PDA

View Full Version : an affront to the Constitution



Qtec
07-24-2011, 01:38 AM
Which party wants to defend the USCON and which party wants to change it?



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Leahy On Balanced Budget Amendment Proposals: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>'Our Constitution Deserves Protection'</span>


Mr. President, <u>unlike</u> any Republican in the House or the Senate, I<u> have </u>voted for a <u>balanced budget</u>. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>We balanced the budget under President Clinton. </span>Not only balanced the budget, but started paying down the national debt. He was able to leave hundreds of billions of dollars in surplus to his successor, who determined <u>with Republican votes</u> to go to war in Iraq and pay for the war with a tax cut. Thatís why we had to borrow the money from China and Saudi Arabia.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Not a single Republican voted for a real balanced budget when they had a chance to.</span> <u>In fact, it passed in the Senate only because Vice President Gore came and broke the tie.</u> I was proud to vote for that balanced budget. Not a gimmick, but a real balanced budget. We had to actually make tough choices. We did. We balanced it. We had a surplus.

<u>But when you talk about amending our Nationís fundamental charter, the Constitution of the United States,</u> itís not something Congress and the American people should feel forced to do in the face of a financial crisis. I take seriously my senatorial oath to support and defend the Constitution.

Now, I know that there are a lot of pressure groups demanding that elected representatives sign pledges about what they will and will not do. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The pledge I follow, the one I was honored to make at the beginning of this Congress, is to uphold the Constitution.</span> Thatís what I intend to do as I represent the people of Vermont.

The House-passed bill, H.R.2560, which the Senate is now considering, claims to impose a balanced budget of future congresses but it doesnít even contain the proposed constitutional amendment the supporters are seeking to adopt. Nor did the bill pass with two-thirds of the Republican-controlled House voting in favor. That threshold is what is required, of course, to pass a constitutional amendment. The House vote was more than 50 votes short of that necessary number.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>The process by which this bill has been brought to the Floor of the Senate is an affront to the Constitution that weíre sworn to protect and defend. </span>Instead, the House bill denies authority to meet the Nationís obligations until Congress passes a type of constitutional amendment that will actually make it more difficult to reduce our national debt.<span style='font-size: 14pt'> That kind of constitutional blackmail has no place in a democracy, and no place in our laws. </span> </div></div>

He spanked them big time. watch the rest (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/leahy-balanced-budget-amendment-pro)

Q

LWW
07-24-2011, 03:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Not a single Republican voted for a real balanced budget when they had a chance to.</span> <u>In fact, it passed in the Senate only because Vice President Gore came and broke the tie.</u> I was proud to vote for that balanced budget. Not a gimmick, but a real balanced budget. We had to actually make tough choices. We did. We balanced it. We had a surplus.
[/url]

Q
</div></div>

That one was especially precious.

Now, back to historical reality:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u><span style='font-size: 20pt'>Senate passes budget plan by one vote Gore breaks tie after Kerrey gives support to bill</span></u>

Corporations and wealthy individuals will bear the brunt of the income tax increases. But the middle class will be nicked by a rise in the gasoline tax of 4.3 cents per gallon.

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Spending cuts over five years will pare deeply from the Pentagon, Medicare for the elderly, Medicaid for the poor</span> and a freeze in the growth of most social programs.

Despite an effort to tighten spending, not all the new revenue raised by $275 billion in total tax increases will be used to cut the deficit. About $34 billion will be used to expand tax credits for the working poor, create empowerment zones to encourage businesses to locate in blighted areas and give new tax breaks to businesses to create jobs.

The plan is aimed at cutting the government's annual shortfall to $213 billion in 1998. </div></div>

OH DEAR! (http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-08-07/news/1993219002_1_kerrey-gasoline-tax-clinton/2)

LWW
07-24-2011, 03:30 AM
BTW ... the balanced budget bill he voted for in the senate ... it was written by John Kasich and opposed in the house 152-50 by the democrooks.

It was approved unanimously in the senate.

Al Gore never cast a vote on it.

All senator Leahy spanked in this article was his monkey.

