Inevitable: Senate rejects House GOP’s budget cuts, 44/56; Update: Dems’ budget bill fails 42/58 with 11 Democrats voting no

posted at 4:13 pm on March 9, 2011 by Allahpundit

Not a party-line vote. All 53 Democrats voted no, but so did the three tea-party all-stars: Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Jim DeMint. No word yet on whether they voted that way because they knew the bill was dead on arrival or whether they were prepared to say no even if it had a chance of passing. Paul, at least, sounded distinctly unimpressed with $61 billion in cuts during his floor speech this morning — and correctly so. Quote: “I recently proposed $500 billion in cuts and when I went home and spoke to the people of my state, spoke to those from the Tea Party, they said, $500 billion is not enough and they’re right. $500 billion is a third of one year’s problem. Up here that’s way too bold, but it’s not even enough.” Not remotely. And yet here we are.

Later they’ll vote on the Democrats’ insulting proposal to cut just $6.5 billion this year, but that’s D.O.A. too. The only suspense is seeing how many “fiscally conservative” Democrats will take the sort of principled stand taken by Paul et al.

“It isn’t often that two failed votes in the Senate could be called a breakthrough,” Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Wednesday in a speech at the liberal Center for American Progress think tank. “Once it is plain that both parties’ opening bids in this budget debate are non-starters, we can finally get serious about sitting down and narrowing the huge gap that exists between the two sides.”

Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb, who is up for re-election in 2012, said Wednesday he would vote against both plans.

“In my view, neither is serious,” he told reporters on a conference call. “These bills are loaded down with tricks, treats, gimmicks and games.”

The combatants are facing a March 18 deadline that already has Republicans in the House drafting another stopgap spending measure to make sure the government doesn’t shut down if a broader agreement isn’t reached by then.

Reid can’t accede to an endless stream of short-term GOP spending measures. The last one cut $4 billion and the one Republicans are currently planning will call for another $4 billion, the sum of which already exceeds the Democrats’ pathetic grand total in cuts for the rest of the year. So Reid’s plan going forward, apparently, is (a) to accuse the GOP of not wanting to kids to read or something and (b) to oppose any new short-term resolutions, which means the risk of an honest-to-goodness shutdown on March 18 is now real and growing by the moment. The left will have a hard time explaining to voters, though, why it was important to bring the government to a halt over $4 billion, which explains why President Present has now stirred himself to action and is meeting with Senate Dems to come up with a counteroffer. Says GOP whip Kevin McCarthy:

“The vice president’s not even in the country right now, and we have less than a week and a half. If you ask the press secretary at the White House, ‘Well, who’s the lead negotiator with the vice president gone?’ Can’t tell you.”

All it took to get The One to wade in was two failed budget bills, one short-term budget resolution, a looming government shutdown, and endless pleading for leadership from Republicans and Democrats. Good work, champ. Here’s Rand Paul’s floor speech from this morning on how feeble this entire debate is. Exit question: Are the Democrats about to try something bold with their counteroffer? I’m guessing … no, not at all.

Update: As expected, the Democrats’ lame budget proposal also failed catastrophically, with 11 Blue Dogs crossing the aisle to vote with the GOP in demanding deeper cuts. That’ll give Boehner some extra leverage in negotiating the next round with Reid, but not as much as he needs. The 42 Democrats who voted yes are still enough to mount a filibuster.

The bill drafted by Democratic leaders would have cut about $4.7 billion from current spending levels. It failed 42 to 58.

Democrats voting no were: Sens. Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Claire McCaskill, Joe Manchin, Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Bernie Sanders (who is an Independent who caucuses with Democrats), Mark Udall, Jim Webb, Carl Levin, and Michael Bennet.

I’m almost afraid to ask, but did Bernie Sanders vote against the bill because he thinks $4.7 billion in cuts is … too much?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Gird your loins. Shutdown’s a-comin’. Time to spin up the messaging wagon to get out in front of the DemSM on this, right GOP?

fiatboomer on March 9, 2011 at 4:16 PM

The entire year is going to be nothing but emergency spending measures to keep the government functioning without ever having an actual budget; what a circus of retards and morons we have in Congress.

