Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Fails in the House Budget Committee
Reps. Ralph Norman (R-SC), Chip Roy (R-TX), Josh Brecheen (R-OK), Andrew Clyde (R-GA), and Lloyd Smucker (R-PA) voted with the Democrats.
The House Budget Committee shut down President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” 16-21.
Reps. Ralph Norman (R-SC), Chip Roy (R-TX), Josh Brecheen (R-OK), Andrew Clyde (R-GA), and Lloyd Smucker (R-PA) voted with the Democrats.
Norman and Roy said they would vote no before the meeting. From The Washington Examiner:
Norman and Roy had said from the beginning of the hearing that they would be a “no” on the bill unless substantive changes were made. Brecheen and Clyde had remained noncommittal but ultimately, Clyde and Brecheen both voted against the package after they were unable to get reassurances from leadership and the White House. Smucker was originally a “yes” vote and then changed his vote to “no.”
The bill’s failure comes after President Donald Trump urged Republicans to unite around the package, which would cut $1.5 trillion to offset the cost of preserving the president’s 2017 tax break. He told GOP lawmakers to fall in line.
Roy said the bill falls short: “It does not do what we say it does with respect to deficits. The fact of the matter is this bill has back-loaded savings and has front-loaded spending. … And I’m not going to sit here and say that everything is hunky-dory when this is the Budget Committee. This is the Budget Committee!”
Other Republicans lashed out at the bill:
“This is not the big, beautiful bill that I had hoped for,” Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.) said during the markup. “The flaw with this bill is it doesn’t go far enough, fast enough, to get our fiscal house in order. But it does take some great strides.”
Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) complained that “too many people out here did not want the wonderful bill that so many of us were expecting in January and February.”
Republican leaders’ decision to enforce work requirements on Medicaid recipients in 2029, rather than sooner, “indicates that there was kind of a lack of sincerity,” Grothman added. “Nevertheless, there’s some good things in here.”
Cut the spending.
[Featured image via YouTube]
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Put the social security tax waiver back.
Unfortunately, the number of bills that got to President Trump’s desk so far is woefully small. The big beautiful bill, by everything I have seen is a masterclass of deceit. Don’t look at a ten year score, this budget is for one year, score it for one year! The Congress, both houses, both sides of the isle don’t want Trump to succeed. They want their pork, their laundered funds and all the perks they believe distinguish them from us poor citizens.
What is good for America, sucks for Congressional politicians. So any bill put forth, sounds good but has no integrity. I point to the Patriot Act as a prime example.
From what I’ve been hearing, the bill is a nightmare that is anything but beautiful in it’s contents.
Start passing line-item bills rather than bloated omnibuses. Let us see what you really support.
If they start passing line item bills, how will they hide all the pork?
Washington is rotten.
Both sides.
The idea of the omnibus is to push it thru the Senate via reconciliation. But they left out all the stuff I would care to push thru by reconciliation, leaving the stuff I would agree with Dem principled objections against.
It was a big pile of caca. More Trumpian corruption, good thing it was caught in time. Do what you said Donnie. Or don’t, what do you care? You’ll get to fly your palace in the sky for the rest of your life anyway, the way you’ve rigged it.
10% cut on everything. It works in corporations.
More like 25%, assuming the goal is to save the US by keeping it solvent. Otherwise, we’re all screwed, which we are anyways. Our system of government isn’t designed to spend less money because any Congressman that does so in earnest will lose his job. Who will torpedo his own career by proposing a 25% cut to SS? No one. It’s the Prisoner’s Dilemma.
In reality SSI is facing a 25% cut in a decade or so when all the IOU/Bonds the general Treasury borrowed over the decades are repaid to the trust fund and spent on current beneficiaries. So everyone who keeps opposing reforms to SSI, looking at you AARP and many Silent gen/ Boomers are locking in an automatic 25% ish cut in benefits in a decade +/-.
SSI is Supplemental Security Income, not Social Security retirement. I think you mean the latter.
Good catch. Yes Social Security Retirement ‘trust fund’ goes broke in a decade ish and will rely totally upon annual social security tax revenue which will only fund 75% of expected (not promised) benefits. So doing nothing has us looking at a 25% cut to benefit payments. SSI (blind, disabled, elderly low income supplement) has a separate funding comes 100% from general revenues not the social security ‘trust fund’. Thanks for opportunity to clarify my error.
