined as something that is to be cut.

Those cuts haven't happened and aren't legislatively mandated (i.e. they aren't part of any budget). Congress could tell Gates (and the Executive branch) we're giving you money to spend whether you like it or not (and even we're going to tell you have to spend money on X, Y, and Z).

And the cuts that are coming from the failure to control the deficeit won't be on top of those executive branch proposed cuts.

They can subsume those cuts in the cuts that are coming due to the legislatively mandated cuts from the failure to come to an agreement over controlling the deficiet.

What of the President's proposed budget? Are you saying that there was never a budget proposed by this administration? In truth, the Right can not block a budget resolution. The left can not block it through Filibuster either so you can't really say that the Right is preventing a budget from being passed. If you can get 60 votes, you can pass a Budget Resolution. That's how it works.

Obama doesn't work in the Congress. He doesn't have the authority to bring his budget to a vote.

The GOP in the House played politics with the budget vote, and they didn't actually bring his budget to a vote.

In the Senate, the GOP brought his old budget to a vote after he had held a major speech indicating he was going to change his proposal.

The Senate Democrats have their own budget proposal.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83H16A20120418
http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/blog...nding-problems

Obama can't make the Senate Dems support his budget.

[Larry]

In the last triggered or forced cuts, I have yet to see anything other then Defense cuts outlined as something that is to be cut.

Perhaps this says something about your choice of where to get your information?

If you can get 60 votes, you can pass a Budget Resolution. That's how it works.

How come it takes 60, now?

So then, what would be the excuse for not trying to pass one when you had a Super Majority in both Houses? What's more, every President has to deal with this.

Could you point out to me where W had to get 60 votes for every single spending bill he submitted to Congress? Or even just for one? Thanks.

[ABQCOWBOY]

This isn't merely about whether a budget was passed. We're talking about the tenor of politics, and the fact that the two parties agree on nothing on the congressional floor anymore.

OK, I understand but certainly, you can't say that it is entirely the fault of one side and not the other. That is beyond a reasonable conclusion to me. They are both guilty of it. To say other wise is unthinkable to me.

---------- Post added May-14th-2012 at 12:55 PM ----------

Perhaps this says something about your choice of where to get your information?

Fair enough. It is completely reasonable to consider that perhaps your sources are superior to mine in this regard. If you can show me what has been outlined for cuts, other then Defense, I would be very appreciative. I would certainly like to understand what the actual plan is for cutting in areas other then defense. Thank you.

How come it takes 60, now?

Could you point out to me where W had to get 60 votes for every single spending bill he submitted to Congress? Or even just for one? Thanks.

Don't know but here is where I got that info.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-budget-requi/

[PeterMP]

Claiming the military budget has been cut is essentially the same as claming the EPA, NASA, and USDA bugets have been cut too (because Obama has proposed cutting them in 2013):

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/13/news...cuts/index.htm

And those are real cuts not reamining frozen until 2015-2016.

Add federal IT spending to the list:

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...licy/232600766

[ABQCOWBOY]

Those cuts haven't happened and aren't legislatively mandated (i.e. they aren't part of any budget). Congress could tell Gates (and the Executive branch) we're giving you money to spend whether you like it or not (and even we're going to tell you have to spend money on X, Y, and Z).

And the cuts that are coming from the failure to control the deficeit won't be on top of those executive branch proposed cuts.

They can subsume those cuts in the cuts that are coming due to the legislatively mandated cuts from the failure to come to an agreement over controlling the deficiet.

IN fact Peter, those cuts have happened and they have been enacted by the Pentagon already. The ones that were triggered by the failure to cut spending have not happened, that's true. Now, if you want to say that funding could be added back in, well I agree. That could happen but it has not happened as yet because there is no budget passed.

Obama doesn't work in the Congress. He doesn't have the authority to bring his budget to a vote.

The GOP in the House played politics with the budget vote, and they didn't actually bring his budget to a vote.

In the Senate, the GOP brought his old budget to a vote after he had held a major speech indicating he was going to change his proposal.

The Senate Democrats have their own budget proposal.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83H16A20120418
http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/blog...nding-problems

Obama can't make the Senate Dems support his budget.

I understand that he does not work in Congress. Neither did GWB but what happened under his Presidency is blamed on him. Conversely, the success that President Clinton saw in his second term, even though it was a Republican House and Senate is accredited to him. That's just how it works if you are President.

The GOP in the House may be playing politics but that doesn't change the fact that not one single Democrat voted for the Democratic Proposal. In fact, not a single Budget has been voted on in the Senate because not a single Budget has been brought to the floor.

How can it be said that this is strictly the GOP? Peter, do you believe that?