DeLay confirms deal on balanced budget amendment

[NewJerseyDem]

http://www.thehill.com/news/060204/istook.aspx

House Republicans will vote this year on a constitutional balanced-budget amendment for the first time since 1995, when the issue was the cornerstone of the Contract with America that helped them gain control of Congress for the first time in 40 years.

Shortly before the Memorial Day recess, Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) promised Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) a vote on the proposal, which was the first of 10 measures the new Republican majority promised to bring to the floor in the first 100 days of the 104th Congress. DeLay’s promise reaffirmed a commitment he made to Istook last September to take up the balanced-budget amendment.

“It will be at the right time; it’ll be in the summer,” Istook said when asked about the timing of the vote.

In a subsequent interview, Istook spokeswoman Micah Swafford said the vote could happen at any point this year.

[kysrsoze]

1. Ummmm....wouldn't the right time have been BEFORE they

pissed all our money away and raided our retirement accounts? Whatever, more B.S.

[LincolnMcGrath]

2. Now the fucks are for "pay as you go"!

Not for the tax cuts for the rich, only on welfare. Go F'en figure!

[Old and In the Way]

3. Can't wait to see the numbers.......can't get there without cutting

the military budget. Or raising taxes. Or maybe their plan will be to balance the budget by 2050.

Purely political BS.

[Shakespeare]

5. No, not BS--they DO have a plan--eliminating all social programs.

And this is how they think they're going to do it.

[Just Me]

10. Why do they hate us so much? Is it our freedoms? n/t

[TahitiNut]

4. I'd say that's proof the Repugs expect to lose the White House.

Heaven forbid they impose this on a Repugnant scumsucker like DimSon. :puke:

[FlemingsGhost]

6. Economists, please help me out here...

If passed, what will this mean to whatever administration is in office January '05?

Will it force cuts in government spending, something the GOP supposedly covets? Will it force a Kerry administration to increase taxes, if they have any inkling to fund social programs?

I'm all for a balanced budget, but what are the politics behind the move?

[NewJerseyDem]

7. Well, first it has to pass the Senate

Where it is unlikely to have the votes. Then, it has to pass 3/4 of the legislatures. So, it definitely won't be in effect by January. It will take a long time and probably several years at least.

Pretty much, republicans hope they can use it to cut programs. But, some liberal democrast like Tom Harkin and Chaka Fattah support the amendment as well. They may just be for balanced budgets but may also want to prevent tax cuts from being passed.

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. They didn't have the votes in the Senate for it in 1995

when Republicans had 55 Senators. they probably won't now either.

[NewJerseyDem]

16. They would need 9 democratic senators elected since 1998

Baucus (MT), Biden (DE), Breaux (LA), Graham (FL), Harkin (IA), Landrieu (LA) and Kohl (WI) are the six remaining democratic senators from 1997 that voted for the amendment then. Jeffords also voted for it as a republican. So, 10 more senators would be needed assuming every republican votes for it, which isn't guarenteed. Every republican supported it in 1997 but several had opposed it prior to 1994. Blanche Lincoln supported it in the House. I'm guessing Zell Miller, Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson, and Tom Carper would support it and perhaps Mark Pryor, Bill Nelson and Debbie Stabenow. If all those democrats mentioned along with every republican voted for the amendment than it would pass, but I doubt the amendment would get everyone's support.

[Richardo]

9. If it's an amendment it won't have any affect in January '05...

#1) They need a 2/3 majority of BOTH Houses of Congress to propose an amendment
#2) It'll take years for the states to ratify, and 3/4ths of the state legislatures must ratify (38 states). I don't think that many states will vote to cut off most or all of their federal funding.

The political agenda? These reps can go back to their districts this fall and say they "introduced legislation" or "proposed an amendment" or "voted for something" in the House that has no prayer in the Senate. It's all show.

[struggle4progress]

8. Have a nice big steaming bowl of twaddle, Mr. and Mrs. America!

The Republicans produce record deficits, then pose for pictures beside a balanced budget amendment? What a pathetic group of wannabes!

[Democat]

11. What a bunch of assholes - Bush can spend freely, but Kerry has to balance

Incredible.

[klook]

12. Show bills

This is just another one of those bills that get introduced in an election year so the politicians can go on the campaign trail and say "I supported a balanced budget amendment.!" "I introduced a bill that would have provided free health insurance for all church members!" Etc.

They know full well it won't pass. They just want to be able to wave it around for the voters. Andrea Seabrook talked about the phenomenon on NPR this morning. See http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.php?prgDate=02-Jun-2004&prgId=3 (story is titled "Congress Returns").

[DieboldMustDie]

13. It's too bad Bill Clinton is constitutionally inelligable...

to be president again. He manage to balance the budget -- to amass a record high surplus in fact -- without such an amendment. Gee! Why can't Bush do that? :shrug:

[jmowreader]

17. Balancing the budget requires blowjobs

Listen close, lurking freepers: a president that doesn't get blowjobs can't balance the budget. It's true!

Carter's religion prevented him from getting blowjobs; he left the country about a hundred billion dollars in the hole.

Reagan didn't get blowjobs and he tripled the deficit.

Bush didn't get blowjobs either, and he ran the deficit Reagan gave him up even higher.

Clinton got blowjobs and he left the budget unbalanced too--when you have too much money, the budget's unbalanced, and Clinton left the US a surplus when he went home.

Bush won't get a blowjob, so the budget has returned to severe unbalance.

For love of country, someone give him a blowjob!

[donco6]

14. If passed, this will give them everything they need . . .

. . . to continue eradicating all programs they don't like.

"Hey, we'll just have to do without Ed funding, after all, we have to balance the budget."

[struggle4progress]

18. Bye-bye social security! We can't give the rich a tax cut ...

and balance the budget without giving up something!

[anarchy1999]

19. DeLay can be gotten rid of, just see Morrison.

We need to make this be a nationwide effort. PLEASE!