Tea partiers should be boiling at $1.1 trillion bill
We’re in need of some fresh, hot tea, and not just because it’s been so cold outside.
Senate Democrats — and some Republican accomplices — want to defy the will of the voters and have one last big-government hurrah. If there was ever a moment for tea partiers to prove to everyone that they’re not going away, this is it.
The immediate threat is a $1.1 trillion spending bill, with some 6,500 earmarks in its nearly 2,000 pages, which Senate Democrats suddenly unveiled Tuesday and want to pass ASAP. The bill would essentially freeze the bloated federal budget through the end of this fiscal year.
In every respect, this is the kind of action voters rejected at the ballot box last month. It is a budget-busting, debt-inducing, written-in-the-dark and rammed-through-before-daylight bill.
Democrats didn’t have the courage to pass such a spending bonanza before the election. They knew the public would punish them for it, and they took the unusual step of refusing to pass an appropriations bill (actually, 12 appropriations bills rolled into one “omnibus” spending package). Well, they refused to do so before now, anyway.
That they punted on this most basic of congressional duties before the election, just to avoid voter scrutiny, is bad enough. But it’s even worse that they are carrying on even after voters handed them the broadest, deepest electoral defeat for either of the major parties in decades: 63 lost seats in the U.S. House and more than 675 in state legislatures. The latter reflects a more decisive repudiation of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Democrats than Republicans suffered after Watergate.
It’s as if we caught the thieves in our house red-handed, and they’re trying to stuff a few more pieces of jewelry in their bags before they flee.
To be fair, it’s not just Democrats at fault here. The Dems can’t get this monstrosity through the Senate without at least a few GOP collaborators, and four Republicans reportedly are considering such a betrayal.
Two of them, Ohio’s George Voinovich and Missouri’s Kit Bond, are retiring. A third, Utah’s Bob Bennett, lost this spring in a GOP primary that was largely fought on fiscal issues. The fourth, Maine’s Susan Collins, is no stranger to siding with Senate Democrats rather than conservative principles. Whatever their motivation, they are flouting the will of the voters.
So, too, are a number of Republicans who have inserted earmarks into the bill. One examination of the bill found just eight of the Senate’s 42 current Republicans requested zero earmarks. The Senate’s top two earmarkers in this round of pork appear to be Mississippi Republicans Thad Cochran (230 earmarks) and Roger Wicker (199).
Another 42 earmarks were tied to Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss, with 24 more from our senior senator, Johnny Isakson. It’s small consolation that they and most Republicans say they won’t vote for the bill even though it contains money for their pet pork projects.
Should the bill pass, House Republicans could do much more when they take the reins in January than merely rescinding the earmarks. They also ought to pass a bill ending the practice of holding lame-duck sessions, in which politicians can thumb their collective nose at voters’ demands. And then they should dare the Senate and President Barack Obama not to go along with them.
But if we’re going to get such results, much less keep the Senate from spending another $1.1 trillion in the first place, we need to see and hear a strong protest from tea partiers. Now’s the time to show they wanted to do more than elect some more spendthrift Republicans.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Find me on Facebook
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
168 comments Add your comment
iRun
December 15th, 2010
7:44 pm
Kyle, the “Tea Party” is a fake group drummed up by organizations like FreedomWorks so that FreedomWorks could gain political power. So they could get money. Now that they’ve won you won’t hear from them on this.
I won’t be surprised if the “Tea Party” dies off now that things like FreedomWorks have what they wanted all along.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
7:48 pm
Just keep the heat turned up Kyle. I’m still not in favor of extending the tax cuts for altogether different reasons than the SOCIALIST who demonize the EVIL RICH. My opposition remains the same. Without cuts in government spending to offset increasing taxes back to what they were before Bush lowered everyone’s taxes, Congress shouldn’t do the deal. I understand the timing is crucial, although at some time soon sobriety has to take place. They the Congress can’t have tax cuts and spend, spend and spend some more, too!
The Republican Congress should cut the non-enforcement federal workforce by 25% right off the bat. Privatize the postal service, get rid of several other federal agencies or departments and get down to serious work on the entitlements. We have to get our fiscal house in order no matter how much P’ moaning takes place. We either do it now or we will follow in the footsteps of the only other former world superpower, imploding as did the U.S.S.R.
I’m glad you mentioned our two Senators. They should know we are watching them and all other Republicans. If they don’t straighten up their act they risk giving birth to a third party and they will have no one to blame but themselves for their losses in 2012.
Tommy Maddox
December 15th, 2010
8:03 pm
iRun – wrong.
Media outlets are running items regarding the Tea Party’s failure in Congress – as if they have made it already to Congress.
We should soon be hearing about the failure of the Tea Party’s 2012 Presidential candidate.
iRun
December 15th, 2010
8:05 pm
Look, I don’t argue that there were real people with real feelings, albeit not very cohesive, regarding the government. But they were grassrooted by things like FreedomWorks, which just used those people for it’s own political gain for it’s own monetary benefit, which is looks like it’s getting.
So, no, I don’t expect to hear from the Tea Party, nor it’s tools, regarding this.
Joe Marchione
December 15th, 2010
8:07 pm
I am glad people finally are beginning to NOTICE things of this monetary magnitude. I have 2 comments after an in depth and equally informative article. Number 1: When will this Country realize that 1% of the people control 99% of the money (PERFECT EXAMPLE; THIS HORRIFIC RECESSION MOST SENATORS ARE WORTH MORE NOW THAN BEFORE, while my parents lost 50% of their life savings…#2 As with the DEFICIT task force (WHICH I HAVE MONEY ON WILL BE LARGELY IGNORED) which I would like to say after reading was an incredibly well built and thought out piece of literature. THIS COUNTRY MUST LEARN THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSON IN ITS HISTORY. The one our soldiers have died for, The one that is this Country’s VERY FOUNDATION! One day we must LEARN the word WE and forget about the word ME. Until that day, we will all be pawns and used with those above us laughing as we slave to KEEP OUR rights and OUR jobs (in this country). Til that Day comes we shall ACCOMPLISH NOTHING.. If only the Blacks, Women, Latino(a)s, Oriental, Gays, and any other ethnic diversity out there, would all come together, we would TRULY MAKE progress. That is MY DREAM, regretfully, The last man I Revered and Honored also had a DREAM, yet there were those who KNEW his POWER would crumble them, and so they disposed of him LIKE TRASH … Dr. Martin Luther KING Jr. should have been made a SAINT!!! Instead his messages was silenced with the tiniest piece of metal, and son after, as they KNEW IT WOULD BE, there empires were restored. Only needing ONE BULLET to do so.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
8:18 pm
Yeah and this country too, before it became a country, began by an albeit not very cohesive group with many forces that were out for their own political and monetary gain by disingenuously fomenting a revolution.
iRun
December 15th, 2010
8:32 pm
Delusions of grandeur much?
Political Mongrel
December 15th, 2010
8:33 pm
“Defying the will of the voters”—like the GOP did for the two years when they were voted out of the majority in congress and out of the white house. Two years of solid obstructionism that hasn’t ended yet. Sorry, Kyle, but the “will of the voters” is one of those phrases like “given a mandate” that can be twisted way beyond its original meaning for the service of anyone’s viewpoint.
Duh
December 15th, 2010
8:34 pm
What? Politicians not listening to the people and only acting on behalf of themselves? Promises made to get elected and then not followed through? Politicians posturing themselves as the savior of all but mostly concerned with their money donors?
Say it isn’t so! If only we could have seen this coming! If only there were warning signs! If only there were some way we could have been informed of their true motives!
If only people would wake up and use their heads for more than holding up their hat, maybe they will FINALLY realize that all politicians whether Left, Right, Blue, Red, DEM or GOP are exactly the same! Stop listening to the soundbytes, Fox News, MSNBC, etc… and THINK, RESEARCH, QUESTION, INVESTIGATE. Only then will there be the slightest chance that this country will ever get back on track!
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
8:38 pm
Historical dementia got you?
Liberal Pariah
December 15th, 2010
8:49 pm
Obama’s election was not a mandate for Liberalism, it was a rejection of George Bush’s liberal policies while he masqueraded as a Conservative. Voters wanted hope and change and got doped and shamed. I believe both election cycles, one won by a Democrat and the other by Republicans, shows that America wants to go in a totally different direction than the one we are headed in now.
iRun
December 15th, 2010
8:51 pm
Mike, you know that old-fashioned pejorative “tool”? Know how it originated? Don’t be one, buddy, because it’s not about you. I’m not out to get you but you’re kidding yourself if you think the “Tea Party” is anything like the Revolutionaries. Sorry, those glory days are behind this country. We’re like Ye Olde England now.
JDW
December 15th, 2010
8:54 pm
@Kyle
“It’s as if we caught the thieves in our house red-handed, and they’re trying to stuff a few more pieces of jewelry in their bags before they flee.”
