Republican big guns: Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona (center), together with Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, at a news conference this week. GOP lawmakers warn against keeping them out of budget decisions.
(Alex Brandon/AP)Photos (1 of 1)
Fast-track on the budget – does that mean Republicans would get steamrolled?
By Gail Russell Chaddock | Staff writer/ March 27, 2009 edition
Washington
House leaders rolled out a big gun this week in the budget wars on Capitol Hill that could tip the outcome for top priorities in President Obama’s first budget — energy, education, and healthcare.
In a bid to move these issues, House Democrats inserted into their version of a budget bill the option of a fast-track process called reconciliation.
If deftly used — that means getting past complex procedural objections — it can squash a Senate filibuster and move big bills on a simple majority vote.
“We want a robust [healthcare] initiative about prevention, about biomedical research, about health IT, about community health centers reaching out, personalized, customized care,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a briefing on Thursday. “I think the best prospect for that to happen is to do it under reconciliation.”
No issue so inflames partisan passions, especially in the Senate where the standard of 60 votes for major legislation is now the norm.
Democratic power play?
“If they want to steamroll the minority, obviously, some kind of reconciliation vehicle would be the best way to do that,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell. “However, it’s a big gamble, because if you do it with no bipartisan buy-in at all, you own the whole thing politically.”
The scenario would play out like this: The House passes a budget bill with reconciliation instruction; the Senate does not. But House and Senate conferees agree to include reconciliation in the final version of the budget resolution — without the issue ever being debated on the floor of the Senate.
Anticipating this move, 33 senators — eight Democrats and 25 Republicans — sent a letter to the Senate Budget Committee earlier this month urging that reconciliation not be used to enact clean energy reform.
“Enactment of a cap-and-trade regime [dealing with greenhouse gas emissions] is likely to influence nearly every feature of the U.S. economy,” they wrote in a March 12 letter. “Legislation so far-reaching should be fully vetted and given appropriate time for debate, something the budget reconciliation process does not allow.”
“I’m prepared to vote against anything I do not agree with on substance or process,” says Sen. Ben Nelson (D) of Nebraska. “The budget is not where you should settle major climate change or health reform.”
Senate Democratic leaders say they will not include reconciliation in their version of the budget resolution, but they’re not ruling it out.
“We’re keeping everything on the table,” said Senate majority leader Harry Reid at a briefing on Thursday.
‘Reconciliation’ limits debate and amendments
Introduced in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, reconciliation was designed to help Congress reduce the deficit. It cuts off debate in the Senate at 20 hours and limits the scope of amendments.
But more recently, it’s been used on a broader range of issues. Since 1980, reconciliation has been used 18 times, including to move the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, and to advance a measure to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to exploration and drilling in 2005.
What’s driving the move to use it in the current budget context is the scale and scope of the president’s proposed reforms — and the toxic partisan climate that persists on Capitol Hill.
“In the absence of reconciliation, health care and energy reforms are likely to be watered down to the point of meaninglessness,” says Ross Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J.
If the reconciliation provision stays in, it signals “the tactical dominance of the House” in the new Congress, he adds.
Comments
2. basementfrog | 03.27.09
Well, we can only hope they get steam rolled after helping the mega rich and their political friends rob the United States for 27 years.
Can I drive the steam roller. Please just line them up on Pennsylvania ave. and let me drive, and tie their hands and feet. I wouldn’t want any of them getting away.
PS lets get those foreign banks in Europe to turn over the names of every American with an tax avoidance account. HELLO.
3. John | 03.27.09
I’m no political science major but doesn’t the budget just allocate money for programs down the road? Vetting health care reform and low emission energy would logically come after money has been set aside to do so in the budget yes? Just wondering what the reasoning for the cold feet on those two issues is.. or is that just political rhetoric?
this is getting more and more difficult to wrap my mind around..
4. R Bateman | 03.27.09
By doing this reconciliation fast track process the democrats are setting themselves up to own this politically. We have seen from their efforts this last 60 days or so that this line of spending and thought doesn’t work. Wall Street reacts negatively every time Obama and his administration speak. Politically it is suicide for the Democrats. I’m all for the Democrat’s demise, but this fundamental change in America may not be recoverable in the near future. The Democrats should not do this. As a side thought, all of this bipartisan talk is not what the founding fathers had in mind. We all should not get along. The idea in part was that if an idea was stupid that it could not go very far very fast. The check and balance system helps us in that regard.
