Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-12-2010, 11:14 PM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,165,640 times
Reputation: 11095

Advertisements

Just posted this info on another thread, but it is worthy of its own.

Largest among these Republican deficit-raising reconciliation acts was the 'Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act' of 2001. The effect of this legislation was to increase the federal deficit by over half a trillion dollars -- specifically, $552 billion -- over five years.

The second-largest deficit-growing impact came two years later with the Republicans' 'Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act' of 2003, which increased the federal deficit by more than another third of a trillion -- specifically, $342.9 billion -- over five years. This one, moreover, required a tie-breaking vote in the Senate by Vice President Cheney -- of 'Reagan showed that deficits don't matter' fame -- to pass.

Finally, case three -- the Republicans' 'Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act' of 2005, which passed by a 54-44 vote in the Senate -- added another $70 billion to the federal deficit over 4 years.

All 5 Democratic resorts to reconciliation, by contrast to the Republican case, brought substantial decreases to the federal deficit. Of these, by far the largest was the 'Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act' of 1993, which lowered the federal deficit by more than 2/5 of a trillion -- specifically, $433 billion -- over five years and ultimately passed, against stiff Republican opposition, by a vote of 51-50. (Yep, that means Al Gore can take credit for the largest reconciliation-wrought cut to the federal deficit rather as Dick Cheney can take credit for the second-largest reconciliation-wrought growth in the federal deficit.)


Dorf on Law: Republican Deficits and Budget Reconciliation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-12-2010, 11:19 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,862,289 times
Reputation: 12341
But lip service is mighty... when it comes to winning elections.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2010, 11:28 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,649 posts, read 26,433,425 times
Reputation: 12660
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
Just posted this info on another thread, but it is worthy of its own.

Largest among these Republican deficit-raising reconciliation acts was the 'Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act' of 2001. The effect of this legislation was to increase the federal deficit by over half a trillion dollars -- specifically, $552 billion -- over five years.

The second-largest deficit-growing impact came two years later with the Republicans' 'Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act' of 2003, which increased the federal deficit by more than another third of a trillion -- specifically, $342.9 billion -- over five years. This one, moreover, required a tie-breaking vote in the Senate by Vice President Cheney -- of 'Reagan showed that deficits don't matter' fame -- to pass.

Finally, case three -- the Republicans' 'Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act' of 2005, which passed by a 54-44 vote in the Senate -- added another $70 billion to the federal deficit over 4 years.

All 5 Democratic resorts to reconciliation, by contrast to the Republican case, brought substantial decreases to the federal deficit. Of these, by far the largest was the 'Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act' of 1993, which lowered the federal deficit by more than 2/5 of a trillion -- specifically, $433 billion -- over five years and ultimately passed, against stiff Republican opposition, by a vote of 51-50. (Yep, that means Al Gore can take credit for the largest reconciliation-wrought cut to the federal deficit rather as Dick Cheney can take credit for the second-largest reconciliation-wrought growth in the federal deficit.)

Dorf on Law: Republican Deficits and Budget Reconciliation


But tax cuts don't cause deficits.

Spending causes deficits.

Yes, Bush spent too much money.

Yes, BO and his unchecked spending is far worse than Bush's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2010, 11:28 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,833 posts, read 19,532,517 times
Reputation: 9632
Quote:
Of these, by far the largest was the 'Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act' of 1993, which lowered the federal deficit by more than 2/5 of a trillion -- specifically, $433 billion -- over five years and ultimately passed, against stiff Republican opposition, by a vote of 51-50. (Yep, that means Al Gore can take credit for the largest reconciliation
notice its 1993...when the DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED congress. so again they have controll and still cant get something passed(in this case passed only because of a tiebreaker)...history PROVES the democrtas have no balls

and lets notice how they say the numbers

increase 70 billion over 4 years.......18 billion a year...less that what cash for clunkers cost

decrease 236 billion over 5 years .....47. billion a year......

and the numbers are scewed........