I don’t get it Kyle…a business as usual spending bill that you knew was coming and even has a measure of support from Republicans and you get your panties in a wad…a tax cut that adds $860 BILLION to the deficit and you think that is ok….hypocrite.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
9:05 pm
Ol’ pal don’t fool yourself into being one. No its’ not about me or you. It is about American. Now and in the future. It may take some time before it becomes personal to enough American’s wallets for them to rise up but when it does… All bets are off. Oh now that you mentioned, how’s things across the pond these days? Hear there are a few riots in the streets, as of late. In fact, rioting in the streets seems to be in vogue on the European continent. I mean, it could go viral, might become contagious?
John Franklin (JF) McNamara
December 15th, 2010
9:10 pm
Yeah, lets be angry over this but not the $860B dollars they just gave away on tax cuts and unemployment…Why weren’t you with me then?
I’m sure all of the junk in this bill will spur the economy just like tax cuts. Most of it will probably directly provide jobs which is all we need to focus on. I’m sure there’s the usual pork, bridges to nowhere which supply construction jobs, libraries for placating politicians which need to built and staffed, and there’s probably even some tax breaks for some special interest (which I know you’re for!).
Put that way, it sound pretty good. I’m now a firm supporter of Porkomania 2010!
Liberal Pariah
December 15th, 2010
9:11 pm
Somebody get some talking points from some place other than MSNBC or CNN. Unbridled spending, two expensive wars and a downturn in the economy produced the vast majority of the deficit we have now. Tax cuts don’t increase the deficit if the spending is under control and this bill does not cut spending….it increases it. When will Congress as a whole get the picture we Americans are painting?
Duh
December 15th, 2010
9:16 pm
Liberal Pariah – ” When will Congress as a whole get the picture we Americans are painting?”
When we stop electing millionaires to represent us.
Liberal Pariah
December 15th, 2010
9:19 pm
Amen brother!!!!!! How can the uncommon represent us commoners?
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
9:20 pm
When will Congress as a whole get the picture we Americans are painting?
Perhaps it is We the People as a whole who don’t get the picture They the Congress have painted?
iRun
December 15th, 2010
9:22 pm
Mike, you want to be part of nation building? You’re on the wrong continent for that. Gotta go to the southern hemisphere if you want to re-America.
The Tea Party will not say much about this bit of news, Kyle, and I think you probably know that.
Left wing management
December 15th, 2010
9:31 pm
Kyle: Maybe you’re right about the cowardice of the elected officials, but why do you pour such vitriol on them without looking with equal scorn at the feckless voters themselves? So I don’t buy the onesidedness of your attack here. If the voters have a Congress that’s loathsome in its cravenness, then that’s partly the fault of the voters themselves. And the thing is, we’ve been at this since at least 1994 when they supposedly dealt the hated Democratic president a devastating setback only to have the wheels of government grind to a halt. And they sure didn’t like that now did they. The only positive sign I see here this time around is that poll show equal disgust on the part of the voters towards both parties – so maybe there’s some justice in that. But maybe the voters ought to vote themselves out – what do you think? Let’s do ourselves one better and vote ourselves a new public. Yeah ..
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
9:36 pm
“42 earmarks were tied to Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss, with 24 more from our senior senator, Johnny Isakson.”
Where’s that old drive by talk radio when we really need them? HUH!
Boortz should be on this all day tomorrow, like stink on crap. Last time he raised “H” with Chambliss over immigration, Saxby changed his tune.
What do you have to say Neal? Are you up to the task of ringing two Senators bell? I mean, we on this blog and you on that old drive by talk radio should shame these two Georgia Senators into withdrawing those earmarks.
‘Cuse please back after sending two emails
Okay, I’m back.
John Franklin (JF) McNamara
December 15th, 2010
9:40 pm
Liberal Pariah
“Tax cuts don’t increase the deficit if the spending is under control and this bill does not cut spending….it increases it. ”
Agreed, the problem is that spending isn’t under control and we’re already in a massive deficit due to the things you noted. If we had a surplus, I’d want a tax cut to get my money back. We’re a long, long way from that, so more tax cuts are just more money that I’ll get to pay back in 20 years. Thanks.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
9:42 pm
More like nation saving. This continent will do just fine should the people on it decide to keep the Republic in lieu of becoming an Internationalist puppet state.
Martin Williams
December 15th, 2010
9:53 pm
Why are some of you people so blind to see that Dems and GOPs are the same people. All hundred Senators are millionaires and you think they going to vote against a tax cut for those making $250,000 and above. For the Tea Party folks, they are just a bunch of idiots and they will history as soon as Obama is out. Talking about tax cuts do not add to the deficit if spending is cut, well, get out of WARS. As a nation we are spending billions every week fighting wars that are unwinable.
Martin Williams
December 15th, 2010
9:56 pm
The Republicans and with little help from the Democrats are killing this great nation slowly and eventually they will succeed.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
9:58 pm
Remember one thing iRun, every time history, the odds and even sound reason and logic said America and the Americans should not and cannot win… We won.
Never bet against America, weRun faster.
iRun
December 15th, 2010
10:04 pm
I don’t believe in American Exceptionalism. We’re human, just like the people in other countries. There is nothing about us that is better than them. America grew to power because of it’s enormous natural resources, including it’s people. But not because of it’s people alone.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
10:11 pm
What is history determines what is the future long after those who are history and made it, have all gone.
they listen now
December 15th, 2010
10:16 pm
This reminds me of the listening to the public skills exhibited by the folks that renamed Joe Robbie stadium in Miami to ” Pro Player Park.” They heard the people and renamed it “Pro Player Stadium” as a sign of compromise.
Michael H. Smith
December 15th, 2010
10:21 pm
Others nations had or have enormous natural resources, the American people alone have uniquely used them exceptionally better. I’m sure dear leader Obumer agrees with your dim belittling view of an unexceptional America.
I don’t.
snarf
December 15th, 2010
10:21 pm
Pretty please would the last frothing at the mouth tea-partier who screams they haven’t read the bill please be so kind to turn out the lights…
just plain bill
December 15th, 2010
10:34 pm
iRun, your blog names are so telling. Your last remark about not believing in American Exceptionalism is understandable coming from the left. We have so much in this country that is exceptional; constitution,freedoms of religion and speech.Try saying something controversial in another country,even in Canada, and the morality police take you to court. This country was founded by great thinkers and achievers with enough forethought to make this country great what it is today. Do not see why you and the left are so afraid of the Tea Party, they just want to keep this country exceptional and not let it become a Euroweenie II. A movement has to start from somewhere,if not,the government will not be afraid of its people and you will have tyranny.
@@
December 15th, 2010
10:35 pm
This on top of the tax bill!!??!! There’s talk the tax bill could go down.
I would love to see them both scrapped.
When the American people say enough is enough, our representatives would do well to listen.
get out much?
December 15th, 2010
10:40 pm
Wow, 6500 earmarks sounds like a lot. Then again, when you realize that out of a $1.1 trillion budget those earmarks account for about $8.3 billion or less than one percent of the total budget you begin to realize that this is just another tempest in a teapot.
Bill
December 15th, 2010
10:43 pm
Kyle—putting the 1.1 trillion on the Demos is bogus–virtually all Reps wanted all the tax breaks, and while the Reps get to oppose unemployment extensions, they would have voted for it (if a separate Bill) if they knew the benefits were not being extended otherwise and they would have been blamed. As with the stimulus and TARP2, they got the benefit of voting against it, and later criticising it. Had they been in power at the time, they would have supported it-a Depression would have hurt them more in the long-run–as the slow economy is now hurting Obama.
Let’s never forget that W’s medicare drug bill boondoggle will cost more than the stimulus, TARP, and Obama’s healthcare bill combined. Always such a joke to see Reps only serious about the national debt when they are in power.
hsr0601
December 15th, 2010
10:59 pm
Back when Bush was pushing his tax cut packages through Congress in 2001 and 2003, supporters said the cuts (which weren’t balanced with spending reductions) would initiate an era in which the American economy would grow so robustly the nation would be running a surplus of more than $5 trillion at the scheduled expiration date. U.S. now runs a deficit of about $1.3 trillion
In sharp contrast, Former President Bill Clinton left a record surplus, despite the warning of potential economic disaster over tax increase for the wealthiest.
Cutty
December 15th, 2010
11:01 pm
Saxby is just like a repub- Insert an earmark, vote against the bill, but hope it passes. Kyle, how can you be so justified in your disgust of this bill when “Obama’s Tax Cuts” will add $850B to the deficit?
Left wing management
December 15th, 2010
11:24 pm
I believe in American Exceptionalism.
We’re exceptional in the way that we – a nation consisting of cast-offs from an older and vastly more sophisticated European civilization, thus forgetting our debt to our forbears – have a certain distorted perspective rooted in our tendency to overestimate our self-reliance as a nation, as well as our virtue as a nation, the predestined outcome of the American experiment, and our ability to use our own will to move history to our own ends.
