‘It’s the checking account versus the credit card’

That’s a good line about federal spending, and it comes courtesy of Sen. Scott Brown (R., Mass.) in the debate over extending unemployment insurance. From a Politico report:

Just two Republicans, Maine Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, joined in support of an estimated $34 billion bill to extend benefits through November. Early hopes of getting help from Sen. Scott Brown were dashed Wednesday when the Massachusetts Republican went to the Senate floor with his own alternative — heavily reliant on cutting unspent funds from last year’s giant recovery act.

(snip)

“It is beyond disappointing that Republicans continue to stand almost lockstep against assistance for out-of-work Americans,” [Majority Leader Harry] Reid said, but Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) countered that he was prepared to fully fund two months of assistance — paid for from spending cuts. “The only reason the unemployment extension hasn’t passed is because our friends on the other side simply refuse to pass a bill that does not add to the debt,” McConnell said. “That’s it.”

“It’s the checking account versus the credit card,” Brown said. “I’ve worked across party lines to solve problems. But it needs to be a two-way street.”

“Bipartisanship isn’t just from the new senator from Massachusetts it needs to be from the majority party looking outside the box … to find a realistic solution to pay for a lot of these things.”

The checking account versus the credit card — it’s an analogy that any American will understand, and it perfectly sums up these congressional Democrats’ approach to spending.

82 comments Add your comment

joan1

July 1st, 2010
11:53 am

It is very refreshing to hear that some legislators really want to know where the money is supposed to come from before they decide to spend it. In the end, it is all coming from the taxpayer. This taxpayer is tired of supporting my neighbors to the detriment of my own retirement savings. If more Americans would “get real” and take the jobs they can get, there wouldn’t be so many out of work. It might also do a lot to solve the illegals problem.

DannyX

July 1st, 2010
12:15 pm

Is this the same Senator Brown that insisted on putting the cost of financial reform on the federal “credit card” instead of charging a fee on banks?

Robespierre

July 1st, 2010
12:16 pm

This unemployment fiasco is the first step toward revolution. Remember the French Revolution? Didn’t Marie Antoinette say, “Let them use their debit cards.”

History recorded one old French hag, who was knitting, as weighing in with, “Perhaps we can cut spending with the guillotine”.

Ivan

July 1st, 2010
12:23 pm

We have money in the checking account?

retiredds

July 1st, 2010
12:25 pm

Kyle, it is too bad that the Republican Party didn’t scrutinize the last administration over its total mismanagement of the budget. My guess is that when the time comes to get down to real budget cutting and, yes, selective tax increases to balance the federal budget the Republicans, especially the GA contingent, will find a way to dodge real reform and come up with some lame excuse to keep on doing the “same old, same old” borrow and spend. I am happy that they are finally being forced to step up to the plate, which would have been better had they (the Republicans that is) during the last administrations “debt orgy”. They really don’t have a choice because the “grim reaper” of decades and decades of fiscal mismanagement allows no wiggle room. So I, for one, will be interested to see how the Republicans behave when they have to go home and tell constituents “I can’t, in good conscience, vote for this boondoggle or that earmark because it will raise the deficit.” As the old saying goes, Kyle, “what goes around, comes around.”

Bgolds

July 1st, 2010
12:40 pm

“Regan taught us that deficits don’t matter”
Dick Cheney, 2004

This whole unemployment debate would be *hilarious* if it were not so desperate and painful for so many people.

The GOP is hell-bent on creating a new generational American aristocracy on the backs of the poor and middle class, and they are succeeding.

Why is the big debate about the elimination of inheritances in excess of two million dollars, when all of these people are taxed on their UNEMPLOYMENT income?

Pathetic.