and let's not forget...if health 'reform' passes and it has a singlepayer/government option/medicare for all on it...it will cost TRILLIONS A YEAR
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2010, 11:59 PM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,165,640 times
Reputation: 11095
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
notice its 1993...when the DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED congress. so again they have controll and still cant get something passed(in this case passed only because of a tiebreaker)...history PROVES the democrtas have no balls

and lets notice how they say the numbers

increase 70 billion over 4 years.......18 billion a year...less that what cash for clunkers cost

decrease 236 billion over 5 years .....47. billion a year......

and the numbers are scewed........




and let's not forget...if health 'reform' passes and it has a singlepayer/government option/medicare for all on it...it will cost TRILLIONS A YEAR
Woolsey: Public Option Too Potent to Ignore

Critics charge this would cost too much and add to the deficit. The Congressional Budget Office, however, has found that the public option will reduce the deficit over the long term. The robust public option favored by the Congressional Progressive Caucus and other health care advocates, paying Medicare rates plus 5 percent, would save the government $110 billion over the first 10 years of its life. Even the version included in the House reform bill would save approximately $25 billion over that span. These savings could be used to bolster subsidies to make coverage more affordable for the uninsured and to lower the deficit.

But our health care system is in crisis now. More than 40 million Americans are uninsured, more than 85 percent of them in working families. Another 25 million are underinsured. By the end of this day, 14,000 more Americans will lose their coverage.

Even those with health insurance are struggling to meet its skyrocketing costs. Health care expenses for the average family of four are projected to jump $1,800 yearly. Over the past decade, health care costs have risen on average four times faster than workers’ earnings.


Woolsey: Public Option Too Potent to Ignore - Roll Call

The Democrats might not have balls, but it's the absence of a heart within the members of the Republican party that is oblivious to the plight of the average American that cannot afford health care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2010, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,833 posts, read 19,532,517 times
Reputation: 9632
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
[The Democrats might not have balls, but it's the absence of a heart within the members of the Republican party that is oblivious to the plight of the average American that cannot afford health care.
the problem is they will find it will be WORSE with a single payer.....unless you dont have a job, and dont pay taxes,,,then it will be cake,,,except the service will suck....the governments stock answer deny, deny, deny
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2010, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,681,824 times
Reputation: 7485
Republicans screaming about reconciliation is so blatenty hypocritical it makes me laugh. It just proves the statement that Republicans are in lock step against anything the Dems try to do and all for political reasons rather than the good of the nation. Fact of the matter is, that since reconciliation was instituted in 1975, there have been 21 bills passed by reconciliation. 16 by republicans and 5 by democrats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2010, 10:18 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,213,074 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Republicans screaming about reconciliation is so blatenty hypocritical it makes me laugh.
Thats because you dont know the difference from when Republicans have used them for budget resolutions, and Democrats who are now screaming to use it to create law.. I'm laughing because some display their ignorance over not knowing how one differs from the other..
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
It just proves the statement that Republicans are in lock step against anything the Dems try to do and all for political reasons rather than the good of the nation.
if healthcare was so popular, then this wouldnt benefit Republicans for political reasons, would it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Fact of the matter is, that since reconciliation was instituted in 1975, there have been 21 bills passed by reconciliation. 16 by republicans and 5 by democrats.
And how many of them were NOT related to budgets?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2010, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,862,289 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
But tax cuts don't cause deficits.
Spending causes deficits.
Nope. First of all, you have to know how much hole tax cuts are going to put you in, and then you be daring enough to cut spending proportionally without going insane. But, to understand that hole, a degree of accountability is required that ain't something to be found in the books of those who profess tax cuts the most, and certainly not those in office.

Even Reagan realized this after his first year in office that it is necessary to raise taxes to maintain sanity. He was less of an ideologue than Bush. BTW, Rep Paul Ryan (R) presented your style of budget with spending cuts and more regressive taxation (rich get tax breaks, poor/middle class pay more in taxes). The result, a $182B bigger hole in deficit (compared to Obama's plan).

So, how many of these "conservatives" are for starting the spending cuts by focusing on the biggest drains on the economy as a whole (defense/war and health care)?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2010, 10:45 AM
 
59,324 posts, read 27,487,371 times
Reputation: 14345
"Nope. First of all, you have to know how much hole tax cuts are going to put you in, and then you be daring enough to cut spending proportionally "

Wrong. Tax cuts bring in MORE money, not less. Check your history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top