The Great CR Debate of 2013

The National Review ^ | 9-16-13 | Jonathon Strong

[afraidfortherepublic]

Last Tuesday morning, at 9 a.m. in a room deep within the bowels of the Capitol, Representative John Campbell was trying to determine whether the GOP leadership’s plan to fund the government would sink or swim.

“Some meetings like that, they present an idea, and it just gets blasted,” he says. “And you can just tell, walking out of the meeting, ‘Okay, this is not gonna fly.’”

Campbell, an affable and wealthy Californian who is leaving Congress at the end of this session and is eager to get ownership of his calendar back, has always had a knack for anticipating whether a deal can be struck. When it comes to the deliberations among House Republicans, he says, the key is to watch who is complaining.

“There are some people who tend to oppose anything leadership comes out with,” he says. “If they’re critical, that really doesn’t tell you anything. But if the others who aren’t the automatic ‘no’ people start to criticize, that gives you a message.”

On Tuesday, there were already worrisome signs.

The night before, Majority Leader Eric Cantor had brought a handful of influential House conservatives into the speaker’s ceremonial office right off the House floor to brief them on the plan. It wasn’t what the conservatives, who thought it would be a discussion about what to do, had in mind. Having sat through angry town halls, they were eager to deliver a message, but instead they listened to a plan they felt they had no say in.

[SkyPilot]

Obama will not, not, not abandon his signature legislation. The GOP does not control the Senate or White House, which both are needed for a short term CR, much less to raise the debt ceiling 2 weeks later and then an agreement on year long CR or budget (unlikely....again).

Every staunch Tea Party member over 65 shouts loudly, but when it comes to their SS or Medicare, they demand any government shutdown "exempt" them.

Watch.

[Principled]

gov’t shutdown does not end SS or even keep the checks from rolling out.

The only thing that stops the checks is an executive decision.

jeez

[Principled]

ok SYPILOT when I read my post, it seemed to say “jeez” to you. Apologies that was unintentional and I regret that I did that.

Jeez is for the propogandists who will push the senior scares..

[PubliusMM]

It is to be expected that Zero and 0bamunists won’t abandon ACA. However, that does NOT preclude the HOUSE (where funding bills originate) from passing CR’s or even a BALANCED BUDGET that expressly names ACA as UNFUNDED.
Pass that, then call all the press outlets in the country for the announcement that it’s been done and HANDED OFF TO THE SENATE, with the clear message that it is now up to the dhimmicraps. It will be on them if the government shuts down (arguably not a bad thing...).
Unfortunately, the pubbies don’t have the backbone for this fight, and it looks like the surrender monkeys will again have their way.

[LibLieSlayer]

Fine dude then give me my money back that I have paid into it and kill the programs. I never wanted a damned dime but they have taken from me and taken from me and I am now 58. If not... should we just gift the Fed with our stolen funds and then cancel the programs? I’ll tell you this... get them to do away with both SS and Medicare and defund obamacare and I will forgo ever collecting a dime of my money. I would gladly lose all that I have paid into these redistribution programs to start to cancel socialism in America.

[DCmarcher-976453]

The repubs need to fight on this cr, defund or real spending cuts if not they are toast. A mirror image of bo vs putin!

[SkyPilot]

gov’t shutdown does not end SS or even keep the checks from rolling out. The only thing that stops the checks is an executive decision.

Partially correct.

There is no law or Constitutional provision for Social Security checks to continuing flowing during a default or government shut down. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Fleming v. Nestor that workers have no legally binding contractual rights to their Social Security benefits, and that those benefits can be cut or even eliminated at any time.

In the 1995-96 government shutdown, Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare were "exempt" was were payments on the debt. This was actually an agreed upon conclusion and course of action between Clinton and Congress at the time.

During the 2011 threatened "shut down", Republicans urged Obama to fund SS checks as well as payment on the debt, and some other vital functions.

Obama played politics with the issue, and threatened Social Security checks being with held in an official letter, on White House stationary, that was sent out. Few believed he would really do that, since recipients across the nation were spooked and burned up the switchboards on Capitol Hill, demanding an "exemption."