Yup.
“It’s a big sh*t sandwich and we’re all gonna have to take a bite.”
How about the Penny Plan?
Deferring Medicaid cuts to 2029 to make the numbers look better over ten years is garbage. I want to know what is happening next year to the $2T per year Federal budget deficit that the Biden administration handed to Trump (and to my grandchildren).
Apparently breaking the budget down by individual departments and agencies would be too much like work for our industrious Representatives.
The Georgetown cocktail party circuit takes a lot of time. So does finding a place to keep those attache cases full of cash.
I’m reading now that House GOP ‘leadership’ is negotiating with blue state Republicans to restore the SALT deduction, $40K for singles, $80K for married folk. This is nothing but a transfer of wealth from red states with low tax rates to DEEP blue states like NY, CA, MA & IL.
The SALT deduction should be equal for everyone. Zero.
What you pay to your state in tax should have zero impact on your federal taxes. I don’t care how your state is trying to game the system by manipulating the three legged stool of state taxation (sales, income, and property). The only way to make it fair, level, and transparent for all is to eliminate any state and local deductions.
I work in a high income (and property tax) state and own a home (now partially rented) in a zero income but high property tax state. I don’t think that Legalinsurrection will let me describe the situation that leaves me in. Lets say its not fun.
Either make.the necessary changes to corral the Members who have legitimate concerns about the lack of the current year spending cuts and back loaded nature of proposed spending cuts or go back and start over. The leadership allowed the go along/get along, big govt, big spending establishment types to have far too much influence and are throwing away an opportunity to make true substantive change. It well past time for Congress to put on their grown up pants and make the hard choices about to cut spending. Priorities matter and deferring the potential spending cuts to out years signals they won’t be imposed.
How unserious is this bill about making cuts to spending? They won’t institute modest work requirements for able bodies adults to receive Medicaid until after Trump’s term. Some segments of the voter population are gonna be upset no matter what. I suspect the largest group is those of us who want immediate cuts but don’t ever see them b/c Congress collectively is too afraid to make them.
This is a classic case of the Perfect being the enemy of the Good. Chip Roy is living in a pipe dream. Congress will NEVER pass meaningful spending cuts. This bill does enact meaningful tax cuts. I like Chip Roy and I appreciate standing on principle. But hoping for real spending cuts from the Swamp is a fool’s errand.
This bill left out all the beautiful stuff. It was a Reagan tax cut bill. And I don’t think much of Reagan as a president; that’s not a compliment.
Where are the DOGE cuts, the elimination of funding for Dept. of Ed. and other departments? Because if they don’t do it now, there will not be another chance, and all the talk will have been malarkey.
You mean DOGE was just a phony dog and pony show?
Awwwwwww.
Across the board 15% paycuts to federal employees including military now.
An additional paycut of 1% per month to congress critters when budget is unbalanced. I don’t care if their salaries go negative and they have to pay. Just put a lean on their assets if they refuse.
How courageous of a retiree to call for cutting other people’s salaries.
Yeah. No.
My salary was cut many times when I was employed. It’s what happens when not enough money is brought in and expenses are too high.
Federal salaries have grown to be plenty high with nice benefits. If I had to do it all over again I’d have gone to work for the federal government. I’d have to change what I did but I changed what I did anyway and there is more job security than with a private company. I got riffed from every job I ever had due to diminishing revenue.
But have you ever written a blank check to the government with your life? Do you know the difference between incoming and outgoing fire? I don’t think so but I have. Our military is not paid enough.
Also, did any of those jobs you were riffed leave you with a disability? Almost every retiree from the military has a disability and live in pain for the rest of their lives.
We can discuss the first point but would end up disagreeing.
As for the second point I don’t believe it. Not everyone in the military serves in a combat zone. If you were in the military you should know that much better than I would.
See my misplaced response in main thread.
The government is not a for-profit company and takes on things that others can’t do or can’t do well for profit. Yes, they take on more than they should…that’s why pretty much everyone here wants to limit the government. Your bs just wants to cut off people’s livelihoods midstream to serve your own interests….you win zero points for your sob story.