Bishop on March 9, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Whew!

Thank God! The Cowboy Poetry Festival is safe!

cntrlfrk on March 9, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Exit question: Are the Democrats about to try something bold with their counteroffer?

Nancy Pelosi is willing to sell 10% in her Botox futures if the House GOP will just go along with Duh Won’s plan (whatever the hell that is).

Roy Rogers on March 9, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Predictable.

Reid can’t accede to an endless stream of short-term GOP spending measures. The last one cut $4 billion and the one Republicans are currently planning will call for another $4 billion, the sum of which already exceeds the Democrats’ pathetic grand total in cuts for the rest of the year.

This is really sad. Just shut the damn thing down.

davek70 on March 9, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Given the fact that people thought Rand was going to turn out to be a nutjob like his dad, he’s the most refreshing of all the new senators. He’s one of my favorites. He has the most balls of any of them.

dforston on March 9, 2011 at 4:17 PM

I’m still curious as to why the three tea partiers said no. Principle, yeah, but isn’t half a loaf better than none?

Vanceone on March 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb, who is up for re-election in 2012, said Wednesday he would vote against both plans.

“In my view, neither is serious,” he told reporters on a conference call. “These bills are loaded down with tricks, treats, gimmicks and games.”

Said Mr. Cornhusker Kickback.

He should know.

ajacksonian on March 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Now can a government shut down be blamed on these loser liberal demorats?

jawkneemusic on March 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM

DEMS=FAIL

When will this horror end!

SPGuy on March 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM

“narrowing the gap” means, pick a number between $50b and $7 billion. Closer to $7 billion, of course.

I think we should start using millions as our baseline, so people get the picture of how much money we’re talking about. For example, the deficit for FEBRUARY was around $230 thousand million.

$223,000,000,000
- 50,000,000,000
—————-
$173,000,000,000 the GOPs proposal doesn’t even clear up FEBRUARY’s deficit.

hawksruleva on March 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM

I’m almost afraid to ask, but did Bernie Sanders vote against the bill because he thinks $4.7 billion in cuts is … too much?

Bernie The Avowed Socialist will vote against anything that doesn’t heavily subsidize government activity.

teke184 on March 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Not gonna be a shutdown, the real RINOS will cave and we will see only about $2 billion in cuts for the remainder of the FY, and the same thing will occur in FY 2013, etc. This is only window dressing for the masses, these guys know that we are so far along the collapse road, we ain’t going to do anything substantial until we have a total meltdown in about 2018 +/- two years.

Johnnyreb on March 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Said Mr. Cornhusker Kickback.

He should know.

ajacksonian on March 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Exactly.

ladyingray on March 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

I’m still curious as to why the three tea partiers said no. Principle, yeah, but isn’t half a loaf better than none?

Vanceone on March 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Once you start taking Dane Geld, you are stuck taking it forever.

Johnnyreb on March 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Exit question: Are the Democrats about to try something bold with their counteroffer? I’m guessing … no, not at all.

If by bold, you mean demagoguery and fearmongering, then I believe they will.

I’m almost afraid to ask, but did Bernie Sanders vote against the bill because he thinks $4.7 billion in cuts is … too much?

Probably. Sanders was on with Andrea Mitchell yesterday(BTW, that might’ve been the ugliest splitscreen ever witnessed on TV) and his grand plan was for a 5.4% surtax on millionaires. He claimed that would match the $61 billion the GOP wants to cut. Which made it sound like he wanted the surtax to REPLACE the budget cuts. So not only is $4.7 billion probably too much for him, but he actually wants to raise taxes in addition to zero cuts in spending.

Doughboy on March 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM

I’m almost afraid to ask, but did Bernie Sanders vote against the bill because he thinks $4.7 billion in cuts is … too much?

Almost certainly.

Count to 10 on March 9, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Johnnyreb on March 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

November 2012.

Elections have consequences

Just like November 2010.

Roy Rogers on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

When will this horror end!