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
12:57 pm

Bgolds, you’re getting warmer. Try this: The established and entrenched American aristocracy wants to continue is power/money grab, and the GOP is too blind to see it is being used as a patsy. As I have argued ad nauseum; “deficits don’t matter” because the government is an “empty suit”. The aristocracy would gladly bankrupt the Federal Government (deficits) because when those unemploy checks are distributed, where do the funds end up? They end up being spent on goods and services (food, shelter, mortgages, legal fees, car payments, or even booze and smokes). Too bad nobody had the cajones to share this wisdom with W when he was maxing out his cards in Iraq and Afghanistan (off the books). How is that when we need to fight a war for oil we have money, but when an American taxpayer needs a boost, we have to practice thrift and tough love? Oh, and how is it that Haliburton cleaned up in Iraq, Katrina clean-up, etc., THEN moved it’s corporate HQ offshore in order to protect its “wealth”?

Gus

July 1st, 2010
1:00 pm

Wait until they try to extend the Bush tax cuts. All the democrats will vote no.

Jefferson

July 1st, 2010
1:07 pm

Party of no is out of touch.

booger

July 1st, 2010
1:12 pm

Gus, the extention bill will not even make it to the floor for a vote. The dems. hold all the cards for now.

Regardless of the truth, dems. are already making political hay saying the repubs. want to take away benefits.

joan1

July 1st, 2010
1:15 pm

Hey you guys, if it weren’t for the so called aristocracy about half the entitlement people sitting on their fat butts and never working would starve. We would really cut down on the obesity. You need people who actually pay taxes if you think you are going to keep eating. Government money has to come from somewhere.

CrazyInGA

July 1st, 2010
1:28 pm

If the republicans want to cut spending, I say let’s cut Iraq and Afghanistan. We have wasted years of taxpayer dollars on that venture. Bring the soldiers home NOW.

mike

July 1st, 2010
1:31 pm

“The GOP is hell-bent on creating a new generational American aristocracy on the backs of the poor and middle class, and they are succeeding.”

LOL. Do you really believe that nonsense?

Lourdes

July 1st, 2010
1:43 pm

Scott Brown is Joe the Plumber on wheels.
Rapidly deregulated market-led petrol-based globalization; two wars; 30-40 trillion dollars worth of entitlements and liabilities; a 10-12 Trillion dollar national debt; Walmartization and globalization equalization are going redefine the seven course meal. Yeah, I’ll have the six pack and Slim Jim please. By the way, it truly is all GW’s fault, fyi……

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
1:59 pm

joan1, I know the truth stings, but facts is facts. are you actually accepting my belief an aristocracy exists? so let me get this straight, you are OK with an entrenched aristocracy bleeding the middle class dry, but you don’t want to see the funds flow through the poor via what you refer to as entitlements. I once again ask you to do the math. when taxes are levied against working people (incomes from say, $50,000 – $50 million). a small (when compared to the DoD and DHS) portion of this revenue is disperesed by the government via what you refer to as entitlements. The social welfare bureacracy is just a corrupt, bloated and inefficient as the warfare bureacracy, but I digress. the bottom line is the bottom line; be it social security, medicaid, food stamps, unemployment benefits; the dispersed revenue merely flows through the recipients and back into the coffers of the aristocracy. I think everyone would be happy if poor people took their “welfare” and re-invested the capital via the stock market or a home (mortgage), but recent events (2008) suggest these once prudent investments were mere ponzi schemes for the, errr, aristocracy. you know, it doesn’t matter to me if people like feel better pulling the Republican lever, as opposed to the Democrat lever every first Tuesday in November, but this idea that either party is anything more than a fascilitator or broker for corporate America is just plain delusional.

retiredds

July 1st, 2010
2:12 pm

Below are some interesting comments from Sen. Lindsey Graham of SC. He is right on target as far as I am concerned. I would further say that the Constitution of the US could not be written in today’s vitriolic political atmosphere. Everyone wants to yell and scream at their perceived enemy (anyone who doesn’t agree with me). So as LG stated even Ronald Reagan couldn’t get elected as a Republican these days (he wouldn’t be able to pass the conservative litmus test).