My story is not a sob story it’s reality. The fact that you call it a sob story is indicative of how much you adhere to the deep state. I said cut salaries not headcount. Cutting salaries doesn’t cut off people’s livelihoods. talk about a sob story. I’m so sorry you feel so threatened that you’re probably overpaid with too many benefits paid for but all of us for the work you do and protected by a federal union that should be disallowed because public unions are nothing but funnels to the democratic party. Go cry a river to someone else. Your personalization of an opinion says all I need to know about you.
A vote of support for this comment. Actually cut, don’t just spend a little less.
Cutting salaries shouldn’t happen and will not. Now if you want to do that then you gotta simultaneously allow every Military member to void their remaining service obligation, keep whatever VA benefit eligibility they already earned….but I will tell you your gonna have huge # of Service Members walk if you do.
By all means cut authorized # of personnel. Cut programs especially the fluffy crap. How about immediate stop on the eligibility of all able bodied adults from age 18-full Social Security retirement age for any ‘welfare’ No Medicaid, no Sec 8, no SNAP, no EBT not a dime …unless they work full time 40 hours per week and prorate downward to 60% eligibility at 25 hours?
This…cut things that weren’t part of a contracted agreement. Cut the entitlements and the misuse of funds.
100 years ago, after WWI, there was not enough money in the budget to fund the Army/Navy. Rather than let people go, the services were reduced in size and people were demoted to a lower rank consistent with the new structure. Lesser of two evils. Either accept the new position or hit the road.
Yes that’s true. However after WWI the USA was very unwilling to get involved in conflicts around the world or at least outside our hemisphere. Between WWI and WWII we had a couple regiments in China and troops occupied PR, Philippines and a couple other territories acquired from Spain but aside from those and the ‘Banana Wars’ and Haiti the USA didn’t stick its nose in. That’s the tradeoff for a much reduced military.
I actually won’t cut salaries. I’m more concerned about pensions and stuff like retention bonuses. I’d even forget about retention bonuses if I could see that the total amount is miniscule. As for pensions I’d like see them deferred until retirement age unless the person is disabled or a combat vet. I’d like to see all government pension while they exist deferred.
It is not my place to talk about headcount. We should have what we need plus some. We probably need more than we have.
Acquisition is a real problem especially in the navy and air force with the navy being worse than the air force. All you have to do is look at the littoral combat ships and the Zumwalt destroyers. The army isn’t immune either. I don’t know what can be done but the revolving door between procurement and flag officers, and the defense industry has to contribute (doesn’t really revolve).
As for SS I think they should remove the cap and extend to capital gains. In fact I’d like to get rid of short term capital gains and extend the hold period for long term to 5 years.
I’d also like to see governmental workers at all levels move onto the same kind of retirement system that private industry is on. That means paying and receiving SS and a 401K system, I’d make an exception for military.
One last comment about SS. To get SS you should have paid into the system for some length of time. I’m not sure that is the case now.
These all are my opinions as they stand now. They are just opinions based upon what I know and what I read. They change. No one should take them personally because they are not meant to be personal.
Thanks for your thoughts and comments. I appreciate them.
Are you proposing no pension benefits be paid for military service until full retirement age at 65-67 depending on generational cohort? That’s not gonna work out unless your goal is an unprofessional force of conscripts with a small cadre of ‘lifers’ too unmotivated to do anything else but the military as their leadership. Federal workers and military pay SSA as well. A few local gov’t jurisdictions opted out when given the choice way back when. They don’t get SSA benefits unless they have another career or a part-time job to pay into SSA and qualify separately.
Social Security retirement and disability both require 10 years of work history. It used to mean ten years of full time work aka 40 hour week. That changed to allow quarters some time ago but it is 40 quarters so still ten years total. What I have an issue with is eligibility. Should be far more than ten years for retirement, make it at least 25. Then there’s the divisor of using the 35 highest earning years. That’s bunk. Full retirement age is 65-67 subtract 18 and someone has a minimum of 47 years of potential full time employment. Make it 25 minimum to qualify for retirement leave disability at 10 but use the highest 45 years of earnings. If someone decides not to go past 25 minimum to qualify then they have 20 years worth of zeros in their benefit calculation. Then end the claiming Spousal benefits b/c Social Security is supposed to be an individual benefit based on individual history not a ‘joint’ benefit.