5. Saint Brian the Godless | 03.27.09
Reconciliation is the right way to do it, but the conservadems, the blue dogs, might try to stop it, as incredibly STUPID as that is…
Who put Republicans in my Democrats???!!!
6. Frank | 03.27.09
What happened to transparency and open goverment, the dems are showing there true colors
7. Chris | 03.27.09
Isn’t fast-tracking spending what got us into this mess in the first place? The AIG bonuses that everyone has their “panties in a wad” about were known about by Congress before the money was agreed upon. But because we have no confidence in a free market economy they wanted to fast track the money to them, without “reading the fine print”. Had they discussed it, maybe they would have put limits on things, like the bonuses. The U.S. Constitution, which so many people like to forget about, set up checks and balances for a reason, it is a shame they are being bypassed so much these days. I wonder what other parts of the foundation of this country we are willing to throw out the window.
I leave you with a thought by Alexis de Tocqueville to let you ponder:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
8. Douglas G | 03.27.09
Well, When the democrats were in the minority, whenever this happened, they howled and screamed, (anyone remember the “Nuclear Option”), demanded that the republicans be bypartisan, etc etc ad nauseum.
Now that they are in the majority, the see no reason to adhere to the standards they demanded of the majority, when they were in the minority.
Now what did my daddy call that.. That’s right, 2 faced. I guess that tells us how they should be treated when once again they are in the minority.
10. thebob.bob | 03.27.09
Where was all the hand-wringing by the media about steamrollers when the Republicans ignored Democrats in Congress. The country voted overwhelmingly for a change from the narrow, ideological focus of Republicans. You earn your place at the table at the ballot box and the Republicans were clearly told to sit down and shut up. Maybe they don’t hear so well?
11. RS | 03.27.09
What kind of threat is this, “the Democrats will own it”?
Haven’t we already heard enough times from the Republicans and the Bayh posse of corporate-owned Dems that the Dems own it?
Sadly, with leaders like the spineless Harry Reid, Democrats don’t need adversaries.
12. dom youngross | 03.27.09
“… without the issue ever being debated on the floor of the Senate.”
This fast-track reconciliation tactic is not aimed solely at republicans, but also at moderate democrats — if not more so.
If a budget proposal can’t win by more than one single vote, how good can that proposal be? Trillions in government spending, and the inevitable inflation it will cause, are under consideration now.
Thanks for pointing out that reconciliation was designed originally to help Congress REDUCE the deficit.
If this end-around doesn’t work, House leaders will have to try the flea-flicker.
13. Matt T | 03.27.09
Couldn’t the same be said in the other direction? The Republicans chided Dems for complaining (I remember quite a bit of “shut up, you’re in the minority”), but now that the shoe is on the other hand…
And as for the “past 60 days we’ve seen this doesn’t work” comment - wait what? We’re supposed to be out of this problem already? We should pay heed in how wall street knee-jerk-reacts after all that’s happened?
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got some credit-default-swap securities to sell to this Tocqueville chap.
14. Chris | 03.27.09
I’m never voting for a Democrat again, EVER. They’ve shown their true colors and are nothing but a bunch of socialist liars.
15. Edward Virtually | 03.27.09
what i remember, Douglas G, was back in the 90s when the Republicans shut down the entire federal government to blackmail it into not passing universal health coverage then. they have been offered a chance to participate, they refused and preferred to play games while the economy withered. they are still playing games. the us is a democracy, and that means the *majority* rules. the majority voted for Democrats, the majority of congress and senate already approve of the planned budget. if the dems had just two more votes (such as Al Franken, who the republicans are keeping from his seat by abusing the legal system), it would not be necessary to bypass their ability to filibuster and block the will of the majority. it should be noted that the filibuster is not allowed by the Constitution and thus is an unconstitutional restriction on democracy, so overturning it is no sin.
16. James Stepp | 03.27.09
Republicans as a party are floundering, trying any way they can think of to try to become relative again after having their chance and blowing it horribly. All I see is obstructionism from them in some lame attempt to try to take some of President Obamas thunder.