SPGuy on March 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM

When an asteroid hits DC…

PatriotRider on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

I’m no economic expert, but from all that I’veread, I think a lot of the tea party folks are delusional about how much we can cut right now and still manage. I don’t think there’s any way to cut half a trillion dollars or anywhere near that much at once right away…this problem built up slowly, and we’ve overextended ourselves, no doubt, but just cutting everything you see won’t work either- people will literally be left out in the cold if we just slash and burn. Pretty sure those screaming for $700 billion in cuts, most of them probably have no clue what most of that even goes to in the first place.

TheBlueSite on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

The democrats are going to deny the GOP any budget, probably for the next two years. When the government ‘shuts down’ those same democrats will blame the GOP.

Rumors are circulating that the Fed is going to stop it’s purchase of Treasury debt. This means the long anticipated, and long feared ‘rise in interest rates’ that dooms us all is only months away, and then there is the need to raise the debt ceiling.

Skandia Recluse on March 9, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Democrats voting no were: Sens. Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Claire McCaskill, Joe Manchin, Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Bernie Sanders (who is an Independent who caucuses with Democrats), Mark Udall, Jim Webb, Carl Levin, and Michael Bennet.

The first 7 of the 11 are up for re-election in 2012…

steebo77 on March 9, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Another colossal failure of leadership. 2012 is coming boys. If you won’t lead we’ll find people who will to replace you.

NickDeringer on March 9, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Just keep those 2 week CRs with 4 billion in cuts coming. Harry Reid is the frog in the boiling pan, except he knows it is getting hot and he can’t get out!

xrayiiis on March 9, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Btw, does anyone know how we’re doing with the debt ceiling?

blink on March 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

In the first 4 days of March, the Treasury spent 81 Billion dollars…at that rate the limit will be reached before the end of March….

PatriotRider on March 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM

I’m no economic expert, but from all that I’veread, I think a lot of the tea party folks are delusional about how much we can cut right now and still manage. I don’t think there’s any way to cut half a trillion dollars or anywhere near that much at once right away…this problem built up slowly, and we’ve overextended ourselves, no doubt, but just cutting everything you see won’t work either- people will literally be left out in the cold if we just slash and burn. Pretty sure those screaming for $700 billion in cuts, most of them probably have no clue what most of that even goes to in the first place.

TheBlueSite on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Maybe, but if they can’t even agree on $61 billion in cuts(or $100 billion if you prorate it over a year), then we’re never gonna get our annual deficits below a trillion much less back to zero.

Doughboy on March 9, 2011 at 4:28 PM

I disagree. $4B in cuts every two weeks adds up pretty quickly. It also gives the R’s to find the right place to make the cuts.

Somebody needs to tell them that border security is the wrong place to make cuts. If the current GOP bill had passed it would have slashed funding for border fencing and E-Verify.

Jon0815 on March 9, 2011 at 4:30 PM

I’m still curious as to why the three tea partiers said no. Principle, yeah, but isn’t half a loaf better than none?

Vanceone on March 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM

It’s almost certainly because they knew it wouldn’t pass anyways. If they voted yes, we’d have still been four votes short of a majority, and 13 votes short of 60.

Hollowpoint on March 9, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Austerity, austerity will set our Nation free…

How about dribs and drabs budgeting? A billion here for a day or two, then a billion there… have each department and agency come up and beg for a few more dollars to spend… then hear the complaints about cowboy poetry against the backdrop of not having an agency to RUN it…

ajacksonian on March 9, 2011 at 4:31 PM

TheBlueSite on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Thats the issue, there are way too many “things” starting to become insolvent at the same time. Sort of like the perfect storm. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Debt, State and Local Pensions, etc. If any of these things had happened by themselves alone, we could have mostly handeled it. Couple them all together at the same time, and we have a huge ass problem.

Johnnyreb on March 9, 2011 at 4:32 PM

I’m almost afraid to ask, but did Bernie Sanders vote against the bill because he thinks $4.7 billion in cuts is … too much?