There’s no appetite to increase SSA taxes. If the silent generation and the Boomers want to agree to retroactively lump sum fork over the inflation adjusted difference between the much lower levels they paid for decades and the 12.4% rate Gen X and younger have paid and also v an inflation adjusted cap then we can have a good faith discussion about higher SSA taxes to support boomers and silent gen retirees. Most of Gen X and younger realized we were getting the shaft on SSA in terms of taxes and the ‘trust fund’ running empty long ago. Most of us planned a worst case retirement on SSA not existing as a benefit so if we get even 75% of what was projected then we’ll take it and oppose higher taxes.
He just gave the military a raise
Trump loves to spend money. Its how he got into bankruptcy so many time. His willingness to spend is one of his weaknesses.
The bottom line for MOST of the Rs is the midterms and getting re-elected. That is their number one goal, and the people and what we want is number two or even less. They know that if the cuts that must be made are actually made, they will have trouble back home. I hate to say it, but that’s it; re-election. They know, as do we, what should be done, but with no term limits, there will never be a solution to spending because re-election will ALWAYS be their first choice.
Yep term limits could solve at least some problems. Trump won’t mention them though. He wants another term.
There are term limits already. They’re called elections.
Note that adding term limits does nothing to change people’s voting patterns which is the root of all the problems we have.
Ummm no…not even close to the same thing.
As long as people can seek re-election they will do what it takes to win re-election. They won’t act in the best interests of the country over themselves. This is why Washington limited himself….to not be made a king. We don’t have a king but we have a collection of crony capitalists in the legislative branch that make a killing off of the people.
To deny that this is truth is to deny the basic tenet of capitalism which harnesses the power of people acting in their own self interest. We know that the power over the economy should not be afforded the same privileges because of the documented abuses they can and will enact.
I partly disagree. The problem is and always has been the people voting. It’s why politicians keep getting elected despite their congressional votes. It’s why you have political families like the Kennedys. Gores, Bidens, Bushs, Clintons, and others. It’s why when a democrat retires they are replaced with someone the same or worse. It’s also why the founding fathers constructed the country as a republic and not democracy and why the 17th amendment was a mistake.
“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.
– Alexander Fraser Tytler
I don’t see that happening. Even Obama, far more of an operator than Trump, didn’t try for an actual third term. He used surrogates instead, to the extent they behaved. Biden didn’t behave too well and he wanted Harris instead.
Trump will be well into his 80’s by 2028 and he may be visibly slowing down. Already this AF1 fiasco makes me think he’s reverting to childish thinking. He doesn’t give a damn how terrible it looks.
This is why they have to be forced to vote for a better bill than this. This is the only chance. The elections will loom even larger next year, and after that the House will probably flip Dem, as the incumbent president usually loses House seats and we know the left is energized if they can just coalesce. Besides I have a sneaking hunch that Trump wouldn’t mind losing Congress. He doesn’t actually want to do all this stuff, it was mainly to mobilize his base and grease the wheels for other stuff he cares more about. Like getting a fancier AF1 to fly himself around in even in retirement.
We have stick Trump with his announced agenda. Actually implement the cuts DOGE investigation indicated. Where was the DOGE stuff in this budget, to actually close departments so the Dems can’t just refill them later, and the courts can’t blockade?
Leaving out the SS benefits tax waiver and pro-2nd amendment articles doomed it. Also without any real spending cuts, it’s hardly beautiful
I just came here to say this. Member of the 2A community are absolutely livid at the betrayal of certain R Congressmen on the Way and Means committee who were willing to drop the Suppressor Tax to $0 while keeping in place the onerous registration requirements. Tell me, what other USG tax requires the taking of biometric data to pay? That a suppressor company possibly was involved in this sell out is doubly troubling.
A suppressor shouldn’t require any additional FFL hoops to jump through than purchasing the firearm it will be attached to, which is a 5 minute NICS check.
This.
All the Republican defections were not because the bill was too MAGA, but because it was not MAGA enough.
It’s hard to beat back the Lee Atwater syndrome without having some Republican pols who are actually loyal to Republican voters pushing back on precisely these issues at the instants when the rubber is actually meeting the road… which this is.
