What I Think the Republican Controlled House of Representatives Should Do

About the debt ceiling. They are in control of the House of Representatives. This President cannot get the debt ceiling increased without their support.

Instead of playing the typical Beltway Syndrome games. They should start making demands of the President. He needs to realize he is not a king, emperor, czar. He does not control the purse strings of our nation. He ultimately has to abide by the will of the people. Something that he has not been expected to do.

I see some wonderful options that the Republicans can include in order to get the debt ceiling raised.

First option, for every dollar the debt ceiling is increased, genuine, authentic cuts in the same dollar amount need to be made from the budget.

Second option, if he wants his debt ceiling raised, he needs to eliminate the healthcare package.

This administration has been grossly irresponsible with the taxpayers money, and it simply needs to be stopped.

Oh and for those who think it will be catastrophe having us "default" on loans. I don't think so. All the treasury secretary, Congress etc. need to do is reappropriate money from other areas. The treasure secretary doesn't like that because he will have less of our money to fuck around with.

Failure to sustain spending commitments in "other areas" in order to keep servicing the debt will be treated with great skepticism by financial markets and could potentially throw the world economy into disarray. Next.

I'm glad to hear you're more qualified to speak of the consequences of default than Moody's, Standard and Poor's, the Treasury Secretary, and the global economy at large. The next time I need some financial advice, I'll be sure to ask you instead of a financial advisor.

Unfortunately, you're incorrect. You can't just reappropriate money from one section to the other, because we already passed the debt limit, and are delaying retiree pension contributions to pay for the country's bills. The next fiscal year begins in October, and that method will only work until August. In order to get around the debt ceiling, Congress would have to change the 2011 FY budget so that only essential services were paid out (military, social security, medicare) for the rest of the Fiscal Year, but even that would likely be too little, too late.

You speak as if the President unilaterally introduced and passed the FY 2011 budget like some sort of king, but it was the Congress that passed the budget for the year. Congress has the power of the purse, not the President, he can only advise them and vote on it, and they can override his veto.

Yes, you can just reappropriate money. Only a small dicked fool like you Nick would think otherwise. Thanks for your undying, blind, defense of all things big government though. It's interesting how each and every argument on this subject is how and why the government shouldn't be limited on its spending and debt.

Congress hasn't passed a 2011 budget yet. Hell, they barely just finished their 2010 budget.

Gee, I think I stated that the Congress controls the spending. Good job in your reading skills Ballsack.

You cannot reappropriate money after it has been spent.

Fuck it. Let them live within the ceiling they already have.

I'm not about to give them another dollar's credit in exchange for the promise that they'll save more than a dollar over the next five or ten years.

They can't do anything without the approval of the Republican House, and we already have that. We don't need to give them anything for that. Refuse on the limit, and then only agree to a budget that fits within the existing ceiling. The GOP is already holding all the cards. They merely need to put their chips into the pot.

All of the money hasn't been spent you fucking idiot. The bailout money is a great example of that.

That's what The Defender just said.

Wash their asses.

Definitely. Of course they don't have their mommy right upstairs to do that for them like you do.

That's something everyone should do...daily at least.

Well, two things, one you're wrong, the 2011 budget was passed on April 15, 2011.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-112publ10/content-detail.html

But the fact that the money is already spent is exactly my point. The fiscal year ends September 30th, we're already 68% through the 2011 fiscal year. Tax receipts after April are roughly equalized, meaning if we're 68% through the fiscal year, then we'll receive roughly 32% of our expected tax receipts in that remaining 32%.

Projected estimates for the FY 2011 called for $2.17 trillion in tax receipts, so in theory for the rest of the FY we will get a total of $690 billion. Given that we are currently already at the debt ceiling, we cannot borrow anymore, so if were to reappropriate money we would need to reduce our expenditures for the rest of the year down to $690 billion less what we currently owe to the federal retirement contributions as those have to be paid back.

So, we have $690 billion dollars to work with from here to September, with that we have to pay at minimum to prevent immediate, widespread social collapse:

1) Defense
2) Social Security
3) Medicare/Medicaid
4) Interest on the National Debt

The 2011 federal budget kept most funding at 2010 levels, so for ease of argument, we'll use 2010 levels, even though National Debt interest won't be accurate.