Does a bear shit in the woods?
Is the Pope Catholic?
Will Snowe eventually vote with the Dems?
Will GOP Sens cave in Wisconsin?

angryed on March 9, 2011 at 4:33 PM

I’m no economic expert, but from all that I’veread, I think a lot of the tea party folks are delusional about how much we can cut right now and still manage. I don’t think there’s any way to cut half a trillion dollars or anywhere near that much at once right away…this problem built up slowly, and we’ve overextended ourselves, no doubt, but just cutting everything you see won’t work either- people will literally be left out in the cold if we just slash and burn. Pretty sure those screaming for $700 billion in cuts, most of them probably have no clue what most of that even goes to in the first place.

TheBlueSite on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

You’re right you are no economic expert.

10 years ago the budget was 50% of what it is today. Cutting $700B would but it somewhere around 2002-2003 spending levels.

And last I checked children weren’t dying on the streets in 2003.

Moron.

angryed on March 9, 2011 at 4:35 PM

As you all know, the real money is in entitlements. They are playing chicken. No one wants to go first, especially not Obama. The Republicans say they are going to go at them in next years budget, and Obama and the Dems are planning on demagogging them to death if they do.

So the question is, is America ready to face reality? Is Obama overplaying his hand? I don’t know. I never cease to be disappointed in the foolishness of the American people.

xrayiiis on March 9, 2011 at 4:36 PM

Dudes … read my lips … “there will be no shutdown”.

Thing is … as much as the GOP guys talk about cuts – they are just really baffled why anyone in the nation would demand that the cuts happen to this year’s budget when we’re already half way through the fiscal year. These guys are lazy …

I mean, all of US out there in “Realtown” have jobs and we’re used to our bosses coming up to us at 4:30pm – thrity minutes before close of business – with some hot “action item” that has to be done before we go home for the night but …

Not the lazy b-tards in the Senate.

That’s one reason and the other is – they really don’t want to make anything but token cuts because they enjoy the sweet taxpayer bread just as much as the Dimmocrits do! That money is their power and they use that power to get reelected by crating it up with a big bow and presenting it to their constituents back home. Without that money – there’s no game for them.

Soooo … they’ll cave alrighty.

This is all kabuki.

HondaV65 on March 9, 2011 at 4:36 PM

I actually respect Bernie Sanders. He is a socialist and is not afraid to say so. The other 52 Dems are also socialists but lie about it. I disagree with 99.99% of what Bernie stands for. But I have to give him credit for being one of the few politicians in DC who actually says and does what he believes in. I respect that a lot more than RINOs like McCain, Snowe, etc.

angryed on March 9, 2011 at 4:39 PM

“I recently proposed $500 billion in cuts and when I went home and spoke to the people of my state, spoke to those from the Tea Party, they said, $500 billion is not enough and they’re right. $500 billion is a third of one year’s problem. Up here that’s way too bold, but it’s not even enough.” Not remotely. And yet here we are.

I really like Rand Paul, though I am a little worried about his throwing all those Christianist gang signs.

I disagree. $4B in cuts every two weeks adds up pretty quickly. It also gives the R’s to find the right place to make the cuts.

Btw, does anyone know how we’re doing with the debt ceiling?

blink on March 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Yeah it adds up to a $104 billion for the year, which is 6.3% of this years overspending. Woop-ti-do.

sharrukin on March 9, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Yeah it adds up to a $104 billion for the year, which is 6.3% of this years overspending. Woop-ti-do.

sharrukin on March 9, 2011 at 4:39 PM

I’d be doing cartwheels if $104B were cut this year.

angryed on March 9, 2011 at 4:41 PM

I actually respect Bernie Sanders. He is a socialist and is not afraid to say so. The other 52 Dems are also socialists but lie about it. I disagree with 99.99% of what Bernie stands for. But I have to give him credit for being one of the few politicians in DC who actually says and does what he believes in. I respect that a lot more than RINOs like McCain, Snowe, etc.

angryed on March 9, 2011 at 4:39 PM

I respect him for his honesty too. The problem is he’s also delusional. And he’s in a position of significant power. There are 100 votes in the Senate and he wields one of them. On the surface that ratio may seem minuscule. But keep in mind that Obamacare’s passage in the Senate came down to a single vote.