Guess what lying sack of excrement said this?
“In the near future, I want to do what has not been done in 24 years: balance the federal budget. We are going to balance it,” the president said midway through his 90-plus minute speech. The line got some of the loudest applause of the night from Republican lawmakers—which might be a small silver lining, as it indicates at least a rhetorical interest in fiscal responsibility.
I now suspect Trump is trying to interpose the courts in the way of real change, and trying to lose in court, then he can whine and charge up his base while not changing the gravy train.
Why else would they choose the riskiest possible EO, the one to abolish birthright citizenship, as their test of nationwide injunctions? They are using this bill, despite the fact that as the very bright Elena Kagan pointed out, it will lose at SCOTUS and thus justify whatever district courts issued nationwide injunctions against it. Any negative comments about nationwide injunctions would be found only in dissents against a lopsided decision, to keep birthright citizenship. That way Trump can lose both fights at once, and Trump can be the hero who tried and failed.
congress wont do its job and rewrite the bs that says illegals..non citizens etc are entitled to healthcare/emergency room care and free education etc
B/C THATTTTT is what the Court ruled on
You do understand that Congress could vote to preclude the lower courts from issuing these injunctions? The inferior Courts are a creation of Congress, they determine the scope of authority held by Inferior Courts. SCOTUS is eventually gonna face a PO Congress curtailing the Inferior Courts in ways they won’t like if they don’t act to rein the Inferior Courts in themselves.
change the law that allows freebies to non citizens
the supreme courts directly cited that as reasoning to allow the continued freebies
then those other courts would have nothing,,,no law to base their pro left decisions on
gop has the power to do so now!
the scotus especially in regards ( and not elected) to immigration (as a / the backdrop) continue to rule against trump
but, again, the gop controls congress now and the dems are somewhat on the run away from their hardercore leftists…the squad etc
No bills is going to make everyone happy. We need to make a move on what we are going to pay like you can’t believe, and standing on principles now is no help.
Again,, the welfare state pits americans against americans
so while the left continues their lies about the gop cutting medicare
the right continues to vote for the programs,,,,,, the anti american,anti middle class programs to continue just b/c people are use to these programs being in existence
end the programs at the federal level
let thel ocals decide if their local government can be should be trusted with these moneys
its not about the person born here
its about the illegals WHO WERE NOTTTTT BORN HERE
you have a child on american soil but you are illegal?
then choose
leave your american born child here in america as you leave
ORRRRRR
TAKE YOUR AMERICAN BORN CHILD WITH YOU
The sausage gets made
No they don’t all serve in a combat zone. When I was in Kosovo it was an ‘operational’ v ‘combat’ deployment but that didn’t stop snipers or the occasional drive by shooting or tossing grenades at TCP/Checkpoints and patrols. In Germany I saw a kid get smashed between two vehicles in a motor pool, paralyzed him. Across all Services there’s an average of roughly 300 training deaths per year. There’s another roughly 195 deaths from illness.
Across the Army alone there’s roughly 300K instances of musculature skeletal injuries each year. Now most of these are just a sprained ankle but many are serious, especially the repetitive injuries that get worse each time. Tough, realistic training requires risk. Soldiers are injured and killed every year making night airborne jumps, on helicopters, in vehicles, drown during river crossings. You can die just quickly in training as in combat, if the training is with a damn then Soldiers WILL be injured and that’s part of the price of preparation for combat. Obviously leadership plans and tries to mitigate potential injuries or death but without an acceptable level of risk the training won’t adequately prep Soldiers for combat conditions.
I’ll probably get hate for this but I actually thought there was a benefit to being in Afghanistan.
Originally I wanted just to invade, clean out the place and leave. After being there so long though the number of injuries and fatalities dropped to a much lower level. I’m not sure how the casualty rate compared to normal training casualties. However, what it did do is prepare our military that cycled through for combat elsewhere. It seasoned them and I thought that was a good thing.
IMO staying in Afghanistan after outing the snack down on the Taliban was a horrible idea. It was simply not possible given the constraints some of which like public support can’t be wished away.