OH MY! (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h1997-241)

Qtec
07-24-2011, 03:44 AM
Again, the word that comes to mind is PATHETIC.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style='font-size: 17pt'>1993</span>: <span style='font-size: 26pt'>Tie-break vote on budget; also passed House by 1 vote</span>

The great budget battle finally ended in August, with the passage of Bill's economic plan. Before the vote, I had spoken with wavering Democrats. One Republican Congresswoman called me to explain that she agreed with the President's goal to tame the deficit but had been ordered by her leadership to vote no regardless of her convictions.<span style='font-size: 26pt'> In the end, not a single Republican voted for the balanced budget package. It squeaked through the House by one vote,</span> and Vice President Gore in his official role as President of the Senate <span style='font-size: 26pt'>had to vote to break a 50-50 vote tie.</span> Several courageous Democrats, who did what they believed to be in America's long-term interests, lost in the next election.

The plan wasn't everything the Administration had wanted, but it signaled the return of fiscal responsibility for the government and the beginning of an economic turnaround for the country. To pay for these reforms, the plan raised taxes on gasoline and on highest-income Americans. </div></div>

Next question,

WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

<u>DOROTHY.</u>....


...OZ?????????

Q

LWW
07-24-2011, 03:47 AM
A planet where people refuse what's spoon fed to them and seek truth on their own ... you should join us.

Soflasnapper
07-24-2011, 01:58 PM
LWW is confused, because he thinks a vote for the balanced budget AMENDMENT, which would take years to accomplish, is the only kind of thing that counts as that.

Instead of the tough budget votes that lead to cutting the deficit, without such an amendment. Clinton's original stated goal was to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. By the time Greenspan got through briefing him on the demands of the bond market, he tried to do even more of a cut.

LWW
07-24-2011, 04:40 PM
There you go inventing history as needed again.

Back in reality:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 11pt'>"balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities"</span>
-Billy Jeff Clinton 1995-</div></div>

OH DEAR! (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5656)

Soflasnapper
07-25-2011, 12:47 AM
Right.

Getting to the BALANCED budget, no, not a priority. Sharply decreasing the deficit, yes. First goal, stated in the campaign, cut it in half. Second goal, after Greenspan's talk, cut it more than that.

And that's what the Clinton tax and budget deal then was fashioned to accomplish. Without that discipline and emphasis, the early progress couldn't have been enough to eventually get it done.

Even after the extra emphasis on balancing the budget by the GOP House, it STILL wasn't supposed to have been balanced until 2002. (7 years after 1995, and Kasich opposed that deadline bitterly, thinking it arbitrary and too soon. He asked Gingrich where that was 'carved in stone,' and Gingrich's answer was that it was a mystical number. I kid you not.)

That it reached what could be called balance in '98 was both luck and bad terminology. Same for '99. The true balance (not using the unified budget accounting, but excluding the SS surplus) was equally unforeseen.

Qtec
07-25-2011, 01:05 AM
As usual, the topic has been ignored and turned around to reflect RW TPs.

My point was, and I think I gave it away in the title was;

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The House-passed bill, H.R.2560, which the Senate is now considering, claims to impose a balanced budget of future congresses <u>but it doesnít even contain the proposed constitutional amendment the supporters are seeking to adopt. </u>Nor did the bill pass with <u>two-thirds of the Republican-controlled House voting in favor. That threshold is what is required,</u> of course, to pass a constitutional amendment. The House vote was more than 50 votes short of that necessary number.

<u>The process by which this bill has been brought to the Floor of the Senate is an affront to the Constitution that weíre sworn to protect and defend</u></div></div>

The GOP proposed a constitutional amendment with no discussion and no hearing. For a party who claim to be defenders of the USCON they seem intent on changing it through the back door.

Q

LWW
07-25-2011, 01:56 AM
Then why did his baseline budget projection show deficits into infinity?

LWW
07-25-2011, 01:58 AM
Every time I think you can't get any dumber ... you prove me wrong.

ugotda7
07-25-2011, 10:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Every time I think you can't get any dumber ... you prove me wrong. </div></div>

He truly is amazing.....he should be brought into a lab and studied.

LWW
07-25-2011, 01:35 PM
He's an idiot that thinks a balanced budget amendment was actually passed by the house.