Jefferson
December 15th, 2010
11:28 pm
The GOP has NO credibility. Their supporters become fools to belive them.
Liberal Pariah
December 15th, 2010
11:34 pm
Let’s not forget that the deficit started in the last year of Clinton’s presidency and continued under Bush. Clinton benefitted from the dotcom bubble which unexpectedly increased revenues from taxes on capital gains and rising salaries and a tax increase in his first year in office. Clinton also coat-tailed on the economic boom brought about by the Reagan tax cuts.
Linda Schrenko
December 16th, 2010
6:51 am
To be fair…. This guy is a riot!
JD
December 16th, 2010
6:55 am
Lessee — you cut all earmarks (8.5 billion) from 1.1 trillion and you get (rounding) 1.1 trillion! So, what’s the real reason Republicans are looking not to pay our military (DOD funding is part of this pkg)
Ayn Rant
December 16th, 2010
7:02 am
Much ado about nothing, just another piece of voluminous legislation too detailed to comprehend and too tedious to be read even by the congressmen who vote on it and the President who will sign it.
The bill would squander thousands of dollars on petty earmarks and untold millions on extravagant military projects, but all attention is focused on the petty not the substantial.
Any difference between Democrat and Republican versions of a spending bill disappears in the round off, but the squabbling and squandering proceeds unabated as the infrastructure crumbles and the economy stumbles.
That’s politics, folks! You voted for it.
El Kabong
December 16th, 2010
7:05 am
The Tea party, most closely aligned with the GOP, is in the process of being co-opted and corrupted by the GOP. Heres the best statement I have seen on this blog:
“If only people would wake up and use their heads for more than holding up their hat, maybe they will FINALLY realize that all politicians whether Left, Right, Blue, Red, DEM or GOP are exactly the same!”
The US has two bankrupt parties bankrupting the US. The politicians and the media are just the handmaidens of the banks that are sucking the country dry. To quote Teddy Roosevelt “The US never learns from experience; only from desperation”.
Jimmy62
December 16th, 2010
7:15 am
I’m not happy about it, and I plan to protest every bit as much as I have already.
But to be fair, the Congress elected by the Tea Party is not yet in office. They swung the election, so wait till that Congress makes moronic decisions before busting on the Tea Party. Hardly fair to do it already.
Chris Sanchez
December 16th, 2010
7:40 am
Kyle,
Friendly reminder: successful Tea Party-backed candidates have not yet been sworn into office. Whether or not they are silent on this bill is irrelevant, they aren’t in office yet!
jconservative
December 16th, 2010
7:48 am
Kyle, “…flouting the will of the voters…” is like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder.
Will of the voters: 65 million voters (the most in the history of the Republic) voted Obama as President, yet within days Republicans began a campaign to “defy the will of the voters”. And they have done so for 22 months.
For 30 years the “will of the voters” has been to cut taxes and let spending increase out of sight. The “will of the voters” is the reason we have a $13.8 trillion National Debt.
So if a few congressmen are slow to note that a very small majority of eligible voters just voted for a change, it is understandable. They were elected for 30 years to raid the treasury on behalf of their constituents. And they have been real good at this little chore.
The Tea Party types will get their opportunity with the 2012 budget which the President will send to them in March.
If the White House has any brains they will send a perfectly balanced budget to Congress in March. Then we will find out who is serious about reining in government and who are just conversationalist.
carlosgvv
December 16th, 2010
7:49 am
This is a very good acid test to see which of our politicians truly care about the American people and which are only interested in their own re-elections. It won’t be any supprise that many from both parties will prove to be the latter.
dcb
December 16th, 2010
7:49 am
Hey Kyle, why direct only the tea-partiers to show their disgust and disgruntlement? Why not ask all Dems, Republicans, Libertarians, Independents, and voters by whatever self-classification to rise up and protest in their own way. This is ridiculous! I mean it must be – the news media says it is so.
A Patriot
December 16th, 2010
7:53 am
Regardless of what happens,
Kyle will be first in line to vote Republican in 2012.
Weird.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
8:02 am
The tea party was hijacked by Sarah Palin, a Republican,
and became a part of the Republican Party. So long tea party.
Buzz G
December 16th, 2010
8:04 am
Nothing new here. The Democrats (and some Republicans) have had contempt for the people for years. For many years we have had a government which thought it had the right to control the people, not the other way around.
Finn McCool
December 16th, 2010
8:06 am
It’s small consolation that they and most Republicans say they won’t vote for the bill even though it contains money for their pet pork projects.
Then why are their earmarks in there in the first place? If they remove their earmarks it might not be such a bad bill and the tea partiers will have less to be riled up about.
Selective Amnesia
December 16th, 2010
8:08 am
@ Duh, you’re spot on but preaching a long sermon to the choir. I think many Americans are aware of this fact, but are so caught up in “my team must win!!!” that rational thought completely escapes them. The fact that there ARE other party candidates (Libertarian, Green, Independent, etc) to vote for on any given ticket-yet by and large we chose not to- proves this point.
Can you hear the collective *guffaw* from the rest of the world? Shame.
Finn McCool
December 16th, 2010
8:09 am
The fact that Kyle is even discussing the number of those senator’s earmarks and not the dollar amount of the earmarks shows why he is a lightweight when it comes to discussing the issues.
I can put in 300 earmarks at $2 each and, according to Kyle’s logic, I should look worse than the guy with 1 earmark for $2 million.
Selective Amnesia
December 16th, 2010
8:11 am
“Remember one thing iRun, every time history, the odds and even sound reason and logic said America and the Americans should not and cannot win… We won. ”
Yeah well we’re losing right now, and are certaily not above reproach to fall to the same demise of say the former USSR or the former Roman Empire.
The former Unites States of America? 20 years? 30 years? 2012? God help us all.
Finn McCool
December 16th, 2010
8:12 am
Political Mongrel at 8:33 is spot on. The Republicans were clearly handed major losses in 2008 but Rep congressmen didn’t spend the last two years going along with Democrats.
So quit with the “will of the people” b-s.
Selective Amnesia
December 16th, 2010
8:14 am
barking frog- surely you jest?
Tea Party= The GOP reloaded, after a crushing defeat in 2008. I know you know this, just thought I’d reiterate for those who make like my screen name.
shelleywyntershow.com
December 16th, 2010
8:18 am
Where are the local Tea Partiers on the Oaky Woods deal? Oh yeah, Tricia Pridemore is now working for the same people she wanted to become real conservatives. And now not a word is said over a local govt that s cutting education, people and more is spending double on land that Perdue said four years ago we did have money for. So my excitement and embrace for the Tea Party was just BS. All the slings and arrows I took from my African American friends and listeners to my online talk show at shelleywyntershow.com was for naught because this was a BS uprising of angry voters.Yeah right. If you’re angry at 1.1 trillion federal budget you dam well better be angry at Oaky woods deal for EXACT SAME REASON.
Selective Amnesia
December 16th, 2010
8:18 am
“Amen brother!!!!!! How can the uncommon represent us commoners? ”
Hmph, there are entirely too many “common” people who are under the delusion that they are apart of this “uncommon” club, namely amongst the GOP. That’s a large part of the problem.
hryder
December 16th, 2010
8:20 am
This is the reason, huge spending to buy votes, incumbents should NOT be elected in the 2012 elections.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
8:21 am
Liberal Pariah
December 15th, 2010
11:34 pm
“Let’s not forget that the deficit started in the last year of Clinton’s presidency and continued under Bush. Clinton benefitted from the dotcom bubble which unexpectedly increased revenues from taxes on capital gains and rising salaries and a tax increase in his first year in office. Clinton also coat-tailed on the economic boom brought about by the Reagan tax cuts.”
HORSE HOOHEY…Clinton’s last four years were surpluses…Duhbya brought back the deficit with unwise tax cuts.
As for Reagan…..HAH…..what “economic boom”. The Reagan/Bush 1 years produced substandard GDP grow when measured against history and Clinton. The only thing Clinton got from Reagan was a budget deficit which he fixed leading to growth.
HORSE HOOHEY…Clinton’s last four years were surpluses…Duhbya brought back the deficit with unwise tax cuts.
As for Reagan…..HAH…..what “economic boom”. The Reagan/Bush 1 years produced substandard GDP grow when measured against history and Clinton. The only thing Clinton got from Reagan was a budget deficit which he fixed leading to growth.
GDP Growth Rates
Historical…1/1/47 to 1/31/81 GDP growth averaged 3.73%…total debt incurred in the period $988 Billion over 34 years.
Clinton…2/1/93 to 1/31/01 GDP growth averaged 3.81% or about the historical average. Total debt incurred 1.383 Billion over 8 years.
Reagan-Bush…2/1/81 to 1/31/93 GDP growth averaged 3.08% or about 17.5% below the historical average. Total debt incurred $3.414 Trillion over 12 years.