Doughboy on March 9, 2011 at 4:43 PM

That’s it. Shut ‘er down.

And let the DemocRats take the blame.

UltimateBob on March 9, 2011 at 4:43 PM

I’d be doing cartwheels if $104B were cut this year.

angryed on March 9, 2011 at 4:41 PM

Why?

It means less than nothing.

It would be worse than doing nothing because it gives them cover while allowing the massive overspending to continue.

sharrukin on March 9, 2011 at 4:44 PM

GOOD! the GOP plan was weak, weak sauce and if passed would only have caused all sides to turn to other, far less important distractions.

Fortunately, since the socialists and the weak sister GOP can’t agree on anything, even though they both want the gravy train to continue, there is no stopgap. As Allen West says, there is a battle on the near horizon–lets get it on.

james23 on March 9, 2011 at 4:45 PM

The entire year is going to be nothing but emergency spending measures to keep the government functioning without ever having an actual budget; what a circus of retards and morons we have in Congress.

Bishop on March 9, 2011 at 4:16 PM

This.

Knucklehead on March 9, 2011 at 4:46 PM

You’re not fooling anyone, Kay Hagan (D-NC). If your vote was the decider, we know you’d vote with Daddy Warbucks Schumer.

SouthernGent on March 9, 2011 at 4:47 PM

I’m still curious as to why the three tea partiers said no. Principle, yeah, but isn’t half a loaf better than none?

Vanceone on March 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM

No. Agreement on the Do Nothing plan of the GOP would have meant the end of work on debt reduction this year. They have to do better; and if it takes a crisis to make them do better, well, lets not let a good crisis go to waste.

james23 on March 9, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Democrats voting no were: Sens. Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Claire McCaskill, Joe Manchin, Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Bernie Sanders (who is an Independent who caucuses with Democrats), Mark Udall, Jim Webb, Carl Levin, and Michael Bennet.

Won’t help repair your tarnished image here, Judas.

YOU. ARE. TOAST.

OmahaConservative on March 9, 2011 at 4:50 PM

HondaV65 on March 9, 2011 at 4:36 PM

What you said….

sicoit on March 9, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Guess we’ll just have to shut’er down.

BowHuntingTexas on March 9, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Our government is disgusting.

rrpjr on March 9, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Shut it down!

GarandFan on March 9, 2011 at 4:55 PM

I’m confused. I thought you CANT fillibuster budget related bills.

Avatar72 on March 9, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Where, exactly, in the Constitution does it say: “Thy budgeteth muft be all containeth within one fingle bill”?

Isn’t there ANYTHING these people can agree to cut? Any ONE program?

Weren’t there dozens (or even hundreds, depending on how you count them) of programs that were cut in the Republican budget proposal?

But the Demcocrats rejected ALL of those proposed cuts. Every. Single. Solitary. One.

How about just defense spending? Both sides say they agree on that. Are the Democrats lying – or are they officially holding it as a hostage to their social welfare increases?

Let’s face it; if the radical liberals in Congress refuse to even agree to cut NPR subsidies, then they will never compromise on anything, ever.

Voting against a “slightly smaller-than-once-planned” deficit increase is more than just a philosophical stand. The line must be drawn – right here and right now.

I’ve read the federal “shutdown” plan for operating without an official budget. It really doesn’t sound that bad. Let’s all just try it out for a while and then maybe consider another go at an official budget a couple of years down the road.

logis on March 9, 2011 at 4:56 PM

How about just defense spending? Both sides say they agree on that. Are the Democrats lying – or are they officially holding it as a hostage to their social welfare increases?

