This is the wrong argument....the republicans already said they wuld extend them if the dems find the money to pay for them the problem is that the dems don’t want to use their slush fund(unspent stimulas) to extend them.It is a false arguement that the tax cuts aren’t apid for because the largest amount the treasurary ever took in whas 2003 and 2004 after the tax cuts were passed in the first place.Perhaps someone should aks the dems why they are not willing to use stimulas funds to extend unemplyment?
Given the question is asked, do you expect them to tell you something that might bear any relationship to the truth? Have we any assurance the Dems even would know what the truth would be? The only way to overcome this is to continue to vote them out. At the moment, it appears that the only way to stonewall their continued assault on the Treasury is to require that any new spending be paid for by applying unused prior authorizations. It creates a paralysis, but has the advantage of doing so in a positive sense: the Reps are trying to help but by requiring that the help be correctly accounted for, the Dems are put in the position of saying 'no'. And making them say 'no' is the entire exercise. Every day the decision is not made, some people are incented to take jobs that pay, even if they were greatly inferior to jobs they once had. Every one who does that improves the situation and drains power from Dems. I don't see a downside, though the LSM would make the whole experience as painful as they can.