Defense for the rest of the year would cost $212 billion, Social Security would cost $222 billion, Medicare and Medicaid would cost $237 billion, and Interest on the National Debt would cost $52 billion.

This comes out to a grand total of $723 billion dollars to fund just those 4 things for the rest of the year at 2010 levels, spending which is already mandated by law. This doesn't count anything else either, such as Department of Education, Unemployment, Department of State, the various departments that actually administer the 4 listed programs, NASA, Department of Transportation. This also doesn't count paying back the Federal Retirement Contributions that we've already used to continue meeting existing obligations.

So in short, not raising the debt ceiling ceased to be an option as even funding just those 4 things would result in massive government layoffs and an instant end to policies that are keeping food on the table for those ~10% on unemployment and ~15% on food stamps.

Yet, we have things like the stimulus with money allocated for later years. Reappropriate the money. At this point, I don't give a shit if it costs federal employee jobs, or otherwise. The money should never have been allocated. This President and the Congress have sunk us deeper into debt than at any other time.

I honestly, don't expect you to disagree with their spending habits. You have made it extremely clear they can do no wrong.

If serious budget cuts aren't imposed and changes aren't made, the debt ceiling shouldn't be increased. Let that jack ass in the White House and his cronies find the money elsewhere.

Let's also not forget the budget passed was supposed to have been passed months ago. Yet, Obama and his Democratic Party friends in the Capitol couldn't be bothered with doing their jobs.

February '08.

They can't spend it if they can't borrow it. Even if they "budgeted" it.

They can touch entitlements. They just need the right circumstances to force them to do so.

They have the ability to decide how to spend the portion they'll have. Shut the rest down. Really shut it down. It will shock you, how fast things will get better.

Money appropriated for future years doesn't sit in a vault, and Governmental Budgets only work on a year-to-year basis. I would hope you understand the concept of BOTTOM LINE as a business owner however.

And the bottom line is this, even if we ended all other spending besides defense, social security, medicare/medicaid, and interest on the national debt, we will go bankrupt before the end of the fiscal year. Revenues are less than expenditures for the rest of the year. The amount of $690 billion dollars is all we have to work with for the rest of the year if we don't raise the debt ceiling.

Yes, that's what default means, when you owe someone money and can't pay them.

But they don't "owe" Social Security and Medicare. They just have a law that says they do. They need to pass new laws.

Just like they don't "owe" welfare.

Oooo, that'd be a fun vote. "Hey taxpayers, y'know all that money we've been taking out of your paychecks since the 1930's, saying it was for your retirement years? Well, joke's on you. We're keepin' it. "

Anyone, and I mean anyone who was stupid enough to buy that the government would take care of them in their retirement years will get exactly what they deserve.

While you're waiting, maybe you should be proactive.

For the intents and purposes of social stability, they do.

What do you think would happen if they suddenly cancelled Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment, Food Stamps, and thousands of government jobs all at once? That miraculously this country would experience a turn around the likes that'd never been seen?

Bullshit, it'd be absolute pandemonium, widespread rioting and crime would take effect almost immediately.

Eh, justified homicides would go up.

Honestly Lanz, I know you can't possibly be expecting to ever receive Social Security. Why are you giving the current generation of recipients a pass? Social Security could switch to means testing tomorrow if they had the fortitude.

And I don't care what a "fun" vote it'd be. Those people have been fucking us for decades -- this is why they get the big bucks. Maybe they should appoint a blue ribbon panel to recommend it. Or a death panel. Or they can say Tim Geithner told them to do it. I don't know why we elect these weasels.

I didn't say to cancel it all. I said to bring it in line with revenues.

So you do intend to be proactive? I mean, in the spirit of "give me liberty or give me death," instead of just spooling out words on a message board, you guys should be rebelling against Social Security *right now*. Refuse to pay your share. See what happens.

Many of us are, except we're using means that are actually legal. Like supporting candidates or legislators who take a realistic approach to the problem, instead of the reality-impaired nonsense dominating most of Congress.

One has to shake ones head at the concept of supposed fiscal conservatives advocating default and confidently insisting that it would make things better.

Kirk, I find your horrific abuse of commas to have become intolerable. I shall now slap you across the face with a semicolon.

;

Let that be a lesson to you!

Contracts are only important if it's between two individuals, if the government is involved, fuck it, cancel 'em all.