I’d like to go that route… fund specific departments for the rest of the year, such as defense, and then make sure to “leave out” funding for certain departments like the FCC, the EPA, etc.

teke184 on March 9, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Shut it down!
GarandFan on March 9, 2011 at 4:55 PM

What ELSE could anyone possibly do with an enterprise that has a net worth of NEGATIVE 44 trillion dollars; is currently spending money at a rate of 2 trillion dollars a year more than it is taking in; and shows absolutely no indication whatsoever that it will reverse that trend in the foreseeable future?

logis on March 9, 2011 at 5:04 PM

I’d like to go that route… fund specific departments for the rest of the year, such as defense, and then make sure to “leave out” funding for certain departments like the FCC, the EPA, etc.
teke184 on March 9, 2011 at 5:02 PM

It’s also a great marketing strategy. Instead of just telling the people “neither side liked the other’s budget,” tell them:

“We submitted 512 (or whatever) individual program spending cuts. And the radical liberal Democrats in the Senate rejected EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM!”

logis on March 9, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Lets look at the number differently

61,000,000,000 out of
3,700,000,000,000

1.6%

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IelJNgPoX-Q

tjexcite on March 9, 2011 at 5:08 PM

What ELSE could anyone possibly do with an enterprise that has a net worth of NEGATIVE 44 trillion dollars; is currently spending money at a rate of 2 trillion dollars a year more than it is taking in; and shows absolutely no indication whatsoever that it will reverse that trend in the foreseeable future?

logis on March 9, 2011 at 5:04 PM

Well as they say in the movies…..the world depends on us. If we don’t keep it going somehow, the collapse and sack of Rome is going to look like a “minor economic readjustment.”

Johnnyreb on March 9, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Democrats voting no were: Sens. Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Claire McCaskill, Joe Manchin, Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Bernie Sanders (who is an Independent who caucuses with Democrats), Mark Udall, Jim Webb, Carl Levin, and Michael Bennet.

Out of those 11, Manchin, McCaskill, the two Nelsons, and Webb might be persuaded to accept LARGER cuts (but less than $61 B). Together with 47 R’s, that makes 52 votes available if the right deal can be struck, somewhere between $4.7B and $61B). Ladies and gentlemen, sharpen your pencils and start calculating…

Steve Z on March 9, 2011 at 5:21 PM

Out of those 11, Manchin, McCaskill, the two Nelsons, and Webb might be persuaded to accept LARGER cuts (but less than $61 B). Together with 47 R’s, that makes 52 votes available if the right deal can be struck, somewhere between $4.7B and $61B). Ladies and gentlemen, sharpen your pencils and start calculating…

Steve Z on March 9, 2011 at 5:21 PM

PS…Kay Hagan is from NC, not exactly the bluest state in the Union, and might be persuaded to accept higher cuts.

Steve Z on March 9, 2011 at 5:22 PM

Paul ’16

Raisedbywolves on March 9, 2011 at 5:27 PM

Our government is disgusting.

rrpjr on March 9, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Yep… Our country is in serious trouble. The pitchforks had better come out soon, or it’s off the cliff. I don’t see the level of anger directed at our government that is justified and necessary under these circumstances.

Keemo on March 9, 2011 at 5:33 PM

I disagree. $4B in cuts every two weeks adds up pretty quickly. It also gives the R’s to find the right place to make the cuts.

Btw, does anyone know how we’re doing with the debt ceiling?

blink on March 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM

At that rate, we will have the $14.2 trillion debt paid off in 2148. The great-great-great grandkids will be thrilled.

Raisedbywolves on March 9, 2011 at 5:34 PM

I need some help or an explanation. Why wouldn’t it be best to take a flat percentage rate and make everyone work with that reduction of funds? Each department would decide their own priorities and there would be no stupid insults on how heartless or irresponsible on side or the other is.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2011 at 5:35 PM

I just want to know why Harry Reid makes all those Christian hand gestures?

jeanie on March 9, 2011 at 5:45 PM

Rumors are circulating that the Fed is going to stop it’s purchase of Treasury debt. This means the long anticipated, and long feared ‘rise in interest rates’ that dooms us all is only months away, and then there is the need to raise the debt ceiling.

Skandia Recluse on March 9, 2011 at 4:25 PM
.
This group is recreating the failed carter years,guess they know they will loose so they just want to F%*% up as much as they can and hope in the future we like socialism.
Talk about nutz.

