'A Total Dumpster Fire': Conservatives Furious as GOP Leadership Strikes Deal on Massive Spending Bill

Western Journal ^ | 17 Dec 2024 | Randy DeSoto

[Sequoyah101]

If any of them had one ounce of conviction about reducing spending they would scream from the highest platform on the loudest speakers that the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and all of it's spawn must be repealed and that we must return to ZERO Base Budgeting. A pox on baseline budgeting, automatic spending increases and use-it-or-lose it spending provisions.

Without a repeal of Base Line Budgeting there is no conviction against out of control spending.

[avital2]

a horror Christmas tree mess adding to deficit - and putting DJT in a bad position in March when he should be on a honeymoon getting tax bill passed. again this Speaker pushed on us has not delivered. they had months to do better.

[Ex-Con777]

It was also, bravely shut down under Obozo. The little creep chose to shut down federal parks and other low budget areas just to stick a dic* in the eye of the republicans.

Had he not done that, no one would have noticed the government was shut down. Essential services continued and government checks went out on time.

This time Trump will get to call the shots and DOGE will get to animate how useless most of the non- essential services are.

EC

[Terry L Smith]

i have an idea whytill March.

a number of in office suppport for various Congresscritters will be losing their jobs in January, so should they have accrued ‘personal’ and ‘sick’ leave hours, the choice is to either sell back the ‘personal’, swallow the loss of ‘sick’ time, or use them till their end date.

[bk1000]

“ The ‘carrot’ appears to be the promise of $100Billion for ‘disaster relief’ “

Future disasters, no doubt. I doubt any will be spent on Helene damage.

[spincaster]

The swamp exists on “welfare for white people”.
More like welfare off of white people.

[pghbjugop]

You all think Trump is going to stop this. He never vetoed his first term. If Trump wasn’t so afraid of the big bad gummint shutdown he would just tell Johnson no deal. Johnson doesn’t have the balls to cross Trump and don’t think he will in March either when he only has a one seat majority waiting for special elections. Trump has proven he has not learned anything in working with congress. He played nice with McCarthy even though Gaetz was torpedoing him and he is doing the same with Johnson. For what? He sat back with the senate majority vote and the senate promptly gave him Thune and the middle finger as well as kicking Gaetz to the curb. Talk is cheap Mr Trump.

[SharpRightTurn]

Mike Johnson should only agree to fund the government until the next Congress is in session (and after Trump is inaugurated). Then go through regular procedure in forming a real budget (with cuts).

[sphinx]

Trump has ruled entitlement reform off the table. That’s game, set, and match ... and we lose. For at least the next four years.

Unless Trump reneges on what he has said about entitlements.

[AndyJackson]

The swamp in DC is a scam for incompetent white people to get rich off of everyone. Sounds like welfare for the privileged lite to me.

[stars & stripes forever]

TRUMP did not have the votes to veto because of RINOS.

[Secret Agent Man]

Uniparty

This is uniparty for those who defend Turtle

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

Get rid if the elephant symbol,

They need a dumpster fire symbol for the rebublican party.

[Buckeye Battle Cry]

Someone had better read this very carefully-line by line. I fear the Dems will slip in some new law that will entirely hobble the incoming Trump Administration.

[Wuli]

The Republicans in charge use the excuse that (1) they are no the majority in the Senate and (2) have a tiny slim majority in the House, which means (3) Dim votes will be needed to get the bill passed, thus allowing Dims and their own GOP members to throw all sorts of stuff into the bill.

They never say STOP and remind the Dims, they need GOP votes in the House to pass anything, and thus the Dims, not the GOP should be making the compromises. No, that would be showing a spine.

[Phlyer]

The little creep chose to shut down federal parks and other low budget areas . .

Walter Williams wrote an article once about the government shutdowns using this analogy.

Suppose you are a government agency with two functions: One is to provide school lunches to undernourished children, and the other is to maintain a museum of Nazi memorabilia.

As bureaucrats, if you get a budget cut, which function to you cut? The answer is obvious, you cut the school lunches for undernourished children. People will shout and you'll get your funding back.

If you cut the funding for the museum of Nazi memorabilia, the typical response will be to wonder why were even funding such a thing in the first place, and the funding will never be restored.

In my driving back and forth to work daydreams, I think of (the many) things I would do as President. One of them would be to cut spending, and I would put the word out that if there were any cuts that looked to maximize the 'pain' (to the public, not the bureaucrats), then the person making that decision, and the next two levels of supervisor up to and including cabinet secretaries, would be fired.

There are many reports of organizations such as the Park Service with more and more-visible staffing due the 'shutdown' than during normal business. Entrances to national parks that were normally opened and unstaffed were not only closed, but staffed by a park ranger who could explain that the park was closed due to the shutdown.

It doesn't even matter, really, if those anecdotal tales are true. The fact that so many people think they are probably true, or certainly might be true shows how little trust the general public has in the bureaucracy. That is real.

[cgbg]

Williams analysis is correct and is exactly the way bureaucrats think.

That is why you never give the bureaucrats choices on what to cut.

Congress must be very specific—or they will get outwitted and lose.

[Phlyer]

Without a repeal of Base Line Budgeting there is no conviction against out of control spending.

Things like Zero Base Budgeting, while a good idea, are merely tools. We don't have a budget, just a series of Continuing Resolutions. So tools to affect budgets don't have any real effect.

I've said for sometime that the national debt is an existential threat to the US. If we don't get that under control, there might not be a functioning United States of America, and in our lifetime. But politicians never see past the next election, so if they can put the collapse off past the next election (by "printing" money - actually just declaring its existence in an electronic ledger) they're all for it.

Since 2020, I have said there are two more existential threats, which may (or may not) be getting under control. The two threats were fraudulent elections, and at least in some places that is still absolutely happening. The second is politicized lawfare where the 'elite' face one set of laws and the people face another. Either of those can destroy the very fabric of our nation.

Derivatives of the deficit include dependency on government, and therefor voting for those who hand out the most of what another person has earned. Once you change charity from a gift to a 'right', the recipients always demand more and are perfectly happy to cheat (or have those who hand out the most cheat) to secure that charity. In the same way, it follows that they are happy to have those who would reduce the handouts being persecuted in the legal system. So the second two existential threats are actually derivatives of the first.

[Phlyer]

That is why you never give the bureaucrats choices on what to cut.

I don't think it matters if bureaucrats are deciding or Congress is deciding. They can all play the same game. What will make a difference is accountability, and that is - in my opinion - best done by the President holding bureaucrats strictly accountable. Accountability for Congress is done by the citizens who elect them, but too many of them are feeding at the public trough. It takes someone like Trump - a rich man who doesn't need the graft and who will never run for office again - to make a difference.

[1Old Pro]

But politicians never see past the next election, so if they can put the collapse off past the next election (by "printing" money - actually just declaring its existence in an electronic ledger) they're all for it.

That indeed is the problem. There is zero accountability for running this ship into the rocks.