US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8112
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans on Tuesday unveiled a budget that makes deep cuts in food stamps and other social safety net programs while boosting military spending by billions, a blueprint that pleases neither conservatives nor moderates. The GOP plan, authored by Budget Chairman Diane Black, R-Tenn., is critical to GOP hopes to deliver on one of President Donald Trump’s top priorities — a Republican-only effort to overhaul the tax code. Unclear, however, is whether GOP leaders can get the measure through the House. Conservatives want deeper spending cuts while moderates are concerned the reductions go too far. Black announced a committee vote for Wednesday, but action by the entire House could be delayed by the ongoing quarrel between the GOP’s factions. Medicare is the second largest mandatory program after Social Security, and the House GOP plan again proposes to turn Medicare into a voucher-like program in which future retirees would receive a fixed benefit to purchase health insurance on the open market. Republicans have proposed the idea each year since taking back the House in 2011, but they’ve never tried to implement it — and that’s not going to change now, even with a Republican as president. The plan, in theory at least, promises to balance the budget through unprecedented and unworkable cuts across the budget. It calls for turning this year’s projected $700 billion or so deficit into a tiny $9 billion surplus by 2027. It would do so by slashing $5.4 trillion over the coming decade, including almost $500 billion from Medicare, $1.5 trillion from Medicaid and the Obama health law, along with enormous cuts to benefits such as federal employee pensions, food stamps, and tax credits for the working poor. “The status quo is unsustainable. A mounting national debt and lackluster economic growth will limit opportunity for people all across the country,” Black said in a statement. “But we don’t have to accept this reality. We can move forward with an optimistic vision for the future and this budget is the first step in that process. This is the moment to get real results for the American people. The time for talking is over, now is the time for action.” But in the immediate future the GOP measure is a budget buster. It would add almost $30 billion to Trump’s $668 billion request for national defense, which already exceeds an existing “cap” on spending by $54 billion. But while Trump proposed taking that $54 billion from domestic agencies and foreign aid, the GOP budget plan would restore most of the cuts, trimming non-defense agencies by just $5 billion. All told, the GOP plan would spend about $67 billion more in the upcoming annual appropriations bills than would be allowed under harsh spending limits set by a failed 2011 budget and debt agreement and pads war accounts by $10 billion. And, like Trump’s budget, the House GOP plan assumes rosy economic projections that would erase another $1.5 trillion from the deficit over 10 years. The measure, called a budget resolution, is nonbinding. It would allow Republicans controlling Congress to pass follow-up legislation through the Senate without the threat of a filibuster by Democrats. GOP leaders and the White House plan to use that measure to rewrite the tax code. As proposed by House leaders, tax reform would essentially be deficit neutral, which means cuts to tax rates would be mostly “paid for” by closing various tax breaks such as the deduction for state and local taxes. However, the GOP plan would devote $300 billion claimed from economic growth to the tax reform effort. But conservatives are insisting on adding cuts to so-called mandatory programs, which make up more than two-thirds of the federal budget and basically run on autopilot. After extended negotiations, Black would instruct 11 House panels to draw up $203 billion worth of mandatory cuts. But neither tea party lawmakers nor moderates are pleased with the idea. Conservatives want larger cuts, while moderates are blanching at voting to cut popular programs such as food stamps. Source | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On July 18 2017 22:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/ericgeller/status/887295902964174851 Trump stumbling his way around foreign affairs, I see. Hope his voters have their fingers crossed. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On July 18 2017 22:53 Nevuk wrote: Realistically the legislative filibuster should've been eliminated the second McConnell used it on his own fucking legislation. I'm fairly sure repealing it would hurt republicans more in the long run. do you expect the republicans to be thinking long term? they spent most of the decade talking about how they were going to repeal and replace obamacare, and look where they are now. plus, the 2018 senate map is very favorable for them so they have minimal concern about losing their majority until 2024. | ||
farvacola
United States18825 Posts
| ||
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On July 18 2017 23:00 ticklishmusic wrote: do you expect the republicans to be thinking long term? they spent most of the decade talking about how they were going to repeal and replace obamacare, and look where they are now. plus, the 2018 senate map is very favorable for them so they have minimal concern about losing their majority until 2024. I doubt it's going to take till 2024 for republicans to start losing chairs. NJ is already looking like they're going full blown democrat in 2017. Trump is pouring 11 million of his own money into some state (can't recall, might be Arizone, still looking for article) in the west coast to help from losing another republican state, because they're already starting to swing democrat as well. | ||
Sadist
United States7219 Posts
Good luck. No way in hell this goes through. Sooner or later people are going to realize the republican legislative ideas are hugely unpopular. | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
A new book details a fight that it says led Donald Trump to oust Paul Manafort, who served as chairman and, for a time, manager of his presidential campaign. The book, "Devil's Bargain" by Bloomberg Businessweek correspondent Joshua Green, was previewed in the Daily Mail on Monday. According to the Daily Mail, the book says a New York Times article led to the fight that precipitated Manafort's removal from the Trump campaign. The Times article noted that Trump's aides used TV appearances to get their messages across to him because they found that more effective than communicating face-to-face. The day after the article's publication, apparently at the urging of Rebekah Mercer, a Republican donor who threw her weight behind Trump during the election, Trump reportedly called a meeting with his top staff at his Bedminster, New Jersey golf club. The meeting, the Daily Mail said, included Manafort, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York, former Fox News chief Roger Ailes, and Manafort's deputy Rick Gates. When everybody was assembled, Trump reportedly shouted at Manafort, "How can anybody allow an article that says your campaign is all f----- up?" "You think you've gotta go on TV to talk to me? You treat me like a baby!" Trump added, according to Green's account of the meeting quoted in the Daily Mail. "Am I like a baby to you? I sit there like a little baby and watch TV and you talk to me? Am I a f------ baby, Paul?" Trump reportedly continued. The room then "fell silent," the book says, according to the Daily Mail. A second Times article the following day appeared to seal Manafort's fate. The report, citing a secret ledger, said Manafort had been paid millions by a pro-Russia Ukrainian political party. Manafort had long worked as a consultant to Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was ousted in 2014 and now lives in exile in Russia. Aides saw the Times report as the "kill shot" that determined Manafort would be forced out, the Daily Mail said. www.yahoo.com Yes, you actually are like a baby, Donald. It's why your responsibility over foreign affairs is so scary. Wonder who leaked the Ukraine story...probably someone in the campaign. Trump's own people are behind a lot of leaks, because Trump's operation is a media driven shitshow. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
Introvert
United States4744 Posts
And of course it's hard to take government $$$ from people; this situation was predicted in 2013. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On July 18 2017 23:37 ShoCkeyy wrote: I doubt it's going to take till 2024 for republicans to start losing chairs. NJ is already looking like they're going full blown democrat in 2017. Trump is pouring 11 million of his own money into some state (can't recall, might be Arizone, still looking for article) in the west coast to help from losing another republican state, because they're already starting to swing democrat as well. the senate is incredibly favorable to R's in 2018. they only have like 2 or 3 vulnerable incumbents, while the dems have like 10 seats which might be at risk. first result i saw: http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-races-2018-trump-primaries-map-2017-6 | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
He's so articulate with his words. | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
On July 19 2017 00:13 ticklishmusic wrote: the senate is incredibly favorable to R's in 2018. they only have like 2 or 3 vulnerable incumbents, while the dems have like 10 seats which might be at risk. first result i saw: http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-races-2018-trump-primaries-map-2017-6 Don't believe anything written this year. All of that will change by the beginning of next year. | ||
| ||