Bush-Obama…2/1/01 to now GDP growth averaged 1.65% or more than 55% below the historical average. Total debt to date $6.102 Trillion over 9 years.
Tax cuts that create deficits are the problem not the solution.
Tommy Maddox
December 16th, 2010
8:26 am
For what it’s worth, I’ve been writing all of my Reps to tell them to vote no on all this mess.
williebkind
December 16th, 2010
8:31 am
get out much?
December 15th, 2010
10:40 pm
If you dont know the worth of a penny then you will never know the value of a dollar. 8 billion is a large sum and that money does not belong to congress.
shelleywyntershow.com
December 16th, 2010
8:31 am
@tommy maddox write your local reps and ask them why we are paying for Oaky woods? I am calling and writing and nothing. nothing nothing. This is a damn shame and repubs are pimping us the same way dems pimp Black voters.
It is what it isn't, that is, it's not what it is.
December 16th, 2010
8:34 am
Kyle is trying to make a silk parse out of the south’s earmarks. He’s trying to rally support for long-obsolete, but perennially-obscene conservative values. His teasing parries at the Tea Party read as transparently vulgar as a Tupac rap-lyric. This column made me want to go and fiddy-cent Fifty Cent again, the poor devil.
Bush caused the economic catastrophe that our brave president is leading us out of. The justification for a two front war and a two-tiered tax cut were culled directly from the Conservative economic plan that builds capital progress on top of living children. All the silver tongued lies meant to impede Obama’s kinder remedies stand like the satanic versus the ebonic, the smart-bomb vs the smarter-obama, and the collateral rummage vs the collateral damage.
And I think it stinks.
But merry xmas, anyhoo.
Wallis the dog
December 16th, 2010
8:38 am
Saxby and (unfortunately) just re-elected Isakson should have demanded their earmarks be stripped from the bill. Fire them both!
Liars all......
December 16th, 2010
8:40 am
Has anybody been to Johnny Isakson’s website? He clearly says he introduced legislation to “reduce last minute, wasteful spending and is an original cosponsor of the Balanced Budget Resolution.” Ha! What a liar. You can make fun of the Tea Party all you want, but don’t discount our mission. We The People will make a difference in stopping the runaway train that is Washington politics. It may not happen overnight, but never fear, it will happen. You can make a difference too by going to their websites and telling them what you think instead of blogging or telling your neighbors. Research the information available to you and make an informed decision and tell your representative in Congress what you think. You are WE THE PEOPLE!
Richard
December 16th, 2010
8:43 am
“They also ought to pass a bill ending the practice of holding lame-duck sessions, in which politicians can thumb their collective nose at voters’ demands.”
Watch yourself Kyle. A lame duck session is going to extend the Bush tax cuts.
An American Patriot
December 16th, 2010
9:04 am
Another 42 earmarks were tied to Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss, with 24 more from our senior senator, Johnny Isakson. It’s small consolation that they and most Republicans say they won’t vote for the bill even though it contains money for their pet pork projects.
A work or two for you Saxby and Johnny……You two empty headed do nothing senators from Georgia need to find a way to remove your pet pork projects from this spending bill or at the next election, you will be removed from your nice plushy offices with secretaries, aids, writers, etc. or we will run you out of town on a rail…….Get this, we’re tired of big government, we’re tired of spending money we don’t have as a country, we’re tired of your sticking your nose in everything we do, we’re tired of your Political Correctness Buffalo Chips, You need to stop hiding behing e-mails, web sites to communicate with your constitients. You need to get out of your shell and start to talking with people on the street, at their schools, yea in their drinking establishments, i. e., make your selves accessible to the people……it seems now you’re afraid to speak with them except in a sterile environment. And start “Raising Hell in Congress like Mitch McConnell, John McCain and others. Actually do something to earn all that money we pay you (You work for the American People buddy, not the federal government)
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
9:09 am
Kyle, How do you justify your demand “ending the practice of holding lame-duck sessions?”
The term of Congress runs from January 5 to January 4. If you are fired from a job on November 1 effective January 1, can you say “I am going to take my salary for November and December but I will not do any work for the company?”
Road Scholar
December 16th, 2010
9:15 am
MHS: “No its’ not about me or you. It is about American.” Exactly!
Kyle:“They also ought to pass a bill ending the practice of holding lame-duck sessions, in which politicians can thumb their collective nose at voters’ demands.”
What happens if we were attacked….will Congress just wait until the next one is sworn in? What a stupid (yes I broke my resolution not to insult) idea. Kyle, do the Conserves want to take their ball home since no one is playing the game the way they think it should be played? Mandate? They only control the House. THEY are not the Boss!
I watch a conservative leader state last night (he wouldn’t answer a repeated (4 times) question concerning HIS earmarks) that he allowed the (and his) earmarks to be added to the spending bill so that he could vote against it!!!!!!!!!!!!! What????????????
I agree that if not ALL earmarks should be deleted, that each state gets one. Georgia’s would be the dredging of the Savannah port.
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
9:17 am
After the criminal (in a non-legal sense) delaying and stopping just about everything in the Senate by filibusters, the Republicans have zero right to complain about anything being crammed into the final days of the session.
TruthBe
December 16th, 2010
9:18 am
The ENTIRE Congress and Senate should be replace with Tea Party Folks. Why? Because we need HONEST People in their that care about the USA. And don’t forget to throught out that total disgrace of a president Obama, HLS Sec., and Eric Holder AG. It’s time to MARCH on Washington!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
joe
December 16th, 2010
9:20 am
As B. Fife used to say….”Nip it…in the bud.”
Finn McCool
December 16th, 2010
9:20 am
This is a perfect example of why the tea partiers look so pitifully ignorant. You can’t separate the terms “politics” and “compromise” unless you have a dictatorship.
You want to see what no compromise looks like? Look at Republicans for the past two years. Until someone starts compromising, ain’t nothing going to happen.
Because your tea party candidate said all the right things on the campaign trail doesn’t mean he/she will be able do one damn thing in Washington without compromising. It just doesn’t happen cause it’ the nature of the beast. In the house alone you have 435 competing interests.
So, grow up tea-partiers and come back to reality.
Darwin
December 16th, 2010
9:21 am
Don’t defy the will of the voters unless they vote for a Democrat. Right?
BW
December 16th, 2010
9:21 am
I agree with jconservative….no elected official is serious about reining in spending. I know that it’s fun to bash Democrats over profligate spending but it’s not like Republicans aren’t complicit…I mean look at the pork they crammed into the tax bill. No more F-22’s but wait surely we need a second engine program for the F-35. National defense is welfare by another name. It would be a trip for President Obama to send John Boehner a balanced budget and watch him squirm. That would end this Tea Party non-sense immediately. Then I want to get some popcorn and watch all the Tea Party “grass-roots” rallies as they turn the budget into another $1 trillion deficit before they vote on it. Maybe then the President will regain some of his swagger and make the Republicans eat their own crow for a while. With all that said someone referred me to a book “What’s The Matter With Kansas?” It detailed that people essentially believe that they are screwed fiscally so they vote for those who engage them on a social or cultural level. That explains alot.
Finn McCool
December 16th, 2010
9:23 am
Ending lame duck sessions? The people in those positions were elected to be in there and doing what they are doing.
How about we revisit “ending lame duck sessions” the next time congress goes from Republican to Democrat? Yeah, thought so.
Finn McCool
December 16th, 2010
9:29 am
Hey Kyle, looks like Bookman HAD the testicular fortitude to put actual $$ figures in his comment about earmarks this morning.
sad sad sad
C from Marietta
December 16th, 2010
9:44 am
Hey Kyle,
It’s refreshing to read someone come out and say the truth. That being said. Voting for Republicans OR Democrats is the samething. Neither party cares about the people or the will of the people. This shows it’s time for a 3rd party to rise up or we are all in trouble. In my opinion however the people are getting what they deserve. Trusting big party politicans is like your wife cheating on you all the time. Yet, you keep giving her chance after chance. I for one will keep voting for Liberterians. I am not buying into the status quo.
Jefferson
December 16th, 2010
9:45 am
You GOP supporters are a sad excuse for progress…
Liars all......
December 16th, 2010
9:48 am
Mr. McCool, you are anything but cool. All Tea Partiers are ignorant? Surely you must be one of the socialist liberals. Just because the Tea Party movement is standing up for returning the country to THE PEOPLE, you find it offensive. If you are not For The People, then you are against them and I suggest moving elsewhere.
Kyle Wingfield
December 16th, 2010
9:55 am
Good morning, everyone.
First, regarding the tax bill. A few people seem to be confusing that bill with this spending bill. They are not the same.
Nor are their dollar figures comparable in the way some of you are making them out to be. This spending bill is $1.1 trillion for ONE year. The tax bill’s estimated cost is around $850 billion for TEN years, or $85 billion per year on average. Big difference.
Finally, for those who say the tax bill adds to the deficit in the same way this spending bill does. Not true.
