House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

[Parkbandit]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Democrats unveiled a $410 billion spending bill on Monday to keep the government running through the end of the fiscal year, setting up the second political struggle over federal funds in less than a month with Republicans.

The measure includes thousands of earmarks, the pet projects favored by lawmakers but often criticized by the public in opinion polls. There was no official total of the bill's earmarks, which accounted for at least $3.8 billion.

The legislation, which includes an increase of roughly 8 percent over spending in the last fiscal year, is expected to clear the House later in the week.

Democrats defended the spending increases, saying they were needed to make up for cuts enacted in recent years or proposed a year ago by then-President George W. Bush in health, education, energy and other programs.

Republicans countered that the spending in the bill far outpaced inflation, and amounted to much higher increases when combined with spending in the stimulus legislation that President Barack Obama signed last week. In a letter to top Democratic leaders, the GOP leadership called for a spending freeze, a step they said would point toward a "new standard of fiscal discipline."

Either way, the bill advanced less than one week after Obama signed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill that all Republicans in Congress opposed except for three moderate GOP senators.

Apart from spending, the legislation provides Democrats in Congress and Obama an opportunity to reverse Bush-era policy on selected issues.

It loosens restrictions on travel to Cuba, as well as the sale of food and medicine to the communist island-nation.

In another change, the legislation bans Mexican-licensed trucks from operating outside commercial zones along the border with the United States. The Teamsters Union, which supported Obama's election last year, hailed the move.

The Bush administration backed a pilot program to permit up to 500 trucks from 100 Mexican motor carriers access to U.S. roads.

The legislation covers programs for numerous Cabinet-level and other agencies, and takes the place of regular annual spending bills that did not pass last year as a result of a deadlock between the Bush administration and the Democratic-controlled Congress.

Congressional expenses are included. The bill provides $500,000 for what is described as a Senate "pilot program" that will defray the cost of mass mail postcards to households notifying them of a nearby town meeting to be attended by any senator.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/House-Democrats-propose-410B-apf-14450221.html


Are you FUCKING KIDDING ME!? Seriously? W-T-F!?

This is like me saying "Gee, I don't have enough to money to make my household budget.. but what the hell, I'm going to not only spend all I have.. but I'm going to go out and borrow more to spend. It'll be ok since I had to make cuts last year"

Holy fuck.

[Warriorbird]

The 'fiscal responsibility' idea from Republicans is pretty funny given their recent record.

I think this might be political gamesmanship on some level, however, as Obama's also proposing cuts.

[Stanley Burrell]

Democrats are retarded:

They should have started with a 10 trillion dollar bill and then went straight to the barter market from there. The dollar isn't worth that much anyway: I'd even let the House repubs have the benefit of the doubt to read over 1,400 pages before passing a truncated version.

[Apotheosis]

This is like me saying "Gee, I don't have enough to money to make my household budget.. but what the hell, I'm going to not only spend all I have.. but I'm going to go out and borrow more to spend. It'll be ok since I had to make cuts last year"



Yep.. lets see... I earn 30k.. of that 30k, 5k is taxed, bringing it to 25k pool.
now.. over a one year period, I'm gonna drop 50k on a car, 300k on a house, 8k on clothing, and my bills are around 10k...

hmm.. am I going to be debt free anytime soon?

[TheWitch]

Not that it will do much good, but.....

Write/email/call your senators and representatives.
I did. I felt better.

I also feel like I can't really complain about this bullshit outloud if I'm not willing to do that. So here, let me just say - having written to Schumer - this is bullshit. Of the highest order.

Maybe its staged bullshit, so the Obama can put the smackdown on them hereby giving credence to his claims of fiscal responsibility and government accountability? One can hope.

[Parkbandit]

The 'fiscal responsibility' idea from Republicans is pretty funny given their recent record.

I think this might be political gamesmanship on some level, however, as Obama's also proposing cuts.

Seriously... how often will that be your only comeback to out of control spending? "The Republicans were just as bad". Do you think that schtick will become old by next year.. or will it take a full 4-8 years for you to stop using it ALL the time?

It's not an article written by a Republican that I know of.. since it's off the AP. Why not start fresh for a change Warriorbird.. and look at the spending bill for what it is.. a pile of steaming shit.

