• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans plan sweeping rules changes in new Congress

Yea, like 90% of the Republican party.. pushing the same old ideas that caused the financial melt down.. and sticking to gaybashing, and religious dogma.. talk about living in the past lol.

None of what you have posted is true.
 
I know. I've seen people on boths sides in here and on other forums whine like little girls that $25 million here, or $47 million there... or even a few billion... doesn't matter, considering the size of the financial hole we are in. My contention has always been that you cut when ever and where ever you can, and it will all add up.

Sure, as long as you keep your approbation proportionate to the cut.

But that's not how the budget works. We have three huge programs, and we can afford maybe two and a small one, one large one and two moderate ones -- but not three huge ones. You can't cut off at the edges and expect to balance the budget. You have to put a stake in the heart. Problem is, all three of those huge programs are instrumental to the functioning of the American economy and society at their core.
 
Last edited:
I think this is an outstanding start to changing how things are done in DC. I look forward to hearing the Democratic ideas for new House rules as well. Maybe they can expand on the start the GOP is trying to make.

Republicans plan sweeping rules changes in new Congress - On Politics: Covering the US Congress, Governors, and the 2010 Election - USATODAY.com

a lame, limp perhaps, proposal, a mere pimple on Rush Limbaugh's ass could come up with better stuff, not that any of it will mean squat in the long run...
If they wanted to make real progress, they would ask the voters via referendum how they should govern, how long they get to serve, and what issues to address first.
 
None of what you have posted is true.

Oh to the contrary. They are indeed pushing the same old ideas that contributed to the financial meltdown. And the entire social issue dragon has yet to raise its ugly head ... but I expect that will happen at some point in the next year. Don't be so quick to declare a new beginning when the same old people still are in charge.
 
Oh to the contrary. They are indeed pushing the same old ideas that contributed to the financial meltdown. And the entire social issue dragon has yet to raise its ugly head ... but I expect that will happen at some point in the next year. Don't be so quick to declare a new beginning when the same old people still are in charge.

Mere rhetoric. The Republicans have something different this time. Intimations of mortality. If they fail they figuratively die.
 
•Putting attendance records for committee hearings online within 24 hours.

I don't think the general public would care enough to look this up on a daily basis..

•Requiring spending increases to be offset by equal or greater cuts elsewhere in the budget. Tax increases could not be used to pay for the new spending.

This will never happen since the republicans never balanced a budget either, and they are trying to pretend otherwise. It's just an empty promise. I would like to see them offer to take cuts and promising to lower the deficit for starters.. offer were the cuts should be made.
 
So what is different this time?

National debt, exponentially increasing debt service payments, a declining standard of living that can no longer be hidden, two wars, a balkanized people, and radicalization within the Republican Party.
 
I don't think the general public would care enough to look this up on a daily basis..



This will never happen since the republicans never balanced a budget either, and they are trying to pretend otherwise. It's just an empty promise. I would like to see them offer to take cuts and promising to lower the deficit for starters.. offer were the cuts should be made.

Eliminate the defense budget. Now it's your turn to tell us where you would cut the budget.
 
Mere rhetoric. The Republicans have something different this time. Intimations of mortality. If they fail they figuratively die.

Oh you see the shadow on the wall of a very large and apparently ferocious beast. In reality its only a chipmunk standing next to the fire. But from a certain angle when the light is just right, the shadow can be quite deceiving.
 
Oh you see the shadow on the wall of a very large and apparently ferocious beast. In reality its only a chipmunk standing next to the fire. But from a certain angle when the light is just right, the shadow can be quite deceiving.

How are you going to deal with debt service on the national debt?
 
Here is one change I proposed during my campaign

Title:Earmark Accountability Act

Purpose:Regulate and Provide Accountability for Congressional
Earmark Spending

Summary:
The Earmark Accountability Act is intended to regulate and provide individual accountability to the practice of Congressional earmarking of funds within the Appropriations process.

The Earmark Accountability Act prohibits the insertion of individual earmarks within any appropriations bill submitted by any Executive Department, requires each House to develop a Consolidated Appropriations Request for earmarks requested by its respective members, and defines the process by which such earmaks will be considered for acceptance and funding.


The Earmark Accountability Act is submitted under the authority of The United States Constitution Article 1 Sections 5 and 7.

Text of Legislation:
1. No Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of the House of Representatives or a Senator may insert any earmark within a budget request from any executive department during the appropriations process.

2. The House of Representatives and The Senate will each prepare a Consolidated Appropriations Request containing all individual member requested earmarks. The Consolidated Appropriations Request must contain the following minimum information:
a. Name of the member seeking the earmark.
b. Amount of Appropriation Requested.
c. Duration of the request – (one-time appropriation or an on-going
payment, specifying length of payments, frequency and amount to be paid at the designated interval)
d. Direct Beneficiary of any funds requested.
e. Rationale for the request, and benefit expected.
f. Disclosure of meetings held in relation to the requested earmark
and a list of all persons present at any and all of these meetings.

3. Each Consolidated Appropriation request will be prepared and published on the public website for the respective House of Congress for a period on no less that 60 calendar days before the requests may be submitted for a vote of the members of the respective House of Congress..