By definition, a bill’s 10-year cost is not “added to the deficit,” because a deficit is a shortfall for one year. But even if you really meant “the debt” and think I’m being pedantic, there’s a more substantive difference here. The “cost” of tax cuts in future years only adds to those years’ deficits if spending in those years is not brought in line. As I’ve said a couple of times on here regarding the tax bill, the onus will be on the Republicans in Congress to come up with the necessary spending cuts.
But they can’t do it until their newly elected members take office next month, which is one reason I find this last-minute spending bill so odious.
Ima Pol Crook
December 16th, 2010
9:56 am
List of Porker Pigs to be thrown out of office next election!
http://www.uncoverage.net/2010/12/list-of-senators-who-are-sponsoring-pork-projects-in-omnibus-bill/
Junior Samples
December 16th, 2010
9:57 am
“Senate Democrats — and some Republican accomplices — want to defy the will of the voters….”
“…just eight of the Senate’s 42 current Republicans requested zero earmarks”
81% of Senate Republicans is certainly more the ’some’ as you referred.
Nice spin Kyle.
It boils down to this.
Republicans threatened NO to everything until the Bush Tax Cuts were extended. Democrats responded with “how bad do you want it”???
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
10:06 am
Kyle, you may be correct in dismissing the inaccurate claim that the cost of the tax bill adds to the deficit, but it is just nitpicking. I believe that most people understand that what it means is that the yearly spending cost + revenue loss add to the year’s deficit, if there is one. And to assume that spending in those near years will be brought in line is a fantasy.
Kyle Wingfield
December 16th, 2010
10:07 am
Following on from that last comment…
Regarding the lame-duck sessions. There is no reason Congress *must* be in session between November and January following an election, short of a national emergency — and to Road Scholar’s point at 9:15 a.m., I’m sure any actual piece of legislation would make provisions for that, probably more broadly than I would like. Congress goes in recess throughout the year. There’s no reason it couldn’t be in recess for most of these two months every other year.
Ending the habitual practice of lame-duck sessions would force members of both parties, whenever they held the majority but were in danger of losing it, to pass legislation before the election so that voters could hold them accountable for it — rather than doing it after they’ve been voted out of the majority but before the changes take place.
And yes, Finn, I think this is every much as bit necessary when Democrats are taking control from Republicans as it is now. And no, Finn, I don’t expect you to believe me.
As for MarkV’s point at 9:09 a.m.: I would be all in favor of cutting their pay to reflect a shorter work period.
We could also look at changing the term of Congress so that the new Congress begins sooner after the election. We’ve done it before, in acknowledgment that modern transportation, etc. meant we no longer needed a transition period of November to March. I think it probably makes more sense to keep the term dates as they are and keep Congress in recess during the lame-duck period, except in an actual national emergency. (And no, failure to squeeze in the DREAM Act before the elections doesn’t count as an “emergency.”)
Liars all......
December 16th, 2010
10:08 am
The Wicked Witch of America, Nancy Pelosi just won Liar of the Year. Everything that comes out of that womans mouth is spin….therefore a lie. Sheesh, aren’t we glad she only has two more years?
The General Feeling
December 16th, 2010
10:09 am
Kyle, please explain how extending the current income tax rates is a cost?
The Tea Party will be enraged and if this spending bill is passed then those voting “aye” and running for office in 2012 will be singled out for replacement. Count on it.
Kyle Wingfield
December 16th, 2010
10:09 am
Junior Samples @ 9:57 a.m.: But only four of the Republicans have said they’re considering voting for the bill. I don’t understand why you’d put an earmark into a bill and then vote against it, unless you’re just trying to have it both ways. But that was what I meant by “some.”
JDW
December 16th, 2010
10:18 am
December 16th, 2010
9:55 am
Good morning, everyone.
“First, regarding the tax bill. A few people seem to be confusing that bill with this spending bill. They are not the same.
Nor are their dollar figures comparable in the way some of you are making them out to be. This spending bill is $1.1 trillion for ONE year. The tax bill’s estimated cost is around $850 billion for TEN years, or $85 billion per year on average. Big difference.”
You are right they are not the same. Both Republican and Democratic legislators have been working on the spending bill for months. It is $26 Billion lower than requested by the budget and represents a 2% increase in spending over last year….sorry your SHOCK I say SHOCK that there is gambling in Rick’s café is laughable.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46383.html
Now talk about spin….JEESSSH…the CBO estimates the tax cut bill will indeed cost $893 Billion over 10 years. Of that cost $797 Billion will be incurred over the next TWO years and $917 Billion over the next THREE. Yes that’s right Kyle those tax cuts will cost us $917 BILLION over three years…far cry from $85 Billion a year now isn’t it.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12020/sa4753.pdf
Again I say…Tax cuts that increase the deficit are the problem not the solution.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
10:19 am
December 16th, 2010
9:55 am
Good morning, everyone.
“First, regarding the tax bill. A few people seem to be confusing that bill with this spending bill. They are not the same.
Nor are their dollar figures comparable in the way some of you are making them out to be. This spending bill is $1.1 trillion for ONE year. The tax bill’s estimated cost is around $850 billion for TEN years, or $85 billion per year on average. Big difference.”
You are right they are not the same. Both Republican and Democratic legislators have been working on the spending bill for months. It is $26 Billion lower than requested by the budget and represents a 2% increase in spending over last year….sorry your SHOCK I say SHOCK that there is gambling in Rick’s café is laughable.
www. politico.com/news/stories/1210/46383.html
Now talk about spin….JEESSSH…the CBO estimates the tax cut bill will indeed cost $893 Billion over 10 years. Of that cost $797 Billion will be incurred over the next TWO years and $917 Billion over the next THREE. Yes that’s right Kyle those tax cuts will cost us $917 BILLION over three years…far cry from $85 Billion a year now isn’t it.
www. cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12020/sa4753.pdf
Again I say…Tax cuts that increase the deficit are the problem not the solution.
hairlip
December 16th, 2010
10:19 am
“You GOP supporters are a sad excuse for progress…”
Jefferson: the election that tossed your beloved Pelosi Dems out of the House and several Reid Dem Senators out 6 weeks ago says you are wrong.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
10:21 am
OOOPS sorry for the double post, Kyle is on top of it this morning and got me out of the penalty box.
Jefferson
December 16th, 2010
10:21 am
So why don’t they just say NO again (GOP), the t-reps have no respect and are just dreamers that will be brought into the machine. Where’s the love?
Jefferson
December 16th, 2010
10:24 am
Anyone that thinks I love any of the politicians is very wrong. elections change nothing to speak of, nor do I care who is speaker (or cryer) of the house.
StJ
December 16th, 2010
10:24 am
“They also ought to pass a bill ending the practice of holding lame-duck sessions, in which politicians can thumb their collective nose at voters’ demands.”
Best idea I’ve heard all year.
Halftrack
December 16th, 2010
10:29 am
You got to remember – - – this is the old spendthrift gang still in office. The Tea Partyiers are waiting in the wings. The Old gang is showing itself big that it wants to destroy the USA by continueing to spend. Just pull a poll on the new Reps. and you’ll see what they want to do.
e
December 16th, 2010
10:37 am
Let us faceit, no one is in the least interested in how much government spends, it is how much they get of it. There was a scam on town supervisors in NYS to see how many would take a bribe, all but one went for it, and the one dissenter did not because the bribe was not big enough.
Kyle Wingfield
December 16th, 2010
10:49 am
JDW: You’re correct about most of the tax bill “cost” being front-loaded. My mistake.
However, I would note that, for this year, we are still talking about a 4:1 ratio versus the spending bill (which only covers nine months since we are already a quarter of the way into the fiscal year, I also should have pointed out). I would also note that the biggest parts of the “cost” aren’t for tax cuts for “the rich”; they’re for the rest of the income-tax brackets and for the AMT patch.
Now, why do I keep putting scare quotes around “cost”? (There, I just did it again.) Because, further to the General Feeling’s point, reduced revenues are only a “cost” (i.e., produce a deficit) if spending isn’t cut to match them. And I think it’s very, very difficult to argue that the message of this election was something other than: Cut spending to close the deficit.
Which brings me back to the Dems pushing through this bloated spending bill in a lame-duck session.
And yes, it’s bloated even though it’s “just” a 2% increase. That’s because it’s a 2% increase on consecutive years of much bigger increases. As I and some others argued at the time, the Dems are trying to bake those increases into the budget cake. They don’t want them to be the temporary increases they sold them as. There’s no reason we shouldn’t be cutting spending by 10% or more, in real terms, rather than continuing to increase it.
Dr. Pangloss
December 16th, 2010
10:54 am
The Tea Party isn’t worried about government spending. They weren’t out in the streets with their misspelled signs when the national debt quadrupled under Reagan + Bush #1. They weren’t waving their guns around when it doubled under Bush #2.
They’re boiling because the president is (partly) black and (somewhat) liberal.