All it takes for them to become relative is have some original thoughts. I guess it’s hard to do that when the only thoughts allowed by their party are slogans and rhetoric that have nothing to do with the reality their people live in, only what is best for their campaign contributors.
17. James Stepp | 03.27.09
Republicans as a party are floundering, trying any way they can think of to try to become relative again after having their chance and blowing it horribly. All I see is obstructionism from them in some lame attempt to try to take some of President Obamas thunder.
All it takes for them to become relative is have some original thoughts. I guess it’s hard to do that when the only thoughts allowed by their party are slogans and rhetoric that have nothing to do with the reality their people live in, only what is best for their campaign contributors.
18. Tom G | 03.27.09
Do It. Get it done. Cap and Trade and universal health care (not single payer)will never get done unless we own it.
19. Mark | 03.27.09
Democrats. Quit being the stupid idiots that you are. We’re not behind Obama. Please stop your stupidity.
20. Mike | 03.27.09
Keep talking Douglas G, your dead on. The Dems are doing everything they cried about when they were in the majority. Obama’s plan to spend our way out of debt is a road to failure.
21. mydogisfrank | 03.27.09
You mean the Republican party has something to offer other than; “BOOOOOOGAAA BOOOOOOGAAA BOOOOOOGAAA YOUR ALL GONNA DIE” Naa that dosent sound like the GOP.
22. DJM | 03.27.09
Another DEM move that draws more power to them and their evil ways….Ask yourself, what is there agenda? HMM? Larger government, more spending…jeeze could it be the old banned TAX and SPEND Liberal Dems!
23. steve | 03.27.09
obama promised bipartisan decisions in washington. if reconciliation obama will forever lose his credibility. It is quetionable at best already!
24. Jimmy F | 03.27.09
No, Douglas G, you’ve got that backward. The Republicans brought up the nuclear option - look it up - because they wanted no limits on installing radical rightists in lifelong posts. So far, as the minority party, they say “no, no, no…” ad nauseum. Make a counteroffer, make a suggestion, put something on paper. Please. Just do something. I’m sure your daddy would say that as well - something about getting off the pot.
25. Paul | 03.27.09
Isn’t quick and thoughtless action part of the reason we’re in this mess? The latest stimulus/porkulus bills passed weren’t even read by the majority of the legislative branch. Limiting debate to 20 hours doesn’t even give people enough time to read the thousands of pages that modern bills can take up.
I’m all for solving problems, but this idea that “reconciliation” is somehow going to improve the quality of the solutions coming out of Congress is simply ridiculous. It can only encourage further partisanship as those who don’t have the time to get their own understanding of a bill try to save face by voting with their party.
Do we need politics more polarized?
26. Ron T | 03.27.09
To Douglas G: I love how some people turn things upside down. When Democrats “screamed” way back when, the Repubs shoved it up their Democ A**es anyway. (Bush tax cuts, excessive Filibusters, Special prosecutors, closed strategy sessions to draft bills). Repubs no qualms about the “nuclear option” (ending judicial filibusters forever). But now its the Repubs “screaming” about having to take the same medicine. Who is two-faced??? Obama promised to “try” to be bipartisan, and completely succeeded in meeting Repubs half-way, only nobody was there to meet HIM. This is what MY dad used to call “good for the goose, good for the gander”. In your world, it seems, since Obama promised to “Try” to be bi-partisan he is somehow “2-faced” - but since the Repubs promised only to be self-centered, take-no-prisoners, scortched earth, panderers (9/11, Christmas, Real American), that strictly enforce party voting discipline (Jeffords); since Repubs never promised to “try” to be bi-partisan they are upstanding Americans and victims??? In the past, whenever one party did something outlandish (Bork fight, Jesse Helm’s mock hearing, Tom DeLay & K-Street project, protecting crooked pols) I always said: Sure, you’re in power now (Dem or Repub) & that certain idea seems so Dee-licous right now. But you will be out of power eventually, and the other side is going to do the same thing to you, using your precedence. You don’t take a dump on the floor of a tent just because nobody can make you not do it. You have to sleep in there too!