Col.John Wm. Reed on March 9, 2011 at 6:08 PM

I need some help or an explanation. Why wouldn’t it be best to take a flat percentage rate and make everyone work with that reduction of funds? Each department would decide their own priorities and there would be no stupid insults on how heartless or irresponsible on side or the other is.

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2011 at 5:35 PM.
.
Logic and hairy the red do not mix.

Col.John Wm. Reed on March 9, 2011 at 6:09 PM

PS…Kay Hagan is from NC, not exactly the bluest state in the Union, and might be persuaded to accept higher cuts.

Steve Z on March 9, 2011 at 5:22 PM

Don’t hold out too much hope, Steve. As a North Carolinian, I’m shocked and pleased, but Kay has her finger in her mouth, ready to stick it in the wind. She is no conservative, and I don’t trust her as far as I can throw her. (I can’t even pick her up.)

tickleddragon on March 9, 2011 at 6:19 PM

The Dems have shown by voting no on the paltry cuts in the GOP budget that they have no interest in stemming the profligate spending and the resultant huge deficit. I say it is time for Boehner/McConnell and the GOP to MAN UP and serve notice to Obama and the Dems that there will be NO raise in the debt limit! Period! Let’s play hardball…

Alas, there are still too many squishy RINOs who still love their pork and are worse than the Dems when it comes to spending.

TheRightMan on March 9, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Nelson of Florida voted against the Democrat plan also. Can we say reelection time?

Cindy Munford on March 9, 2011 at 6:41 PM

I can’t believe that the GOP only proposed that 61b be cut and that Obamacare is still funded! I just can’t believe the people who are running this country! We need more Rand Pauls in the Senate.

CCRWM on March 9, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb, who is up for re-election in 2012, said Wednesday he would vote against both plans.
“In my view, neither is serious,” he told reporters on a conference call. “These bills are loaded down with tricks, treats, gimmicks and games.”

But not loaded with pizza or cornhusking, eh Ben?

onlineanalyst on March 9, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Hey, maybe they’ll shut down TSA, too.

Grope-free flying!

nukemhill on March 9, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Niagara, here we come!

patrick neid on March 9, 2011 at 6:51 PM

Dr. Rand Paul gave an impressive, fact-based speech. It should be broadcast in full to the nation.

onlineanalyst on March 9, 2011 at 7:02 PM

If there is a government “shutdown” the Republicans need a path to a resolution with spending cuts substantially greater than what the senate Republicans proposed. Otherwise, the troops will look for new leadership.

GaltBlvnAtty on March 9, 2011 at 7:11 PM

We need a Senate full of Rand Pauls.

Whatever his shortcomings, he’s right on the most important issue of our day.

rickyricardo on March 9, 2011 at 7:15 PM

Let’s just defund everything until the dems come to the table with a huge cut!

Bambi on March 9, 2011 at 7:36 PM

I’m no economic expert, but from all that I’veread, I think a lot of the tea party folks are delusional about how much we can cut right now and still manage. I don’t think there’s any way to cut half a trillion dollars or anywhere near that much at once right away…this problem built up slowly, and we’ve overextended ourselves, no doubt, but just cutting everything you see won’t work either- people will literally be left out in the cold if we just slash and burn. Pretty sure those screaming for $700 billion in cuts, most of them probably have no clue what most of that even goes to in the first place.

TheBlueSite on March 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Hellooooo. Obama passed the Stimulus bill in about 2 weeks spending 800 BILLION dollars and then the 400 Billion Omnibus with 8000+ earmarks. None of it worked. Complete waste of money. It is included in this spending level the Dems don’t want to cut. If we cut to the level of government spending immediately prior to the Stimulus don’t you think we could manage for crying out loud??? What is wrong with people? 2008 was not that long ago. The government was too big then and it is WAY TOO BIG now.

txmomof6 on March 9, 2011 at 9:58 PM

Take down the flag and turn out the lights. Close the shop and go home. This may be the best way to stop Ocare since the dem libs funded it within the bill itself. So what if no more post offices get named, the military still works, the SS checks keep coming, all the rest is pig fluff. NPR already proved that when they said they really didn’t need our money anyway.

Kissmygrits on March 10, 2011 at 8:40 AM