And some of them are angry because poor people get to vote.
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
10:56 am
Kyle, just to see what your philosophy is, why should we cut spending? Can you make a cogent argument?
Jefferson
December 16th, 2010
11:01 am
Sounds like a revenue problem, how the bills gonna get paid ?
Kyle Wingfield
December 16th, 2010
11:12 am
MarkV: I’ve been writing about cutting spending, size and scope of government, etc. 1-2 times a day for the past year-plus. I don’t think I’m going to set out much more of a personal philosophy in a single comment…
JDW
December 16th, 2010
11:14 am
@Kyle, I agree that the biggest part of the tax cut is not for the rich…problem is that we simply can’t afford any of it right now for anyone. IMO it should have never been done and should be allowed to expire. It has already dug a $3 Trillion plus deficit hole. STOP DIGGING.
On the spending, yep it is, as always, bloated and BOTH parties are squarely to blame. The thing that burns my butt is that some of our representatives are incredibly disingenuous…for example:
“It’s completely inappropriate; I’m vigorously in opposition to it,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who then had to admit the bill included earmarks for projects in his home state of Kentucky. Indeed, the spending levels are specifically designed to meet appropriations targets that McConnell and much of the Republican leadership espoused only months ago.
The Republicans are flat lying to the American public. They helped write the spending bill, stuffed it full of pork, and tossed it over to the Dems so they don’t have to take the heat…business as usual.
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
11:16 am
Kyle, you have been writing either about specific issues, or about vague notions of “getting spending under conrol.”
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
11:19 am
JDW: While I generally agree with you, I would challenge you, just like I have challenged Kyle, to define what is “bloated spending.”
JDW
December 16th, 2010
11:19 am
@Kyle,
” And I think it’s very, very difficult to argue that the message of this election was something other than: Cut spending to close the deficit.”
I must take exception to that comment…
From CBS News
Of all the problems facing the country today which one do you most want the congress to concentrate on first when it begins in January.
Ecomomy and Jobs 56%
Health Care 14%
Deficit 4%
Immigration 2%
Education 2%
Wars 2%
Taxes 2%
Other 9%
Please note taxes and spending combined comprise only 6% of the response…I think that it is very difficult to argue that taxes and spending should be anything more than a side issue at the moment, according to the public.
I think you misread the message.
Not So Casual Observer
December 16th, 2010
11:22 am
Do you just love the racist posts here who claim the opposition to the Democrat Socialists, and Republican Socialists, is because the President may or may not have black heritage?
I believe Obama and Clinton are the only two Presidents in recent history who have refused to release their medical records.
In the case of Clinton the records likely indicate numerous std’s (pure speculation I know) but what is the issue with the current POTUS? Clues to his lineage perhaps? Or just an ugly mole somewhere?
Yes, poor people vote and look at the results. Exit polls indicated they voted for Obama because he had a female running mate (Palin) or his opposition to abortion. Obviously the election is a beauty contest and an opportunity to vote for someone who will keep pouring money into welfare so they will not have to work. You do remember the Dem convention woman who said Obama was going to pay her mortgage, her gasoline and for her food? How is that working out?
The Democrats have promoted class warfare for the last 50+ years and now here we are with entitlement programs sucking the life out of the country, not just in money but more importantly in the incentive to work and succeed.
All 535 Members are back in the vote-buying business if the omnibus bill passes!
Come on Pangloss and Jefferson be honest. All you really care about is the next handout!
Keep voting for these R and D crooks and then see how you like a one-world government with dolts like David Rockefeller making the decisions.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
11:22 am
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
11:19 am
“JDW: While I generally agree with you, I would challenge you, just like I have challenged Kyle, to define what is “bloated spending.””
I don’t think there has ever been a spending bill that did not contain something that could be called bloated. However in most cases it is just ground noise. I think that the recommendations from the recent deficit reduction commission coupled with history from the Clinton years support spending and tax revenue parity at between 20% and 21% of GDP.
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
11:30 am
JDW: But the “spending and tax revenue parity at between 20% and 21% of GDP” are just numbers, without any real basis. Recommendation of the deficit reduction commision surely cannot count as one, and history from the Clinton years is just that, history of what happened at a particular time,.
Not So Casual Observer
December 16th, 2010
11:38 am
JDW,
While somewhat enlightening there are problems with your reference:
First – CBS News – The “We distort and you decide” network, by Dan Rather.
Second – The respondents are most likely TV viewers and thus 70% of the responses are direct “me” issues (jobs and healthcare). The TV crowd is not smart enough to understand the biggest problem affecting all of the others is the deficit and the debt created by the deficit.
Third – The respondents are clearly not educated enough to understand the drain on the economy and jobs created by illegal immigration, not to mention the security issues.
We are not a Democracy, the US is a Constitutional Republic, a land of laws, and the Congress is elected to vote in the best interests of the nation as a whole, not to vote based upon the whimsy of the populace. Unfortunately, the Congress has devolved into voting in their own interest and that of their supporters and friends.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
11:51 am
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
11:30 am
“JDW: But the “spending and tax revenue parity at between 20% and 21% of GDP” are just numbers, without any real basis. Recommendation of the deficit reduction commision surely cannot count as one, and history from the Clinton years is just that, history of what happened at a particular time,.”
Agreed, they are target numbers. Using them as a base you can then work backwards to reduce spending to those levels. If you want to play with the numbers you can visit The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget’s site. It is the best budget simulation I have seen.
http://crfb.org/stabilizethedebt/
Yes, the Clinton years are history. They are the only time in recent history that spending and revenue were in parity and looking at how that was achieved allows one to build a model to fix our current problem.
Left wing management
December 16th, 2010
12:07 pm
Not So Casual Observer: “The Democrats have promoted class warfare for the last 50+ years and now here we are with entitlement programs sucking the life out of the country, not just in money but more importantly in the incentive to work and succeed.”
There’s only one real case of “class warfare” going on right now: the class warfare being waged by the crony capitalists and reckless financial speculators, and the cover given them by certain people, especially those who throw around the charge that there are some Americans who pay no income taxes.
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
12:12 pm
JDW: While I find the simulation interesting, it only underscores the main problem: Different people will make different choices, resulting in different outcomes. The main discrepancies are between what people want from the government, what they are willing to pay for, and who should pay how much. It was revealing how Sen. Cornyn answered the question about why he put his earmarks in. He said those project were “defensible.” All the spending is “defensible” is you take individual items and the constituencies that want them. To call spending “bloated” is meaningless unless you define which part YOU think is bloated, and then you have people who have completely different opinion. I think most everybody would agree that the government for the most part should not spend more than the revenue. The disagreement is in what to spend it for..
JDW
December 16th, 2010
12:19 pm
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
12:12 pm
“JDW: While I find the simulation interesting, it only underscores the main problem: Different people will make different choices, resulting in different outcomes. The main discrepancies are between what people want from the government, what they are willing to pay for, and who should pay how much. It was revealing how Sen. Cornyn answered the question about why he put his earmarks in. He said those project were “defensible.” All the spending is “defensible” is you take individual items and the constituencies that want them. To call spending “bloated” is meaningless unless you define which part YOU think is bloated, and then you have people who have completely different opinion. I think most everybody would agree that the government for the most part should not spend more than the revenue. The disagreement is in what to spend it for..”
Fair enough. My approach to the problem is one of a model. If we can bring revenue and spending into parity, then any new spending must be paid for via some revenue source and any tax cuts must be offset by spending cuts.
I think that is where the actual line item battle would occur. As to what I would specifically cut the results of the deficit commission are a good start though I would move faster than they suggest.
retiredds
December 16th, 2010
1:03 pm
Yes, Kyle and other conservatives, the Republicans are on the band wagon as well …. and have been for at least the last 20 years. Kyle, there are no innocent bystanders but it is so cool of you to lay most of the blame at the foot of Democrats. So, I am taking the liberty of revising your lead to: “Tea Partiers should be boiling at Democrats and Republicans at $1.1 trillion bill. Let’s us not forget that Bush’s (and he was a Republican last I checked) last budget was for a deficit of $1.3 trillion … and I can hear you now, why go back to Bush … just to make a point). As I said when it comes to politicians, whether Republican or Democrat, they can’t keep their hands out of the till. And I can remember when earmarks were called pork. And that’s what the R’s and D’s are doing, loading up the pork.
Jefferson
December 16th, 2010
1:04 pm
Let em’ boil…boiled t, add some sugar and lemon and charge $2.25 a glass.
Intown
December 16th, 2010
1:05 pm
I am the opposite of a tea partier. So I say now is the perfect time to RAM IT THROUGH and keep the government functioning through at least the end of the fiscal year.
Not So Casual Observer
December 16th, 2010
1:20 pm
Left wing,
So you propose to ignore the constant carping from the Left of “raise the taxes on the rich”?
That would be the rich, say the upper 5% of income earners who pay more than 55% of the personal income tax?