27. Don | 03.27.09
For Frank,
They’re not hiding anything here, Frank. They’re even openly discussing tactics. The Republicans aren’t being locked out completely (if this happens at all), this would just keep the filibuster out of the budget. Considering how much the Republicans have abused the filibuster you shouldn’t be suprised.
Try fewer Limbaugh/O’Rielly/Hannity talking points in your diet and more actual free thought. You’ll be happier and less constipated.
28. Ed the C | 03.27.09
The proposed budget will help to increase our national debt by another trillion dollars. I honestly ask someone to explain how they have ever spent their way out of debt. When a sensible person is strapped for money, he/she does not max out their credit cards to solve the problem.
I’m all for many of the efforts being proposed by this administration: better health care for all; a lessened dependence on foreign sources of energy; better education for our young people; but I ask you, do all these problems have to be solved at the same time?
My family and I have walked that rocky road of a budget that did not support all our desires; what we did was to establish a budget that would take care of one thing at a time. I’m afraid that the same rules do not apply today. It looks more like people are functioning on a philosophy of “I want it, I want it now, and I’ll do anything to get it.”
29. Jayson | 03.27.09
#8 Doug… Do you remember the “nuclear option”?? That was the republicans threatening to eliminate the filibuster so they wouldn’t have to listen to the minority party. Now they seem to feel that the filibuster is a sacred right. And the dems are 2-faced?
If the dems seems disinclined to listen to the reps on the budget, maybe it has to do with the fact that their economic theory (AKA “Give more money to the rich”) has been completely discredited rather than political retribution.
30. jpowersny2 | 03.27.09
Bush spent an obscene amount of money and left with a $400 billion deficit. Obama is trying to pass a budget that will leave a $1,800 billion dollar deficit this year. The budget must be stopped and I will support anyone, Republican or blue dog, that will do it.
31. citizen | 03.27.09
Seriously, not one person has mentioned the fact that regardless of who passess the proposed budget, it cannot financially be supported. No one wants to buy our bonds any longer and how exactly do you think we get the money to cover JUST THE INTEREST we already owe. In this climate, spending must be slashed to the bone. And perhaps people should listen to what other countries say about their national healthcare system as well. It will work perfectly until the government tells you your child is too sick to help and they are not going to provide them the needed medication or treatment they are just going to let them die. Think it doesn’t happen? Look around people, and get the real facts.
32. K.P. | 03.27.09
It doesn’t matter who holds control of Congress. The Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same fiscally-irresponsible coin. Their narrow-minded, bankrupt ideologies have brought us to our current state. Pres. Obama is the same as Pres. Bush who was the same as Pres. Clinton, ad infinitum. Their parties are beholden to special interests and simply use the U.S. Treasury as their own personal piggy bank to gain reelection.
33. welfarebandwagon | 03.27.09
>> Democrats. Get the budget passed. We are behind Obama. Please get it done.
I agree with you 100%. The sooner this gets passed, the sooner I can quit worrying about how to pay for things. I mean, why actually work when I can sit around all day and live off the poor fools who haven’t figured out yet that you can live off all the government programs without actually contributing anything. Once this universal health care thing gets passed it will be one less thing I have to worry about as I’ll get all my health care at the expense of the rich too. And if things get too bad, all I have to do is kill someone (preferably in a state where the democrats have outlawed the death penalty already) then I’ll get 3 meals a day, excersize, cable tv (as opposed to the broadcast channels I have now), internet (so I don’t have to go to the library for it), and more. Sure I don’t have the best things, but I have enough to get by, and the best part is I don’t have to do anything to get it.
34. Hudson L | 03.27.09
Doesn’t all this fast governmental passing of legislation resemble the same thing happening in South America with Hugo Chavez? Spending less than 20 hours on such important legislation is rubber stamping without consideration of the economic impact on America. Lets be real. Even the Congressional Budget Office says that 9 plus Trillion is unsustainable.
It looks like Obama and his admin., has become America’s most Toxic Asset.
As a Democratic Conservative, I object to everything this Congress is doing. Why, lets just do away with the Constitution! Perhaps we already are!
35. Todd | 03.27.09
Has everyone lost sight of where the “government’s” money comes from? Hello! Someone has to explain to me where the money is going to come from when all business leaves the U.S.
What the Obama administration is doing will make the depression of the 1930’s look like a robust economy.