“Everything I’m doing now in terms of talking about climate, talking about immigration, talking about Gitmo is completely opposite of where the Tea Party movement’s at,” Graham said as Cato drove him to the city of Greenwood, where he was to give a commencement address at Lander University later that morning. On four occasions, Graham met with Tea Party groups. The first, in his Senate office, was “very, very contentious,” he recalled. During a later meeting, in Charleston, Graham said he challenged them: ” ‘What do you want to do? You take back your country — and do what with it?’ . . . Everybody went from being kind of hostile to just dead silent.”

In a previous conversation, Graham told me: “The problem with the Tea Party, I think it’s just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country. It will die out.” Now he said, in a tone of casual lament: “We don’t have a lot of Reagan-type leaders in our party. Remember Ronald Reagan Democrats? I want a Republican that can attract Democrats.” Chortling, he added, “Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting elected as a Republican today.”

booger

July 1st, 2010
2:14 pm

Neo,

Having lived in Europe for 6 years, I can tell you people in the US do not know what an aristocracy is. And Europe is the role model for all the progressives out there who bark about a US artstocracy.

Tray

July 1st, 2010
2:23 pm

our problems can be summed up right here: There are becoming more moochers than there are producers…it’s that simple!

Lourdes

July 1st, 2010
2:23 pm

My back’s up at Boehner & Brown,
The petulant pair of the Town,
Neither one well endowed
Without brains, but both loud,
Each meriting more than a frown!

StJ

July 1st, 2010
2:28 pm

I’m all for giving people who are out of work but looking for a job some extra assistance. It can be paid for by taking back all the money given to ACORN (or whatever name it goes by now), Jesse, Al, GM and the rest of Big Business “too big to fail”, and the rest of the completely useless people whose corrupt/inept organizations were funded by the so-called “stimulus” and bailouts.

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
2:29 pm

booger, excuse me, the US Aristocracy is actually a plutocracy. the European version is probably more “social” than financial, but Europe spawned the feudal system and was ruled by monarchies for generations, so social class divisions are more European. I would concede (some) Americans have the opportunity move between classes (poor, middle, upper-middle, upper), but very few, if any crack the glass ceiling. in Europe and other societies, there is more or less the working class and the aristocracy, period. regardless, the middle class (here) is being bled, and as I have repeatedly argued, “middle” is a function of position (between rich and poor) not any specific income. SO, if you earn $50,000 or $5 million per year, you are taxed and your taxes flow through the poor – or those receiving entitlements – to the coffers of the $50 billion/year+ income crowd (corporate). You need to drop the “progressives” and “conservatives” and “liberals” stuff. we’re all the same in the yes of the plutocracy/aristocracy.

WOW

July 1st, 2010
2:31 pm

Kyle

Left wing retards know their short majority is about to end. Oh well.

BADA BING

July 1st, 2010
2:34 pm

No more borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. Peter is broke, too.

WOW

July 1st, 2010
2:35 pm

“Peter is broke, too.”

Al Gore’s peter is about to broke.

BADA BING

July 1st, 2010
2:38 pm

Confucious say…..”Neither a borrower nor a lender be”. Boy, he saw this financial crisis coming, didn’t he?

BADA BING

July 1st, 2010
2:39 pm

Gore confused Global Warming with warming KY Jelly.

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
2:39 pm

retiredds, very interesting comments. I would ask; what is Graham’s “vision”? I would answer; the status quo. keep borrowing from most Americans to “sustain” the lifestyles of a few (the aforementioned aristocracy). Graham et al (politicians) don’t work for or represent US (Americans), they work for THEM (plutacracy/aristocracy). This is Tea Pary 101, but like any political impulse in this country, it is either dismissed/marcinalized or forced to capitulate to the will of the… aristocracy/plutacracy. In short, the real WEALTH in this country calls the shots, and like Mortimer and Randoph Duke (Trading Places); makes money regardless of whether the dems or reps are in power

Lourdes

July 1st, 2010
2:43 pm

WOW & Bada, Two fine examples of American exceptionalism!

