Omnibus bill: not an official ‘Federal Budget’.

Wheatietoo and I spent hours yesterday providing links, researching the laws, the 1974 law and statutes…. Do you know why the Omnibus is not going to get any notice…Here it is..

It's not an official 'Federal Budget'. It's an Omnibus bill…not a Budget…He outsmarted them again…Congress basically screwed themselves by not passing a Budget…

Per the Constitution…the President must adhere to a Budget set forth by Congress and direct the expenditures as provided therein.

This is another one of those big Porkulus Bills, like they gave Obama for 8 years. This is not a Budget..

An Omnibus Spending Bill may have some 'instructions' as to how the money will be spent…but Obama ignored them. He spent the money, or didn't spend it, however he wanted to.

I think our President observed how this happened, year after year. He is bound to realize that those 'appropriations' for different things in these Omnibus bills…are merely 'suggestions'.

So like Obama, Pres Trump can spend this money on whatever he wants to. Or…not spend it.

Planned Parenthood? What if our President decided to tell the Treas Dept to 'slow-walk' that money to Planned Parenthood…until the Senate gets off their ass and confirms his appointees?

Sanctuary Cities? What if our President decided to 'slow-walk' that money too…until those Sanctuary Cities assist ICE in rounding up criminal illegal aliens?

Splodey heads? From the Dems and the Enemedia? Why yes. There would be a colorful display of splodey heads.

done finished…research was done…and it is so very humorous actually….our VSG..just said just give me money for the military and the wall…put anything else you want in it…and those goofballs did.

In this case, as per above….he doesn't have to spend a dime….because it is not a budget…and even if it was…researched….he could still spend as he please… Congress appropriates….up to the President to spend it…or not….as he pleases..

If anyone disagrees, I can go back and get the links and evidence, but if you just read yesterdays political thread…Wheatietoo and I laid it all out for all…Wheatietoo did most of the work and put together the consolidated update as per above….

Again, that is why Obama never had a Budget in his Presidency…Congress did continual Omibus's and he just took the money….for 8 years…and no one seems to know where it went…

When Congress does not or cannot produce separate bills in a timely fashion, it will roll many of the separate appropriations bills into one omnibus spending bill. The deadline could be the start of the next fiscal year, October 1, or it could be some other deadline when appropriations would otherwise run out (such as a deadline set by a continuing resolution). The fiscal year of the United States is the 12-month period beginning on October 1 and ending on September 30 of the next calendar year.[2] Some of the reasons that Congress might not complete all the separate bills include partisan disagreement, disagreement amongst members of the same political party, and too much work on other bills. According to Walter J. Oleszek, a political science professor and "senior specialist in American national government at the Congressional Research Service", omnibus bills have become more popular since the 1980s because "party and committee leaders can package or bury controversial provisions in one massive bill to be voted up or down." Omnibus bills can also be used to "veto-proof" items, by including measures that the president is expected to veto if they were submitted for signature on their own, but who is willing or pressured into signing an omnibus bill that includes those measures. Criticism In Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process Oleszek described omnibus measures, "Packaging all or a number of appropriation bills together creates what are called omnibus or minibus measures. These bills appropriate money to operate the federal government and make national policy in scores of areas. These omnibus bills grant large powers to a small number of people who put these packages together - party and committee leaders and top executive officials. Omnibus measures usually arouse the irk of the rank-and-file members of Congress because typically little time is available in the final days of a session to debate these massive measures or to know what is in them. Absent enactment of annual appropriation bills or a CR, federal agencies must shut down, furloughing their employees. Moreover, "uncertainty about final appropriations leads many [federal] managers to hoard funds; in some cases, hiring and purchasing stops." — Walter J. Oleszek. Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process. Often, omnibus spending bills are criticized for being full of pork (unnecessary/wasteful spending that pleases constituents or special interest groups). The bills regularly stretch to more than 1,000 pages. Nevertheless, such bills have grown more common in recent years. In December 2004, the 3,016-page $388 billion Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 became known for its size, its earmarks inserted in the final stages that represented 4% of the $388, its unrelated provisions, and controversial content and for being rushed through at the last minute; it was drafted by the House in less than 24 hours then pushed through the Senate. It contained "complex and controversial matters" which included nine bills, only two of which had been debated in the Senate and a conference report with 32 unrelated provisions that the Senate had never considered. In 2009, a $410 billion omnibus bill, the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, became a point of controversy due to its $8 billion in earmarks. On March 11, the bill was signed by U.S. President Barack Obama into law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_spending_bill

Trump just banned himself from building the wall.

OK, that article says the following:

" The omnibus spending bill bans Trump from using any of the new border wall designs his administration has commissioned, instead only allowing for previously-used fencing barriers to be constructed."

Two questions.

1. If he can only use "previously-used fencing barriers" does it specifically state barriers on the US / Mexican border? Because I can think of some pretty spiffy "fencing barriers" that the fed-gov has built in the past, just not in that specific location.

2. If he can only use "previously-used fencing barriers" does it specifically state the number of layers of "fencing barriers" that can be used? Because two (and in some locations three) of these with a "no go zone" in the middle would do a pretty good job...

Or he could just declare it an issue of National Security if there is some event related to the border and move in the Corps' of Engineers.

Chucky could be invited to stand in front of one of the bulldozers to protest it.

Thanks! If you agreed with me more than 50% of the time, you'd probably need your head examined. LOL.

I'm going to come to McConnell's defense on this, though.

Believe it or not, it's the failure and dysfunction among Democrats over the years that has driven a lot of what you are seeing in Washington today. They've done a thorough job of pissing off middle-class voters and independents across this country over the last 25 years. Over that time, they've relegated themselves to a core voter base comprised of avowed Marxists in New York City, on the West Coast, and in a bunch of urban sh!t-holes across the country. As a result of this, you have a lot of elected officials across the country who might have run as Democrats before the early 1990s but register as Republicans now just to avoid any association with the dingbats who run the Democrat Party. Unbelievable as it may sound to those who know history, the GOP has become something of a "populist" party in this country ... even while it continues to represent many of America's corporate interests.

This just makes it harder for the GOP to get a consensus on anything in Washington.

Right, they’re all the same. Might as well hide under the covers because it’s never going to change.

You do realize that President Trump has virtually no power over legislation as long as McConnell sticks by the filibuster, right?

Absent that, he can twist arms, even Democrat arms.

But with McConnell holding the filibuster, he and he alone, holds the power in DC.

And that’s fine, if he can keep it. What I don’t understand is the apparent inability of conservatives to understand that fact and unite against him. Instead, crickets.

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.