Maybe we should stop whining about all the freebe’s we want, and start earning our keep. Our fathers and grandfathers generation would be disgusted with the direction this country is heading.
36. Bocapope | 03.27.09
Democrats are all evil, godless socialists. Tax cuts are the way to go. Just cut taxes for all corporations, large and small, and all the wealthy people who own businesses. Then they will turn this economy around but letting this money trickle down to the rest. They can be trusted to do the right thing for America.
Besides Obama doesn’t have a clue, he’s stupid, and he uses a teleprompter all the time. He wants to have social(ist) programs like health care for sick people. Real conservatives will stop all this needless spending, they know better and do not spend needlessly.
The Democrats had there chance… they blew it… It is time we had a real conservative agenda in charge.
37. Speaktruth | 03.27.09
Does anyone remember the prescription drug benefit Bush and the Republican majority pushed through a few years back? It was a major piece of legislation supposed to provide senior citizens with relief from high drug prices. While adding a drug benefit to Medicare was not a bad idea, by the time the Republicans and their pals (lobbyists for “Big Insurance” and “Big Drug”) got through with it, it was a hugely overpriced giveaway that dumped tons of money into the pockets of Insurance and Drug companies, but did little to help seniors. It was such a festival of corporate greed, that the Republicans even guaranteed that the U.S. Govt could NOT even negotiate the price of the drugs it was buying (****, Wal-Mart does it, why not the U.S?)
The point is, President Obama is proposing significant changes in the way that medical care is financed and significant changes in energy priorities, all of which bode well for the American public. Its the first time in years that government policies are being formed which serve the public interest, rather than benefitting some industry special interest .
The Republicans are looking to slow it down anyway they can, to make it as complicated as they can, all so their lobbyist pals in Big Insurance, Big Drug and Big Oil have time to start cutting it up, watering it down, and dealing themselves in, all to preserve their place at the trough. And if they do that, and as a result, the legislation is not as successful as it could have been, then the Republicans will howl about how President Obama was wrong!
The use of the “reconciliation” fast track is not the best way to enact legislation, but in this case, it may be the best way to get this important work done without it being corrupted by special interest groups. And Republicans love nothing better than doing the dirty work for well financed special interests.
38. Matt | 03.27.09
Reality check: The Democrats didn’t JUST get control of Congress. They’ve been in control of Congress since the last two years of Bush’s presidency. Congress puts forth legislation. All the president does is sign the bills. Get your facts straight and you’ll see who’s REALLY responsible for the mess we’re in now.
39. g from ORF | 03.27.09
The current administration reminds me of my childhood; watching westerns with friends and wondering how you could get shot and not bleed and recover in the blink of an eye.
The White House and Congress keep shooting from the hip, throwing money at problems to fix them before defining what is wrong and what to do to fix it. Spending all the money we don’t even have.
I had some serious problems with the last administration, but the current players scare me. Why is is that when reasonable people gain power in Congress, they become so stupid.
Okay, I’m being generous calling them reasonable. I mean, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank played a very large part in the mortgage fiasco we’re in, yet who is helping us resolve the problem now?
My friend gave up and moved out of the country. I initially thought that was pretty extreme, but now I begin to wonder.
40. Steve | 03.27.09
I’ts almost comical to read some of the comments here, presumably by partisan Republicans, who are so up in arms about fast-tracking to eliminate what amounts to pure obstructionism on the part of the Republican minority in Congress. Where were those people when George W. Bush was in effect running a one-man government with his Signing Statments and other measures that pre-empted Congressional input for 8 long years? It’s time for the Party of Rush Limbaugh, who took over from the Party of Lincoln, to acknowledge that they actually lost the election last November. Perhaps if the Republicans were not just engaged in carping criticism, but actually presented an alternative for President Obama’s budget, they might start to come out of the political wilerness which their poor choice of candidates in 2008 has consigned themselves to.
41. AndyShep | 03.27.09
Well it is good to try to get bipartisan input, but the Democrats “Own it” whether they fast track it or not. The public will not take into account the procedural nuances of how they accomplish (or don’t accomplish) their goals, they will grade them based on the fact that they are in the majority.