Peter

July 1st, 2010
2:48 pm

HA HA HA Kyle……..you write such crap, and it is silly stuff !!!!!!!!

The checking account versus the credit card — it’s an analogy that any American will understand, and it perfectly sums up these congressional Democrats’ approach to spending.

OK tell us about the check writing ability of the USA going into the IRAQ WAR Kyle ?

HA HA HA……. the Joke is the Republican’s who have spent us BROKE ! Oh wait WAR and Killing is Good !

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
2:48 pm

Tray, and you don’t think Bank of America or AIG are “moochers”? Is there a difference between a moocher and a profiteer? Both “lifestyles” are funded by “producers” (working Americans), but strangely enough, the “aristocracy” is laying off Americans, which means they can no longer “produce”. And yet, when that laid off widget maker files for unemployment, XYZ Widgets, Inc., the company that off-shored his job to India or China, still gets paid because we all need widgets. SO, Uncle Sam (you and me) now pays the widget maker’s “salary”. And as Dick Cheney, channeling Ronnie said, “deficits don’t matter” because after 4 or 8 years, the pimps in DC just hand the tab (think musical chairs) to the next round of pimps (who were put in office via large campaign contributions from… you guessed it, XYZ Widget !

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
2:54 pm

BADA BING, of course Confucious was wise… he’s Chinese!

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
2:58 pm

Does not the U.S. Secret Service enforce check fraud laws? Think Tom Hanks vs. Leo DiCaprio in Catch Me if You Can? Maybe the Treasure goons should arrest the entire Legislative and Exective branches 2000 – present – both parties), to be tried (and convicted) for “kiting checks”?

WOW

July 1st, 2010
3:15 pm

Peter is retarded.

Tray

July 1st, 2010
3:20 pm

Neo, i still stick with my previous comment…Moochers vs Producers. The whole healthcare debacle was done just to pacify a mere 400,000 of the millions in the US. Also, it was supposed to help costs, but the number 1 drain is frivilous lawsuits, something Obama and Pelosi left out when they killed the trees to write a dumb 2000+ page bill. And now they’re doing it again!

rdh

July 1st, 2010
3:35 pm

So a Republican makes a proposal, But this bill does not include Harry’s pork-for-teachers, so Harry Reid pisses on it. Hopefully, the American people will see that it is the Democrats who are truly holding up an unemployment extension by demanding on a pork-laden deficit spending bill instead of something that can be done with monies already appropriated.

retiredds

July 1st, 2010
3:56 pm

WOW if you had been paying attention for the last several months you would understand that the Democrats have enjoyed a numerical majority but most of the push against Obama has come from the more conservative wing of the Democratic Party. So a majority of votes he does not have. I will add that at least in the Democratic Party there is room for dissent versus the party of no where dissent is not tolerated very well.

neo-Carlinist

July 1st, 2010
4:32 pm

Tray, wake up and smell the Kool-Aid. where do you think the “healthcare” money ends up? Let’s say the cost of some boondoggle is $1 trillion. That money is put into the system (usually via an IOU to China, or our grandkids, or both). The “moochers” take the $$ and buy goods/services (healthcare, medicine, etc.). So now the $$$ is in the hands of the “aristocracy” (healthcare providers, drug companies, etc.). The executives and majority shareholders skim off a % via bonuses and dividends, and then they re-cycle it via their employees, who on average earn about .01 to ever $5 of executive compensation. So now there is $ 1/2 trillion ($500 billion). Uncle Same Borrows another $1/2 trillion, pays it out, and the aristocracy takes another $500 billion. This, I would submit, is why “deficits DO matter”. So who is the “moocher”? Welcome to the middle class, my friend. I know it sucks, and personally, I sleep OK at night. I don’t like welfare fraud or sloth anymore than you, but this is a rigged game and you and the rest of us in the middle class are the ones who ante up every April 15. I’ll let you use “moocher” if you agree the those above us are not producers, either.

