Posted on 11/03/2005 3:32:35 PM PST by HHKrepublican_2
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday narrowly approved the first cuts since 1997 to benefit programs such as Medicare (search), Medicaid (search) and farm subsidies, giving Republicans a symbolic victory against ever-rising government spending.
The bill, passed by a 52-47 vote, would make modest cuts to the health care programs for the elderly, poor and disabled, but leave the food stamp program untouched.
The measure also would permit exploratory oil drilling in an Alaskan wilderness (search) area.
The spending battle now heads to the House, where Republicans are divided over whether to cut more deeply across a broader range of social programs.
The spending battle now heads to the House, where Republicans are divided over whether to cut more deeply across a broader range of social programs
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
That's just what I was going to point out... So out comes fox showing their conservative bias by implying that today's GOP has been fighting increases in government spending, when they alone have been responsible for the greatest increases in decades.
Is there any unbiased source of news?
The Republican senators who voted against the budget bill were Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike DeWine of Ohio, and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine. The Democrats voting for the bill were Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
Unfortunately the net cut in this bill is only $1 billion thanks to the $35 in new spending...
Well, at risk of sounding like a kool aid drinking optomist, if GDP growth is over 3% and spending is flat, then government shrinks, at least as a percent of GDP plus the budget eventually falls into balance. It's slow and incremental but atleast positive.
"the budget eventually falls into balance"
When, in 259 years?
We have a coming faceoff with China in 10-20 years, and they will be in a great position to defeat us since we will have no manufacturing left while they hold most of our debt.
They could simply pull the plug on our imports while ceasing to loan us the money our government needs to exist every day.
We don't have the luxury of waiting for these slow types of economic trends to materialize.
5 years. I just worked it out on a spreadsheet. I assumed revenue growth (from economic growth) of 2.5% more than spending.
Why would China tank their economy like that? The unemployed masses would revolts and the Chinese know it.
Give yourself more credit than that! :)
If spending is flat and GDP growth is nonzero, the deficit shrinks amazingly quickly. From 1993-2001, government spending rose at 3.5% on an average annual basis. GDP grew faster, meaning spending fell from 21.4% of GDP in 1993 to 18.4% in 2001. Since 2000, we've seen spending rise back to 20%, increasing at a 7.3% annual rate.
If Nominal GDP grows the 5.5% currently projected by CBO for 2006, and tax collections stay at the same % of GDP as they were for FY 2005 (17.5%), then that would mean an increase in revenues of $157 billion. Keep spending flat, and you've closed $157 billion of the projected $503 billion on-budget deficit. That's a reduction of 31%. Not bad. Do that for two years, and you're close to an off-budget surplus again (although you're still borrowing heavily from social security surpluses to be able to make this claim, and you're still at an overall deficit).
Compounding can be our friend, if GDP growth is greater than spending growth and tax collections stay constant as a % of the economy.
The compounding we've seen under the GOP lately has been our enemy, as spending growth has vastly exceeded GDP growth at the same time tax collections have been shrinking....
correct - but that only balances the off-budget numbers. You're still piling up mounds of intra-governmental debt (borrowing from Social Security, etc). Public debt, on the other hand, would begin to drop, as you saw during the latter portion of the 90s...
Landrieu was also in favor
Chafee, Collins, Snowe voted NAY...surprise, surprise, surprise.
Jeeez.... I thought I was being funny.
The measure also would permit exploratory oil drilling in an Alaskan wilderness (search) area.Smart move! Put it in a bill to cut spending! Hope it works, but it won't.
Because we're setting up all sorts of great new markets for them in Canada, Mexico, Central and South America via NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA.
We're introducing the rest of the western hemisphere to capitalism, and the Chinese are setting themselves up to takeover our spot as global superpower.
This is the most shameful thing that our government has done in recent history! They've hurt the elderly, the poor, and people who are sick! When I think about all of the pork projects that Congress has funded lately, the money that we are sending to Africa for aids, money to terrorist countries, the UN and other taxpayer rip offs, when they could have used that money to keep from harming American citizens who need help the most, it makes me furious.
This WILL come back to haunt the ones who have done this, and since the GOP has control of the Senate and the House, they will take the blame. I can assure you that the RATS will use this against them. They ALL make me sick!!! We are being 'ruled' by greedy, money hungry, power grabbing people. It's time we clean house in DC!
Don't know if anyone else posted this, but for reference...
Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Corzine (D-NJ), Not Voting
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
DeWine (R-OH), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay
I'll take three guesses...
Chaffee
Snowe
Collins
Coleman? Uugh...he's been slipping lately into RINOism. Not that he was ever a rock-ribbed conservative in the first place...but he never used to be that bad.
Add DeWine
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.