If the government shuts down, I believe this will be replayed, however, I would argue that if we really want to "shut er down!" as the mantra goes, then go for it and really shut it down. Only interest on the debt should be paid.

The hypocrisy that "my" checks is sacrosanct and everyone else's is not cannot be allowed to stand in the light of truth.

[SkyPilot]

Fine dude then give me my money back that I have paid into it and kill the programs. I never wanted a damned dime but they have taken from me and taken from me and I am now 58. If not... should we just gift the Fed with our stolen funds and then cancel the programs? I’ll tell you this... get them to do away with both SS and Medicare and defund obamacare and I will forgo ever collecting a dime of my money. I would gladly lose all that I have paid into these redistribution programs to start to cancel socialism in America.

I am with you, but that will never happen. They need the people's money who are working now to pay those who are collecting. It is the exact definition of a Ponzi scheme (pay off previous clients with the current cash from newer payees, and have nothing left for the newer payees when the system collapses).

All current Social Security is "paid for" via payroll taxes or borrowed money. Period. There is no vault of "my money" or your money anywhere.

Many people believe that Social Security is an "earned right" because they have paid Social Security taxes, they are entitled to receive Social Security benefits. As I stated earlier, the Supreme Court ruled 53 years ago in Fleming v. Nestor that there is no legally binding contract to pay anyone anything.

The amazing thing about those clamor for a "Government Shutdown!" the loudest is that many of them are the biggest beneficiaries of the largest share of our spending that is the source of our debt and deficits: Entitlements.

The Sequester did nothing to address this explosion of Entitlement growth, in fact, it completely ignored the problem. The source of our spending nightmare is not discretionary spending, it is Entitlements (both earned and unearned). The 3 worst actors are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, two out of three are earned Entitlements, but they are all a train wreck, and ObamaCare is about to add to the carnage.

We need real tax and Entitlement reform, in the vein of Simpson-Bowles. If we don't do that soon, we will collapse. Moreover, that collapse may be accelerated with this current Washington DC brinkmanship. I believe we may have a technical "default" within the next few weeks or months, and if that happens, the US Dollar will lose its status as the world's Reserve Currency. When that happens, we cannot borrow as we have, and our interest payments on the current debt as a percentage of the Federal budget will skyrocket.

There are no good scenarios.

[SkyPilot]

However, that does NOT preclude the HOUSE (where funding bills originate) from passing CR’s or even a BALANCED BUDGET that expressly names ACA as UNFUNDED.

That is what Sean Hannity and a lot of people are repeating, over and over again.

I am not a Constitutional scholar (like Obama is!), however, that language in the Constitution refers to Appropriations bills, which are not the same as a Continuing Resolution. All a CR does is keep spending levels at last year's levels or at current levels, because there is no agreed upon Appropriations. Budgets are political documents, it is Appropriations that have the binding authority of law to spend money. Guess what? The House has only voted on a couple of the 12 Appropriations bills for FY14, and there also has been no Conference called to work out differences between the Senate budget that passed this year (the first since 2009), and the House budget.

An appropriation bill is used to actually provide money to "discretionary" programs. Appropriations are generally done on an annual basis, although multi-year appropriations are occasionally passed. According to the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, clause 12), Army appropriations cannot be for more than two years at a time. An annual appropriation requires that the funds appropriated be obligated (spent) by the end of the fiscal year of the appropriation. Once the fiscal year ends, no more money can be spent via the prior year's appropriation. A new appropriation for the new fiscal year must be passed in order for continued spending to occur, or passage of a special appropriations bill known as a continuing resolution, which generally permits continued spending for a short period of time—usually at prior year levels. The Anti-Deficiency Act makes void any attempt to spend money for which there is no current appropriation. According to the Origination Clause of the United States Constitution, all bills relating to revenue, generally tax bills, must originate in the House of Representatives, consistent with the Westminster system requiring all money bills to originate in the lower house which is why the appropriations bills that are enacted begin with "H.R.", indicating a bill that originated in the House. The Constitution also states that the "Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills," so in practice, the Senate and House each drafts and considers its own bill. The Senate then "cuts-and-pastes", substituting the language of its bill of a particular appropriations bill for the language of House bill, then agrees to the bill as amended."