The Republicans did not allow the Democrats to Fillibuster and this was after the Republican Fillibuster prevented 60 Clinton judicial vacancies from being filled. The Dems have an obligation to play the game of hardball that the Republicans played, and I am saying this after having voted Republican. If they decide to involve Republicans more than the Republicans involved them, they should seek a constitutional ammendment that protects debate. Two different sets of rules is not healthy.
43. volunteer | 03.27.09
David Ruch and a few other coment makers are followers who obviously don’t do a lot of reading
This whole push to get every aganda item of Obama passed under a cover of confusion and fear is being accepted by too many of our so called leaders
Forcing car companies to produce more hybrids when people were not buying them before is stupid. Thinking wind and solar are going to produce any appreciable amount of energy in our time is stupid, etc.
44. NukularOpshen | 03.27.09
Is it any surprise that both major parties are hypocritical? The minority whines when they get cut down by the same tactics used by them when they were a majority, and the majority eventually resorts to the same sort of procedural hardball in the face of perpetual obstruction that they decried a few years back. The senate GOPers have already set a record for filibustering over the last few years, I wish I could say I’m amazed that it’s taken this long for the Democratic leadership to evolve spines.
The real issue here, if there is one at all, is the role of the neo-conservative media echo chamber in overhyping this carp, like it’s some kind of jackbooted takeover (as if the jellyfish Democrats would even fit in jackboots!) Ever since the last election, “60 votes in the senate” gets billed as if it’s the norm. IIRC, it hasn’t always been this way — if a minority wanted to block cloture with a filibuster, they used to stand up and TALK for hours on end, with the pretense of extending debate. Now the senate has some kind of “virtual filibuster” rule where they pretend the minority is debating and the whole bill goes shuffling back to committee. Pathetic, really — but the rwmedia does what it can to ensure that We The People are kept in abject FEAR of the possibility that the figureheads we voted for might dare to pass their agenda, while calling us to pray that the corrupt and discredited minority stalls indefinitely.
Where were all these latter-day Paul Reveres when the bushistas were railroading their securities deregulations, tax-cuts for millionaires, and warrantless wiretaps through six years of congressional rubber-stamping? That’s right, decrying the minority opposition for its treasonous unAmerican thoughts, nevermind. “Bipartisanship” is dead, the GOP killed it cold in 2001, danced on the grave in 2004, and now that the tables turned it’s somehow the Democrats’ fault for not reaching out… pathetic.
45. Todd | 03.28.09
It’s obvious that socialism and democracy cannot co-exist in the same country. Where do we go from here?
Those who rant that business, big or small, is the problem, forget that business employs people who are simply trying to create a good life for their family. The idea that American’s gutsy enough to own a business should somehow be punished for doing so, is ludicrous. Imagine for a moment America without private business…what do you see?
The divide toward freedom and socialism is fairly even. What do we do? Split the country in half? Which side do you think will survive in the long run? I’ll put my money on the side of the constitution which made this country what it was, before we decide to destroy it.
46. Ted | 03.28.09
The strategy here is obvious and appropriate. Republicans have until next fall to cooperate and compromise honestly with the Democrats on these Obama initiatives. But if their only goal is to obstruct (and I suspect this is the case), then reconciliation will be used to prevent the minority in the Senate from preventing the majority from acting. The appropriate role of the minority is to raise objections, illuminate problems, make suggestions the majority might accept, and prepare an alternative platform for the next election. It should not be the role of the minority (especially a 40% minority!) to prevent enactment of the policies preferred by the majority. But this is what the rules of the Senate may allow. We cannot any longer permit minority rule.
47. Douglas G | 03.28.09
U&niversal health care coverage? EVERY country that has it has it’s citizens doing EVERYTHING they can to come here for health care!
WHY would you muck up our system that everyone else is trying to get IN to.
Next, not to be rude, I work to support MY family, and my taxes, (IAW the constitution), are to be used to defend this country’s borders. NOT to provide health care to millions of ilegal people in this country.
1. we need to get ALL ilegal people OUT of the country. If MY grandparents could legally immigrate from Russia and become citizens, it can be done by ANYONE.
2. We need to quit with the earmarks and focus on OUR country. Our taxes are not to be used for OTHER countries, and all the other crud, the reason behind Federal Taxes was the defense of our own nation and it’s borders.