The “crony capitalists and reckless financial speculators” (your term) are being given cover by the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and by the Obama White House, and by the W Bush, Clinton and HW Bush administrations and Congresses before them.
You also choose to throw into doubt the very real FACT that almost 50% of the people pay no federal income tax. Actually, that group not only does not pay but a significant number of them actually receive “refunds” greater than their payments into withholding.
The EIC is simply more welfare disguised as tax policy. This is policy driven by Democrats to create a “dependent class” to rely on more Democrat largesse to survive – thus my comment on sucking the incentive to work and succeed out of the people.
Not So Casual Observer
December 16th, 2010
1:33 pm
Stop the omnibus bill and let the government actually shut down for a month or two.
Tax collections cease, entitlements are disontinued and the slackers will have to develop a means to survival. Best of all, federal government employees will catch a glimpse of the real world and the mess created by the Congress and Administration, present and past.
Chaos would ensue but then that is what 20-30% of the population faces on a daily basis as homes are foreclosed, jobs are lost forever and all so the crooks in Washington can continue to take care of themselves and their buddies like David Rockefeller and George Soros.
“Tea partiers should be boiling at $1.1 trillion bill” « Tea Party NM
December 16th, 2010
1:38 pm
[...] In every respect, this is the kind of action voters rejected at the ballot box last month. It is a budget-busting, debt-inducing, written-in-the-dark and rammed-through-before-daylight bill….more [...]
HDB
December 16th, 2010
1:41 pm
Not So Casual Observer
December 16th, 2010
1:20 pm
“The EIC is simply more welfare disguised as tax policy. This is policy driven by Democrats to create a “dependent class” to rely on more Democrat largesse to survive…..”
Actually the EITC was a REPUBLICAN idea…..enacted under the Ford Administration!
…from wikipedia: Enacted in 1975, the initially modest EIC has been expanded by tax legislation on a number of occasions, including the widely-publicized Reagan Tax Reform Act of 1986, and was further expanded in 1990, 1993, and 2001, regardless of whether the act in general raised taxes (1990, 1993), lowered taxes (2001), or eliminated other deductions and credits (1986).[6] Today, the EITC is one of the largest anti-poverty tools in the United States (despite the fact that most income measures, including the poverty rate, do not account for the credit).
John
December 16th, 2010
2:17 pm
“They also ought to pass a bill ending the practice of holding lame-duck sessions, in which politicians can thumb their collective nose at voters’ demands.”
If Republicans would stop fillibustering every piece of legislation and allow bills to be debated and voted on, perhaps they could get work done throughout the year and would therefore not need to do any work in hte lame-duck sessions.
Linda
December 16th, 2010
2:33 pm
John @ 2:17, A filibuster can only be used in the Senate & can’t be used by the minority party if the majority party has 60 votes, which the Dems. had until Kennedy died in 8/09. There are now 41 Reps. in the Senate but several of them frequently vote with the Dems.
The tax cuts, passed in ‘01 & ‘03, were scheduled to expire 12/10. EVERYONE knew this. The Dems. failed to even introduce a bill to be debated until this week.
Your statement has no merit at all.
Linda
December 16th, 2010
2:41 pm
Does anyone else find it strange that the tax bill includes both tax cuts (which encourages people to work & earn more money) & an extension of unemployment benefits from 99 wks. to 112 wks. (which discourages people not to work & earn money)?
retiredds
December 16th, 2010
2:59 pm
Question, has the party out of power always ranted about lame duck sessions? If it’s evenly divided then do away with them. If it is lopsided one way or the other then keep them. To the victors belong the spoils (even if you or I don’t like it). Sort of like the mortgage mess, let the buyer beware (and don’t look for a handout when you bet the farm the wrong way).
Ed Kubeck
December 16th, 2010
3:24 pm
Thank you Kyle for make some kind of voice on this matter. I know that the Tea Party is certainly outraged by what congress is doing while the nation and media is asleep. This is proof why we need Tea Party Candidates who stand for Americans, who stand for freedom through a smaller government, who stand for good over evil. We need to get the message out that America cannot and should not trust the two party system. They have sold us out to the Banks and the lobbyist. A top of this the democrats have control of the media who say nothing about it or act like it did not happen. We need to vote tea party and we need it to be the third party choice to save America from big government and lack of national defense. I wish Kyle would also speak out on the Star Treaty that will hurt America’s National Defense.
Toby
December 16th, 2010
3:32 pm
Linda, it’s not 112 weeks, not 99 weeks. where in the world do you get your facts?
Jefferson
December 16th, 2010
3:51 pm
The t-reps were too chicken crap to run on their own two feet as an independent, so they ride the “R” coattails and will soon be in line with the rest of the uncreditable liars. More of the same, greed and fear.
MarkV
December 16th, 2010
4:25 pm
There is no point to discuss things with people like Linda, who thinks that extension of unemployment benefits “discourages people not to work & earn money.” (What does that mean, anyway?)
Linda
December 16th, 2010
4:48 pm
Toby @ 3:32, S. 3706 was introduced in Aug. by Sen. Debbie Stabenow, the Tier 5 employment benefits extension bill, to provide 20 wks. of additional unemployment to the 99ers, about 2.5 million Americans who had already received 99 wks. of unemployment benefits. This bill would have extended them in states with an unemployment rate of 7.5% or higher, which included GA.
I assumed, incorrectly, that the unemployment extension of 13 wks. in the tax bill passed by the Senate, included the 99ers.
The General Feeling
December 16th, 2010
5:00 pm
@ Kyle “Now, why do I keep putting scare quotes around “cost”? (There, I just did it again.) Because, further to the General Feeling’s point, reduced revenues are only a “cost” (i.e., produce a deficit) if spending isn’t cut to match them. ”
You would get laughed out of Econ 101 for that line of thinking. See, you, like many others in journalism, have allowed the MSM to cloud your thinking.
And, tax cuts don’t always reduce tax revenues, do they?
Linda
December 16th, 2010
5:03 pm
MarkV @ 4:25, Do you think that people who live in an area with an unemployment rate of less than 8% could possibly or likely find a full-time job or 2 part-time jobs in less than 2 yrs.? Do you think that paying them for 2 yrs. increases or decreases their motivation &/or urgency? Are there people telling hirers that they want to work only a couple of days per week or to be paid under the table, so as to keep their benefits?
Left wing management
December 16th, 2010
5:05 pm
Not So Casual Observer: “So you propose to ignore the constant carping from the Left of “raise the taxes on the rich”?”
I assume you’re talking about the current debates concerning extension of the so-called Bush tax
cuts. The actual rates are of course somewhat secondary. More important is the demagogic battle over whether their lapse would represent an actual increase or not – which of course they do not.
“The “crony capitalists and reckless financial speculators” (your term) are being given cover by the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and by the Obama White House, and by the W Bush, Clinton and HW Bush administrations and Congresses before them.”
I couldn’t agree with you more. The current president is succeeding in his desire to be Bush II, only better.
CJ
December 16th, 2010
5:14 pm
“…an omnibus spending bill that would fund the government through the end of the fiscal year is still pending in the Senate, and will run into fierce Republican opposition when it’s brought to the floor, probably on Saturday. The main GOP complaint: the laundry list of earmarks, many of which they personally put in the bill.”
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_12/027126.php
It is what it isn't, that is, it's not what it is.
December 16th, 2010
5:20 pm
There is no correlation between debt and growth. There is a correlation between ancestry and mongoliodism as proven every day on this comment board. Ignorance is elastic, because most of the comments here come from waistbanded.
Peter
December 16th, 2010
5:29 pm
Hey Kyle are Republican’s going to get the job market going in Georgia ?
James Woods
December 16th, 2010
5:58 pm
We should of been boiling while Bush was growing government.
The republicans laid the foundation for all of this mess.
CJ
December 16th, 2010
6:06 pm
Kyle wrote, “I think it’s very, very difficult to argue that the message of this election was something other than: Cut spending to close the deficit.”
Actually, despite this media meme, it’s quite easy to argue that the message this election was something other than: Cut spending to close the deficit.
The exit polls and other polls since have demonstrated that the majority of Americans prioritize jobs/economy first. Dealing with the deficit is typically lower in the priority list and in the single digits.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/11/politics/main7045964.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody
http://www.gallup.com/poll/144512/Jobs-Climb-Higher-Americans-Top-Problems-List.aspx
Michael H. Smith
December 16th, 2010
6:30 pm
I call for the yeas and nays, Kyle. How many people who made a comment against earmarks on this blog wrote Georgia’s two Senator’s asking them to remove their earmarks?
I yield my yea in advance.
Dem-mentia
December 16th, 2010
6:43 pm
This speaks volumes on the Dem arrogance and blatant disregard for the American people who gave them the middle finger salute on November 3. Biden tells DeMint and others opposing the ratification of the START treaty: “Get out of the way. There’s too much at stake.” That’s the exact elitist mentality that Americans voted them out for. Arrogant Dems don’t learn much after elections, do they?