4. A Roll Call vote is required for each earmark identified within each House’s Consolidated Appropriations Request. Those earmarks not receiving a 2/3 vote in their favor will be removed from the corresponding Consolidated Appropriations Request and not submitted for consideration during the normal Appropriations Process.

5. No earmark approved in the above manner may be increased in amount or duration during the normal Appropriations Process they may only be reduced or eliminated.

6. Congressional Earmark Defined- In this section, the term `congressional earmark' means a provision or report language included primarily at the request of a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of the House of Representatives or a Senator providing, authorizing, or recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality, or congressional district, other than through a statutory or administrative formula-driven or competitive award process.
 
Eliminate the defense budget. Now it's your turn to tell us where you would cut the budget.

There is noway the gop is proposing to eliminate the defense budget.. are they? I would cut the war/defense budget, impose term limits, make them take pay cuts.. I would actually have to analyze the budget for myself and to make a really informed decision though. Maybe they should make the budgets public, proposed budgets, and make them as transparent as those bound by GAAP to be transparent. We should be able to understand the budgets, or at least people with accounting/finance knowledge, people do invest in gov bonds afterall.. probably reform NAFTA, reform the Federal Reserve..
 
There is noway the gop is proposing to eliminate the defense budget.. are they? I would cut the war/defense budget, impose term limits, make them take pay cuts.. I would actually have to analyze the budget for myself and to make a really informed decision though. Maybe they should make the budgets public, proposed budgets, and make them as transparent as those bound by GAAP to be transparent. We should be able to understand the budgets, or at least people with accounting/finance knowledge, people do invest in gov bonds afterall.. probably reform NAFTA, reform the Federal Reserve..

The Budget - is publicly available at OMB.GOV You can also find historical tables of expenditures, revenues, and budgets
 
OMG. Can it be that the Republicans have had a Come to Jesus Moment?? One can hope!! Also this:



And for those cynics who say that $25-$30 million is nothing, just shut up.

LOL...I don't know about a "Jesus Moment' - whatever that is - and I sure hope you're happy with you're hope, but my memory goes back a little further, so at least I won't be disappointed.

Was that before or after raising their payrolls?

Cantor, the Virginia Republican who has led the GOP charge this year to freeze federal salaries, has boosted his congressional office's payroll by 81 percent since coming to Congress in 2001 - about 8 percent per year through 2009. When he became minority whip last year, the office's personnel expenses went up by at least 16 percent.
[...]
-Firebrand Republican Michele Bachmann of Minnesota has for months pushed legislation to freeze what she calls "unconscionable" federal salaries. Meanwhile, her own payroll jumped 16 percent between 2007, when she came to Congress, and 2009.

- Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the Utah Republican set to chair the House subcommittee overseeing the federal work force, says Washington must "figure out how to do more with less." But the freshman lawmaker gave his own employees an average raise of about 9 percent this year.

- Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who has long criticized federal pay, has overseen an average jump of 8 percent per year in his office employee costs between 2006, his first full year in the Senate, and 2009.


SPIN METER: Conflicting GOP messages on pay cuts

But I really, really, double promise I'll be better this time....:2rofll:
 
The Budget - is publicly available at OMB.GOV You can also find historical tables of expenditures, revenues, and budgets

I know that, but it's not transparent in the same way statements are for publicly traded company's.. they attach hundreds of pages explaining financial debts, law suits, costs of ethical investigations, numbers subject to change, outstanding stocks/bonds, etc.. Those statements aren't that clear, and doesn't show all the spending in the government.
 
Last edited:
I know that, but it's not transparent in the same way statements are for publicly traded company's.. they attach hundreds of pages explaining financial debts, law suits, costs of ethical investigations, numbers subject to change, outstanding stocks/bonds, etc.. Those statements aren't that clear, and doesn't show all the spending in the government.

That takes more effort such as going to each executive department's web page for example

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)

and the drilling down for the douments you want to view

http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbudget/fy2010/fy2010_BudgetBriefing.pdf

NOt always an easy read - but hey when I was a stock analyst in the mid-1980s I made a living reading the 10k and 10q reports of publicly traded companies, now I do it with gov. documents just because :lol:
 
I wouldn't bother asking Hay for anythign liek a specific plan... he's more interested in blaming the GOP and whining in general.

Says you and we know what that is worth.

The only way to pay a debt is a bit at a time. What else is there?
 
That takes more effort such as going to each executive department's web page for example

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)

and the drilling down for the douments you want to view

http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbudget/fy2010/fy2010_BudgetBriefing.pdf

NOt always an easy read - but hey when I was a stock analyst in the mid-1980s I made a living reading the 10k and 10q reports of publicly traded companies, now I do it with gov. documents just because :lol:

I read those too... so you know how detailed they are with all the costs and liabilities.. assets and where revenues are coming from, and who owns the debt, how much.... how much was paid off, how much debt they own..

It's not just showing the budgets... Our government should be that open too.. I don't like having to dig around and trying to find all the different documents..

It seriously causes me to question the knowledge of the people forecasting the budget. Do they actually know that much about the accounts, and our debts, who owns them, how well they are managed? Probably not...
 
Says you and we know what that is worth.

The only way to pay a debt is a bit at a time. What else is there?

What items would you cut from the budget in order to free up the revenues necessary to pay off the national debt a bit at a time?
 
Back
Top Bottom