Chris Salzmann

July 1st, 2010
6:09 pm

Don’t understand Republicans to understand the plight of ordinary folks. However, they will scream FOUL if anyone asks corporations like BP to pay for the damage they are causing. Heck, Republicans call that UNAMERICAN and a SHAKEDOWN.

Kyle: One of the reasons the GREAT DEPRESSION lasted as long as it did was that because of deficit concerns, the government cut back on stimulus spending. Thats pretty much the accepted view of accepted economists. What is it with you people that you will throw aside lessons from the past and advocate a path that is sure to repeat itself?

Chris Salzmann

July 1st, 2010
6:19 pm

Tray July 1st, 2010 3:20 pm SAID: Neo, i still stick with my previous comment…Moochers vs Producers. The whole healthcare debacle was done just to pacify a mere 400,000 of the millions in the US. Also, it was supposed to help costs, but the number 1 drain is frivilous lawsuits….

CHRIS SAYS: The statistics don’t prove your point. Lawsuits account for less than 5 PERCENT of health care costs. Some states have laws against these kinds of lawsuits and their healthcare costs have NOT GONE DOWN. Care to explain that. Your Tea Party/ Republican garbage may work in your crowd but its not working here.

Nice try ……………………….

jconservative

July 1st, 2010
6:52 pm

The Credit Card approach has been with us for 30 years now. And we should learn from the debacle that was the last 30 years. But we will not learn.

McConnell said …”the other side simply refuse to pass a bill that does not add to the debt,…”. He could have said that about the $1 trillion we have spent in Iraq. He could have said that about the Part D expansion of Medicare, but he did not. He could have voted NO on the Petraeus nomination as Afghanistan CO and refused to fund the Afghanistan war, but he did not.

If fact, since McConnell has been in office the national debt has gone up $11 Trillion dollars. So lets hear it for Mitch!

Yeah Mitch! Yeah Mitch! Yeah Mitch!

CJ

July 1st, 2010
6:58 pm

Kyle: “The checking account versus the credit card — it’s an analogy that any American will understand, and it perfectly sums up these congressional Democrats’ approach to spending.

I think Kyle must be yanking our chain.

Republicans passed tax cuts approaching $2 trillion without paying for them (via offsetting spending cuts), passed Medicare Part D (while lying about the estimated cost) without paying for it, dramatically increased agricultural subsidies without paying for them, started two wars without paying for them, more than doubled the national debt, and drove the economy over the cliff such that we lost nearly a trillion dollars in revenues in 2008-09 alone. Yet Kyle has the gall to imply that Republicans are more fiscally conservative than Dems?

Here’s the rule: Run surpluses during times of economic growth and stability and run deficits in times of economic decline or instability—not the other way around as the Republicans now assert (in contrast with 2001 when Republicans actually sold deficits as stimulus to justify tax cuts and sending rebate checks that summer).

Dems are deliberately seeking to temporarily run deficits specifically to plug the hole created by the loss of private sector spending. That is the very definition of “economic stimulus.” If we extend unemployment benefits with corresponding spending cuts, then there is no economic stimulus and unemployment remains at 10 percent.

Polls consistently show that Americans care more about jobs than the deficit. At this point, it’s an either or proposition. Faux fiscal conservatives can cynically complain about deficits (after running them through the roof) until the cows come home, but we’ll never be able to cut the deficit until we put people back to work and restore long-term economic growth in the private sector.

Churchill's MOM

July 1st, 2010
7:48 pm

A few weeks ago a reported asked our Senior Socialist Senator Saxby, if he would give up his earmarks to pay for unemployment payments, Saxby said NO, earmarks were not the cause of out of control spending. As always with Saxby it’s Lobbyist money 1st and Taxpayer last.