So anyway, grocery prices have grown by more than 1 1/2 times the overall rate of inflation this year. When Obama took office in January 2009, gas prices were at $1.70/gallon. Today they are $2.85. What I’d like to know is where the hell the main stream (lib) media is on all this news. Because as God as my witness they sure had conniption fits (as did the Dems) every time gas and food prices ticked up when Bush was president.
Oh silly me. These are the same people who say things like “things could be worse” and even spin unemployment figures into good news like saying it cuts down on smog and allows families to spend more time together. Follow the libs and their dancing flutes right off the cliff, right?
Linda
December 16th, 2010
7:09 pm
CJ @ 5:14, Kyle wrote that the “tea partiers should be boiling…”
It doesn’t matter who included earmarks, Dems. or Reps. The tea partiers should be fuming. I am.
The difference is that Reps. (& a few Dems.) got the message in Nov. that earmarks are no longer acceptable. Some of the Rep. earmarks are reported to have been included in the massive spending bill before the Nov. elections.
Regardless, right now, what matters to the Tea Party members is who votes for or against this bill.
It is what it isn't, that is, it's not what it is.
December 16th, 2010
7:14 pm
The gas prices are rising because China is buying more and more. Then a half hour later they buy more. They’re Chinese, okay? I’ll tell you what’s coming, man, is 2000 dollar Camry-quality cars from the chinese. I’ve always said that if America only built Camrys, and no other car, then Camrys would cost a couple of grand and everyone could have a damn Camry, but no, the capitalist pigs wizards on madison avenue had to teach us that everyone should be different and get a personalized car and now our highways are littered with pos’s. Imagine how cool it would look if everyone drove a white camry.
Linda
December 16th, 2010
7:26 pm
CJ @ 8:06, You & the Dems/progressives/socialists still don’t get the message from the American people, especially the Tea Party members, as a result of the mid-term elections.
It’s impossible to separate the priority of jobs & the economy from cutting spending & closing the deficit. They all affect each other. What you are trying to do is push the progressive Keynesian economics principle which has not worked.
Linda
December 16th, 2010
7:31 pm
It is @ 7:14, What did the socialists give you when you joined their party? Since you are against the Constitution, what rights are you willing to concede?
Left wing management
December 16th, 2010
7:53 pm
CJ: “Actually, despite this media meme, it’s quite easy to argue that the message this election was something other than: Cut spending to close the deficit.”
Exactly right.
Sabastian Curry
December 16th, 2010
8:38 pm
Obama and his men are a bunch of second-hander looting criminals that have never had a real job, never produced a service or product that anyone wanted, but now RULE over you. They have working evil little brains, but are partially mentally ill. Yes, the Republicans are a bunch of criminals as well, but they dont want to kill the golden egg. They are smarter than that.
This system is collapsing, we are being looted and destroyed.
Obama belongs in jail.
Sabastian Curry
Sabastian Curry
December 16th, 2010
8:43 pm
Who cares about the Tea Party?
This government is too big. It is killing this country. It is not securing our borders, allowing this country to be over run and taken over by Mexico, while they fight meaningless wars across the ocean.
Liberal Socialism is a failure.
You sheeple need to wake up, you are being ruled by freaks who plan to destroy you.
Sabastian Curry
LeeH1
December 16th, 2010
9:14 pm
I think the Tea Party drank “Orange Teko Pee”. Off course, now that they have had their vent, they realize they were duped and fooled by the Republican Party. The GOP now no longer has any need for them, so they have been dropped like rotten tea bags.
The Tea Party will now be ignored until the next election cycle, where once again the tools and fools will be angered up with lies and distortions, and used by smarter people. Then, they will be dumped again.
There is nothing worse than weak tea.
Scott
December 16th, 2010
9:17 pm
Massive, massive cuts in the budget – everywhere. Let’s compete to see how many federal agencies we can eliminate. And massive cuts in federal law and intrusion into people’s lives.
How about taking the code of federal regulations and tossing half of it into the fire? Would be a great start and really fuel the economy!
Time to put the federal government back where it belongs.. a very tiny percentage of the economy. To all those who have milked it all these years, well, sorry. You knew you were latching onto a public trough. Well, the trough is closed now.
hsr0601
December 16th, 2010
11:23 pm
1. Anti-DISCLOSE Act VS. Pro-Earmark Ban
Admittedly, both are disturbing, but it is apparent that the largest form of wasteful spending can arise from the Shadowy Campaign Money offered by the greedy interest group.
And Earmarks accounted for about $16 billion, less than 1 percent, of federal spending in 2010, small potatoes in contrast to Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans
2. The reps along with Big Business bought this past midterm election.
The structure that the last champion is authorized to pick the next match winner .
The ruling that allowed Corporate money to back Political Candidates destroyed the very fabric of the Elections and Americans are paying dearly for it.
The incessant flood of negative campaign ads drove most Americans towards something they knew nothing about, the Republican/Corporate take-over of the US. Millions upon millions were spent to defeat certain
Jimmy62
December 17th, 2010
12:31 am
So the bill didn’t pass. Looks like the Tea Party won that one, despite all the naysayers on here. Now we’ll see how the new Congress handles things in a few months.
DEBBIE
December 17th, 2010
1:08 am
JUST REMEMBER——–AL QAEDA IS CIA-DUH!
Ragnar Danneskjöld
December 17th, 2010
8:45 am
Sounds like the water got hot again. Call it another tea party victory.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
December 17th, 2010
8:47 am
Kim Strassel of WSJ wrote a marvelous paragraph:
“Yet to this legislative Frankenstein Democrats carefully attached the spenders’ equivalent of crack cocaine. To wit, omnibus author and Hawaii Democrat Daniel Inouye dug up earmark requests that Senate Republicans had made in the past year (prior to their self-imposed ban) and, unasked, included them in the bill. He lavished special, generous attention—$1 billion worth of it—on some reliable GOP earmark junkies: Mississippi’s Thad Cochran got $512 million; Utah’s Bob Bennett, $226 million; Maine’s Susan Collins, $114 million; Missouri’s Kit Bond, $102 million; Ohio’s George Voinovich, $98 million; and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, $80 million.”
Jimmy62
December 17th, 2010
9:17 am
Ragnar: I saw that, good paragraph. What she neglected to mention was how much of the media cooperated with Inouye by making it seem like the Republicans were putting in these earmarks themselves, and making every other editorial in every major paper about how the GOP was a bunch of hypocrites. Thankfully the truth is out there, it was the Democrats every step of the way, doing their best to spend all our money and destroy the economy.
howard
December 17th, 2010
9:33 am
Federal spending is the #1 issue for which we as voters must hold Isakson and Chambliss accountable. They are as guilty as the most liberal Democrat when it comes to pork. Chambliss, in particular, needs to stop his bloated earmark requests. We are taxed enough already and he is helping bankrupt our future with his spending sprees.
Churchill's MOM
December 17th, 2010
10:27 am
Ragnar Danneskjöld
Is your son coming home for X’Mas?
Saxby got his real earmark in the “great compromise” a $6,000,000,000.00 extension of the Etthanol Subsidy. Never say Saxby’s Lobbyist Son doesn’t earn his keep for the Chicago Merc.
Peter
December 17th, 2010
10:46 am
Hey Kyle.Are Republican’s going to create any Jobs In Georgia ?
Georgian’s should be Boiling !
Swede Atlanta
December 17th, 2010
11:44 am
I fully support “pay as you go”. The costs of this package should have been paid for either through cuts in expenditures or new revenue.
It is ludicrous to think that tax cuts don’t need to be paid for.
David
December 17th, 2010
12:35 pm
I thought Saxby was our senior senator and Johnny our junior senator.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
December 17th, 2010
2:24 pm
Dear Mom @ 10:27, “Is your son coming home for X’Mas?” Yes, thanks for asking. Coming home soon.
Peter
December 17th, 2010
4:02 pm
Kyle…..There is NOT a Republican who doesn’t want PORK attached or a TAX Cut for the wealthy.
You continue to be JOKE like a typical Republican…..Are you praying for Rain these days ?
By the way how is un-employment doing in out Republican led state ?
Georgia and Idaho endured the largest increases in unemployment. Georgia’s rate rose to 10.1 percent from 9.8 percent. Idaho’s jumped to 9.4 percent from 9.1 percent.
NOT Good….so we elected a bankrupt liar, who has a sweet heart deal with Georgia.
Please you have to be kidding all !
Libby
December 17th, 2010
4:58 pm
Nah – we’re so used to getting the shaft we don’t even feel it anymore.
On political moderates, tea-party victories, and more! | Kyle Wingfield
December 20th, 2010
11:30 am
[...] Congress gets settled in) and, according to Mickey Kaus, the death of the DREAM Act. Apparently, the tea partyers are still being vocal after [...]