3. We need to start pulling together and working as a team, I ma sick and tired of hearing for BOTH sides, they aren’t playing fair, they arent working with us, they promised.
Sit down, shuttup and play nice.
This is why we need term limits.
48. RD | 03.28.09
Hypocrites? They all are hypocrites? Doubtful; not all republicans are conservatives and not all conservatives are republicans. By the way, the United States is a Republic, not a democracy. Maybe we need a new party, perhaps named Conservative, or Common Sense?
49. J ROberts | 03.29.09
Obama only is to bankrupt the country and everyone is raising a red flags and no one is listening to his spending. You will see and pay, one group is stealing and scheming the country and Obama will bury the country before the rich stwal it, what a game we allow them to play.
50. daniel | 03.29.09
You all know that republicans are just scared. When these bills pass, they know they will work and it will make them look bad. Newt Gingerich and Bob Dole both predicted that Bill Clinton and the Dems budget/stimulus will cause the next great depression. 22 million jobs and a balanced budget later, they won the spin war. Spreading fear to further their agenda.
The worst part is americans. Americans who don’t check up on facts and just watch Sean Hannity or Billo for their political news. I mean I turned on the t.v. one night and Sean went on about, “welcome to day 55 of the socialism we have been waiting for”…… Yet, they don’t consider the rich paying 15% in taxes and the middle class paying 30% in taxes, socialism….. HELLO!!!!! That is the definition of socialism. Whichever class pays the lower percentage gets the money redistributed without even touching the government.
Look at the average middle class income from 1980 to present
Look at how much wealth has shifted to the few from 1980 to present
It’s funny to hear republicans talk about, “The New World Order”, and how Obama will take us to a one government……. Sounds more like the republicans took us closer then anyone to the new world order.
At least Obama is spending the money on things we need. Instead of oil in the middle east. I’m so tired of oil……
51. daniel | 03.29.09
To J Roberts:
More doom and gloom huh?
Care to explain how Bill Clinton’s budget/stimulus didn’t bury the country? All you republicans predicted it would, just like what you are saying about Obama now.
I can’t wait til 2010. Maybe then republicans will get a hint at what is wrong with their party. (I’ll give you a hint: CONSERVATIVES are the problem)
52. Schwartz | 03.29.09
Amazing how most media seems to think that all of this is happening with no prior history to January 21,2009. The same gang pictured above had a conservative(albeit dimwitted)President, and clear majorities in each chamber of Congress. They cut taxes, boosted military spending, cut the social safety net, ran up deficits. This was after the Clinton administration left them with a multi-trillion dollar SURPLUS. This gang of thieves were the ones who de-regulated banking, insurance, transportation, etc. that led to the current meltdown. Yet our media pals(all supported by the very advertisers who helped cause this mess)make it look like the Democrats are stealing away the future. What is happening is a reaction to 8 years of Republicanism, where “govmint” is the problem unless you waste money in “Homeland Security”(an oxymoron), Pentagon, Intelligence(stripping our freedom everyday)and all they areas THEY favor. But give someone $10 more on their Social Security check and these thieves are all set to crucify those “free spending” Democrats. Really? Really? How much money did Bush spend in Iraq, an illegal and immoral waste of Iraqi and American lives? I don’t feel any more secure.
Please have the sense of justice friends in the media, that the problems being addressed today were created by 8 years of outright lies and deception caused by those “moral crusaders” who now try to look like victims.
53. David | 03.29.09
If the Democrats are at long last able and willing to steam roll the Republicans I would be more than happy to supply the gas. I’ll even drive the damn steam roller my self.
The Republicans have done so much harm to the country over the last decade, that I can wish for nothing more than their total annihilation!
Stop being so darn kind to those knucleheads. Just steam roll right over them. And when they are rolled over..let’s backup and do it again!
David
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. David Ruch | 03.27.09
It’s about time the Democrats take ownership of Congress! They have a mandate to do so. It’s also about time the Democrats start acting like the Majority they are and stop kow-towing to the Republicans. The Republicans lost the last election, so why oh why are they acting like they own the Congress? Congress should also stop this 60 vote silliness. Can anyone show me where in the Constitution and the Rules of Congress it is written that all legislation must pass by a 60 vote majority … particularly when your man is in the White House waiting to sign your legislation?