Iraq was IMO two separate victories followed be two separate deliberate decisions to eff it up. The first was from invasion to Paul Bremmer deciding to change the plan and basically dissolve the Iraqi Army. Until that mouse had the thing won. His dumbass decision created the insurgency. The Iraqis knew where the arms and ammo was stored, the Iraqi Army leadership now convinced they would be liquidated during the piece of Bathe party members had the keys. That’s where the bulk of the insurgents got their arms ammo in the first years basically from March 04 Then after we put down the foreign ISIS cells particularly in Ramadi and Fallujah we had it basically won again by 2010/11. I spent a little over 40 months in Iraq in the first 7 years of the war and it was incredibly frustrating to see how badly our SR Civilian leadership kept messing things up.
Iraq is a much better example for your meat grinder or training by conflict desire. Better able to use combined arms due to better terrain so could do some full spectrum operations v Afghanistan which is great for light Infantry or even motorized IN in some places. We should have gotten out of Afghanistan soon after the initial curb stomping of the Taliban.
Significantly less spent per year than what it takes to keep Ukraine from falling to Russia because the pull out without doubt influenced Russian thoughts that they could invade Ukraine easily, no casualties for America, no terror state helping enemies of the United States, no American military hardware shipped over to China………
I care about results staying in Afghanistan did not ruin the 45th administration but it caused a catastrophe for America under 46 that we are still dealing with.
That is without even mentioning the humanitarian catastrophe that greeted the Taliban’s return, the moral impact of America breaking her promises or the loss of diplomatic credibility around the world.
Danny,
The neocon military adventurism paradigm seems to over, thank goodness. We don’t have any obligation to depend the lives of our Sons and Daughters or our $ to ‘save the world’. In our hemisphere? We probably should police it to retain our hegemony.
The Afghans could have chosen to fight the return of the Taliban but didn’t. That result is on them not us. Two Eastern European tyrants want to slug it out? Not our issue that’s a European issue and given the lack of military preparedness of the EU Nations and their continued, deliberately created reliance on Russian energy the EU Nations don’t seem all that seriously concerned.
The question EVERY policy has to answer is “is it good for America”
The Taliban takeover was very clearly not good for America.
The expenses are not good for America
The invasion of Ukraine that can directly be linked to the Biden decision has been horrible for America.
Can you place how exactly Ukraine will pay for all of the military gear sent without laughing hysterically?
Danny,
The question of Ukraine paying for military equipment is up to your side of the debate to answer b/c y’all want to keep spending on it. Cut them off and let the EU with its larger GDP and larger population pay for it.
Afghanistan? We’ve spent way too much over two decades to try and save the Afghan people and they refused to stop the Taliban. That’s on them and the regional Nations to solve.
Nope. The question is ‘does this policy benefit the broad middle-class in concrete ways economically, culturally’ not ‘America’ b/c too many people use that formulation as a deceptive shorthand to mean the top 15% or the bottom 15% depending the policy. The brake middle-class, the 70% in the center IS ‘America’. Without these folks the Nation will collapse.
Well I wasn’t proposing to use a meat grinder for training. That would be irresponsible,
Initially I was in favor of going into Afghanistan hard and cleaning house, and then pulling out. I’m also not in favor of nation building or even of garrisoning. Nation building almost never works in a primitive country with an undereducated populace and garrisoning to me is another word for target. Force when used should be overwhelming and with the only message sent being “F with us again and we will end you”: Why we still have a based in Iraq/Syria is beyond me. In my mind it’s just a target.
I was not in favor of the second Iraq war. Any nuclear program was primitive and could be and was dealt with by Israel. The country to invade if you were concerned about nukes was Iran. As for chemical/biological weapons, Iraq had chemical weapons but any country can make them. Delivery of them is notoriously difficult. Invading Iraq to deal with their chemical weapons is overkill and didn’t warrant the cost in lives and treasure.
The issue is even hinting that using a worthless conflict like Afghanistan post early defeat of Taliban was useful solely as a way to blood troops or train troops. That’s some neocon military adventurism logic at it’s best; we.gonna fight meaningless wars to prep for the important war.
What a bunch of despicable worms these guys are. Absolutely disgusting. They really should all be thrown off the committee.
