Posted on 07/19/2011 12:33:18 PM PDT by bobsunshine
President Obama joined Democratic and Republican senators Tuesday in offering support for a $3.7 trillion deficit-reduction plan announced Tuesday morning by the five remaining members of the Gang of Six.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who pulled out of the Gang of Six in May, also rejoined the group and praised the plan as something that could win the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate.
“The plan has moved significantly, and it’s where we need to be — and it’s a start,” Coburn said. “This doesn’t solve our problems, but it creates the way forward where we can solve our problems.”
(snip)
According to an executive summary, the Gang of Six plan would stabilize the debt by 2014 and reduce publicly held debt to 70 percent of gross domestic product by 2021.
It would involve two separate bills, one implementing $500 billion in immediate deficit cuts and another implementing larger reforms. Conrad said that he has held off marking up a budget in committee to use the normal budget process to move the Gang of Six plan.
On entitlements, the plan would fully pay for the Medicare “doc fix” over 10 years, allowing doctors to avoid a drastic cut in Medicare payments under the law which is regularly avoided but never paid for.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
I hope you are successful. We’ll be working on our own RINO here in Indiana - Lugar.
He has always been too trusting.
Me too. JUST ONCE I wish SOMEONE would ask Obama...the democrats...AND the Republicans two questions:
1) Let's say you agree on $ 4 TRILLION in cuts over 10 years. That's $400 Billion a year. So...given the current deficits...are you telling the American people that the BEST you can do is agree on increasing our debt by another $11 TRILLION by 2022?
2) How can you promise spending cuts over 10 years in the future given the ABSOLUTE FACT there will be a different congress in 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019 and 2021? How can you promise cuts over 10 years given the possibility of an entirely different look in Washington by 2013? and certainly a different look by 2017? How can you make spending PROMISES for people in congress who aren't even THERE yet?
The idiotic nature of a 10 year promise astounds me...and the fact the GOP is pushing such a long term plan makes me ill.
Here is a debt ceiling deal I would support: A $2 Trillion raise in the ceiling for a reduction in the budget to 2008 levels. Get out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya...reduce defense along those lines and apply the savings to the debt. THERE. SOLVED IT.
“Has anybody read it , or do we have to pass it to know what is in it.”
You can read it here......
What happened to all the trolls? Heck I’m ready to throw down......
Read the first 20 pages I have linked above.....
“When we are borrowing forty cents for every dollar we spend, we cannot afford excuses.
We must review every department, every program, and every expenditure for potential savings. If
you cannot find waste in any part of the federal budget, whether health care programs, defense
spending, or even the tax code, it can only be for one reason—you have not looked.”
Coburn seems to care mainly about what Medicare reimbursement rates will be if he ever goes back to practicing medicine.
“Coburn seems to care mainly about what Medicare reimbursement rates will be if he ever goes back to practicing medicine.”
Really?
“The federal government has become so large, it is impossible to grasp its true size and scope
or to pay for its costs. Nearly every corner of the federal government is rife with duplication,
mismanagement, and special interest carve outs. Each is protected by an entrenched bureaucracy, a
well financed lobbying group, an active and organized constituency, and an entrenched politician,
which time and again align to best any efforts to reform, cut, or eliminate government waste.
Perhaps there is no better recent example of this phenomenon then when only 15 of 100 senators
voted to defund the infamous Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska which had become the national symbol
of government waste.”
We have to get rid of both of ours. Chambliss and Isakson are both card carrying RINO’s. Neither one of them will sign the NAGR’s American Firearms Sovereignty pledge to stop this UN small arms treaty either. They are worse than worthless.
Uh, he's an OB-Gyn doc. I don't think many women are delivering babies on MediCare.
Good point. I can't be the only person who objects to the word "revenue". As I understand it, if taxes were lower, business would get going, and the actual "revenue" would increase. When NYC raised the taxes, enough business left the city that although the taxes were higher, the actual revenue went down. If the corporate rate were lower, more business would stay in the US. Even the uber liberal Bono took his operations out of Ireland and went to the Netherlands to avoid paying higher taxes.
Per page 4 of the document below, tax expenditures for health, charitable giving, homeownership,
and retirement will be reformed but not eliminated.
http://thehill.com/images/stories/gangofsix_plan.pdf
“Good point. I can’t be the only person who objects to the word “revenue”.”
Have you gone through the first 20 pages I linked yet bob? If you have time to whine on FR, surely you have time to hit the first 20 pages? No? Here are the highlights.
Three Year Freeze on Pay and Bonuses for Federal Employees
Reduce the Size of the Federal Workforce by 15 Percent or 300,000
Reduce the Size of the Federal Contractor Workforce by 15 Percent
Reduce and Restrict Government Printing
Reduce Civilian Agencies’ Travel Budgets by 75 Percent
Eliminate Reemployed Annuitant Double Dip
Reduce the Number of Limousines Owned by Federal Agencies
Reduce Non-Limousine Federal Vehicle Fleet Budget by 20 Percent
Prohibit the Use of Project Labor Agreements on Federal Contracts
Eliminate Hollywood Liaison Offices
Eliminate the Use of Non-Competitive and Cost Plus Government Contracts
Reduce Agency Advertising Budgets by 50 Percent
Freeze Federal Locality Pay for Five Years
Reduce Annual Spending on Federal Government Conferences
Support the President’s Efforts to Reform Federal IT Management and Close Federal
Government Computer Data Centers
Eliminate the Financing of Presidential Election Campaigns and Party Conventions
Ending Duplication in Federal Employment Agencies by Consolidating Functions at the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
Not intended as a whine. As I said, good point. I agree with you. I was just expressing my observation about not liking the word revenue used as it is being used. I did check the link. It appeared to me the Democrats came up with the choice of the word revenue so as to make people think the Republicans didn’t want the government to have any money. No whine or offense intended.
I thought this was a Coburn shishkabob by the trolls. My apologies Bob. FReegards.
Accepted. No harm in being ever vigilant.
New Revenue is a term that should mean money from newly created jobs. What they are talking about is raising taxes. Call it what it is.
Doesn’t seem to be anything in the proposals to create jobs, so there is no new revenue - just new taxes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.