Our Junior Socialist Senator Johnny Bailout is willing to vote for unfunded unemployment if we do another $34 BILLION Housing Bailout. Johnny talks about ending waste but he has never seen a housing bill he won’t vote for..

CJ

July 1st, 2010
7:59 pm

Former CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf from his testimony today before the bipartisan fiscal commission: “There is no intrinsic contradiction between providing additional fiscal stimulus today, while the unemployment rate is high and many factories and offices are underused, and imposing fiscal restraint several years from now, when output and employment will probably be close to their potential.”

Jonathon Cohn responds: “To be very clear about this, Elmendorf’s testimony does not imply government should ignore the long-term fiscal situation. The ideal solution, if you follow Elmendorf’s logic, would be to pass tax and spending bills that raised deficits now but reduced them later. If even a few conservatives were willing to talk about such a package, it might have a chance of passing. Instead, conservatives–including the whole of the Republican Party and a depressingly significant fraction of the Democrats–insist we must tighten belts now. Elmendorf obviously thinks otherwise….

Conservatives love to cite him in their arguments against spending. If even Elmendorf doesn’t see a problem with temporary deficit spending–emphasis on the “temporary”–the rest of us shouldn’t, either. “

CJ

July 1st, 2010
8:00 pm

Lil' Barry Bailout

July 1st, 2010
9:03 pm

It’s really unfortunate that the majority party is so incompetent as to be unable to craft legislation that can pass both houses of Congress, which they have a hammerlock on.

No wonder their approval rating is 22%.

Lil' Barry Bailout

July 1st, 2010
9:05 pm

The Idiot Messiah took a real b1tch-slapping from the Europeans at the recent G20 summit. When you get b!tch-slapped by Europeans, you know you’re weak.

Lil' Barry Bailout

July 1st, 2010
9:10 pm

retiredds: At least in the Democratic Party there is room for dissent versus the party of no where dissent is not tolerated very well.
————————–

Hey idiot, ever heard of Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, or Scott Brown?

Chris Salzmann

July 1st, 2010
9:11 pm

CJ, conservatives wouldn’t understand sound economics if it landed on their heads. On the same note, I came across this piece of news (and no surprise to liberals):

238 presidential scholars: Bush worst president of modern era, fifth worst in US history

And the idiots who voted for Bush twice are passing judgment on Obama? All I can say is ROFLMAO!!!

Chris Salzmann

July 1st, 2010
9:24 pm

Republicans are REALLY concerned about the economy. Here’s one of them taking a stand. Its really funny when you think about it.

Link to it at: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/01/boehner-tanning-tax/

Boehner Takes A Stand Against Paying $1.50 More For Indoor Tanning

boehnerHaving already declared health care reform a failure just three months after it passed, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) wants to alert the public that today is the day the Affordable Care Act begins to destroy America, one tanning salon at a time. Boehner blasted out a press release and tweet warning about a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning beds, which goes into affect today, to help fund the Affordable Care Act. Citing a Wall Street Journal article, Boehner wrote, the tax is “causing all kinds of problems for business owners who provide tanning services.”

Red November

July 1st, 2010
9:26 pm

Funny. Liberal economic idiots calling Conservatives economic idiots. This, from a group of mindless droolers who think Pelosi and that other incompetent who couldn’t and hasn’t even run a corner lemonade stand who are running this nation’s economy RIGHT into the ground. Hey, at least unemployment isn’t 15%, huh? Morons.

The Nanny: “Unemployment checks are the fastest way to grow the economy.”

Here’s what Benjamin Franklin, one of the more liberal of our Founding Fathers said long ago:

“I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

America can’t take too much more stupidity from socialist liberalism who are steering us all right into an iceburg and doing nothing but rearranging deck chairs and blaming the previous crew on the previous voyage for all that is wrong and.