And CHip Roy is such a disingenuous grandstander. He is so principled that he cannot be party to this budget … so what the hell does he think is going to happen if Trump’s budget priorities are not pushed through? Does he think that, somehow, he’s going to author some sooper-conservative budget that everyone is going to support and pass through? Or does he think that the most likely event would be another CR, but this time screwed up enough to be able to gain a few democrat votes to get it passed – thereby killing Trump’s agenda??
I find it hard to truly express my utter disgust with these pea-brained d-bags.
Exactly what I have been saying about the grand standers for some time.
There is nothing principled about securing significantly worst results.
Unfortunately a lame duck presiding over a struggling economy is also a president with highly limited influence.
This was another sacrifice on the altar of stopping the dreaded Ming Vase and making sure Americans could some day enjoy the wonderful and overwhelmingly better lives of the Malagasy.
The US economy is burdened by too much debt, the insistence of far too easy access to credit by the non creditworthy (see rising consumer delinquency rates) and a GDP fueled not by manufacturing, industrial sectors but by Govt growth, entertainment and finance.
Moody’s lowered its credit rating for the Fed Gov’t last week. As have Fitch and S&P before them each citing the lack of commitment to restrain gov’t spending which places the fiscal position of the US Gov’t at higher risk. Debt to GDP ration is approaching 135%, highest since WWII and we ain’t in a wartime footing which might justify it.
The total cost for servicing the $36+ Trillion debt (on the books only not including the unfunded items such as the looming 25% Social Security shortfall) exceeds the entire DoD budget by 20%. That cost will only grow as there’s about $7 Trillion in lower interest debt coming due this year which will be refinanced at roughly twice the the previous interest rates.
It’s been said that bankruptcy happens very gradually then suddenly. The USA is entering the the ‘suddenly’ area of that observation. We are adding about $1 Trillion to the growing Federal debt every 100 days or so and it is NOT sustainable.
Refusing to allow the continued plunge into a sovereign dent crisis by demanding modest spending cuts in current year and near term budgets isn’t grandstanding it is simple financial prudence. How about we try it and see which members of Congress refuse to pass such a plan and then castigate them with the same vigor for change?
You have a version of the U.S. Economy that does not exist on planet Earth
Here is the real manufacturing by the United States
https://www.macrotrends.net/2583/industrial-production-historical-chart
As you could see today we manufacture more per capita than any previous points.
The plunge into sovereign debt crisis by de dollarization (which has been jumpstarted by this)…..
If you think we will get a better bill than the one Trump put out………..
I am all ears. Why exactly would you stop Trump’s bill in favor of what exactly?
We did this dance many times before. Grand standing people force the president to go to the Democrats resulting in higher spending on everything.
That is called defeat.
The measure of economic health is better reflected by the # of manufacturing and industrial JOBS. Unless you want incredibly high tax rates on the credentialed class and on capital gains to pay for an ever larger welfare State to support the many tens of millions who the globalist put out of work.
Changes to the current bill? Easy and modest.
1. Immediately cut all income/housing, food assistance, health IN eligibility for all able bodied Adults.
2. Grant the Executive explicit authority to impound funds and then force Congress to up/down vote standalone basis for each line item.
3. Close or shrink Agencies/Departments as ID for such by DOGE.
4. Set severe criminal penalties for financial mismanagement and malfeasance.
5. End Federal employee unions.
That’s all very reasonable. I’d really prefer to use the last.Clinton budget adjusted for inflation and set that as the top line spending cap. Then work backwards to fund things based on explicit powers priorities. IOW fund the debt payments, find the retirements, fund VA, fund DoD. Put 2% towards debt reduction. Whatever revenues remains unspent are what is available for funding everything else.
The MMT idiocy is and utter lack of fiscal discipline is the cause for loss of faith. Add to that the neocon bad decision to seize Russian assets including dollar reserves held abroad. That creates a lack of trust in the us gov’t, how it operates, whether another Nation is ‘next’ to have its assets taken and all 3 rating agencies agree the ability to repay is in doubt. Recall that the rating agencies didn’t lower ratings on CDO until just before the housing crash b/c they do not want to rock the boat.
And our bond rating is once again downgraded. What a surprise!
All the folks more interested in kicking the debt issue down the road are gonna discover that the end of the road is looming. The closer we get the higher the chance of a sovereign debt crisis. It will make the Great depression look like a picnic.