In either case, for the CR to pass, the Senate must agree, and the President must sign it. Period.

[LibLieSlayer]

I agree... that is why I stated in another thread that the economy will collapse... when I do not know but nothing that anyone is doing will help the economy and it does not appear that anything will happen until 2017.

[X-spurt]

Was not that post pushing the senior scares??

Apologizing for the truth is partly what has gotten us to this place in history.

Jeez is right, do these people think SS is some damn gift?

[X-spurt]

Did you read the thing you posted? It includes the whole kitchen sink, not JUST SS.

Yes things like Medicaid, SSI, nobamacare and welfare are entitlement give-aways. Damn few drawing either of those paid a dime for that “entitlement”

SS and Medicare, we pre-paid for it more than 100% and pay again for Medicare insurance every month.

Need to quit inferring SS and Medicare is some kind of free-loader deal.

[SkyPilot]

I did differerntiate between earned and unearned Entitlements, in post #9.

"The Sequester did nothing to address this explosion of Entitlement growth, in fact, it completely ignored the problem. The source of our spending nightmare is not discretionary spending, it is Entitlements (both earned and unearned). The 3 worst actors are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, two out of three are earned Entitlements, but they are all a train wreck, and ObamaCare is about to add to the carnage."

And unfortunately for you, me, and the entire nation, the biggest contributors to our debt and depict ARE Entitlements, and Social Security and Medicare are massive problems to deal with.

We didn't "pre-pay" into anything. Those programs are only sustained even today by massive borrowing and taxes on (the few) remaining current workers. There is not vault of money, yours or mine.

I am not saying we should eliminate SS or Medicare, but there have to be reforms or the United States is going to implode.

The giveaway programs are an obscenity. I just read here on FR that illegals in one California county collect billions.

[X-spurt]

Don’t agree with your contention, except for that last sentence, which correctly points out the problem is fraud not honest PRE-PAY recipients to SS and Medicare.

Regardless of how the Ponzi is processed inside the government, it does not change the facts that those that are legitimate SS drawers did PRE-PAY at 15% of their income their whole working life.

Most folks who have not yet talked with SS Admin, may be surprised to learn that they can not collect any SS if they do not sign up first for Medicare. A second surprise is that Medicare costs us very close to standard health insurance by the time the 1st part of deducted from your monthly SS, Part B and Part D (you pay to some private insurance company) runs another big out of pocket cost. And again, hardly some freeby entitlement.

[SkyPilot]

I am afraid you and I will just agree to disagree then.

[X-spurt]

No point to feel afraid, I don’t bite.

This is one of those things that’ll change your mind when its your turn to get just some fraction back from the strong-arm robbery you will have gone through for 30 years.

Enjoy a great evening my FRiend.

[SkyPilot]

No point to feel afraid, I don’t bite.

Please, don't be patronizing. I debate here all the time, and on every issue. I can tell when a mind is made up, and they usually are in concrete when it comes their personal checking account receiving a Federal Direct Deposit or getting subsidized medical insurance paid for by others.

[X-spurt]

Would never patronize.

I paid for someone’s SS before me, when I really could not afford it, but I didn’t hate em or cry about it like a 3rd grader.

I could give a damn how much or how bad a deal the next set of payers has set themselves up into.

Unless you are 15, you won’t get much different SS than we now do and you’ll quite happily take that monthly deposit.

[Jim Noble]

You are correct that ALL of the core problem with the budget and the deficit is caused by Medicare, and that until Medicare, not "Obamacare", is repealed we will never get out of this mess.

In fact, the reason the GOP secretly supports Obamacare and will never do anything to hinder it is that Obamacare, bad as it is, starts us on the road to killing Medicare.