[Back]

Where exactly is the pork?

[Warriorbird]

So... life comes down to choices, Parkbandit. As I've said before... wasteful spending is going to occur in our current system. There is no secret Libertarian alternative.

Do I immediately go for the wasteful spending that the Republicans do that doesn't benefit the actual populace (unless you make upwards of 250k per year?) Or do I go for the wasteful spending that Democrats do that actually goes to more Americans?

My preference would be for America to spend within its means... but that's not going to happen either.

I mean, heck, when it comes down to it... do I hold up the amount the Republicans added to the national debt and compare Obama to it on a year by year basis?

I make this argument because it works. I know you want to forget who your party is but things don't change.

[Parkbandit]

So... life comes down to choices, Parkbandit. As I've said before... wasteful spending is going to occur in our current system. There is no secret Libertarian alternative.

Do I immediately go for the wasteful spending that the Republicans do that doesn't benefit the actual populace (unless you make upwards of 250k per year?) Or do I go for the wasteful spending that Democrats do that actually goes to more Americans?

My preference would be for America to spend within its means... but that's not going to happen either.

I mean, heck, when it comes down to it... do I hold up the amount the Republicans added to the national debt and compare Obama to it on a year by year basis?

I make this argument because it works. I know you want to forget who your party is but things don't change.

Wow.. you want to compare what Obama spends in his first 30 days to what Bush did in his first 30 days? No wait.. that won't work for your argument.

Once again.. let's look at this spending (asking for an 8% increase in this economy is a slap in the face to every American imo. So much for 'sacrificing' like Obama said we have to do...) for what it is and stop settling for DC politics as usual and using lame ass excuses like "OMG BUT THE REPUBLICANS DID IT!"

And I'd still rather be a Republican than a Democrat any day of the week. My values don't change depending on who is in the power seat.

[Apotheosis]

yeah.. wow..thanks government for more spending..

only 2 months into a new presidential election.. wow.. how much more are they going to spend by the end of the year?

[Warriorbird]

Not 30 days, PB. 8 years.

Republican values like... Enron, Gitmo, Prop 8, and Ted Haggard?

[Parkbandit]

Not 30 days, PB. 8 years.

Republican values like... Enron, Gitmo, Prop 8, and Ted Haggard?

I didn't realize you could see into the future on what Obama is going to spend in the first year. My apologies.

Democratic values like... Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac, unfettered welfare, ACORN and Rev. Wright?

[Warriorbird]

Don't you just love politics?

[Stanley Burrell]

yeah.. wow..thanks government for more spending..

only 2 months into a new presidential election.. wow.. how much more are they going to spend by the end of the year?

Hopefully a lot more just to piss off the GOP.

[Parkbandit]

Don't you just love politics?


Not really.

Like right now, I'm listening to Bobby Jindal.. and everything the guy is saying makes perfect sense to me... and can't understand why you wouldn't.

[Ignot]

I really have to laugh at people who bitch at something like this because they act like they can run the country better then the current President. News flash, you are not smarter then Congress, stop pretending you are. I will admit, I don't know how to fix the economy, I'm not that smart so I will cast my vote and hope the people who are in place to fix this situation get it done. But if anyone here thinks they are smart enough to fix the economy and run a nation then by all means post your solution.

[Apotheosis]

Hopefully a lot more just to piss off the GOP.

and if you didn't post intelligently in other topics, I would clearly tell you to STFU in a variety of different ways..

however.. yeah really.. but problem being the taxpayers are going to be responsible for the debt.. which kinda sucks in the long run..

clearly, i pay little taxes due to my income situation, however, i noticed that federal taxes are going up in consumables, and that the gasoline tax might go up.. so.. thing is that what doesn't come outta FICA comes out other ways..

[Warriorbird]

Bobby Jindal's a perfectly nice and well-meaning guy until you get to his religious beliefs, abortion beliefs, human rights beliefs, gay rights beliefs, and actual amount of time he's spent in the state he's supposed to govern.

I can't help but feel he's a sort of GOP John Edwards figure. He's appealing but he has some sleeper issues that'll devour him.

[Parkbandit]

Bobby Jindal's a perfectly nice and well-meaning guy until you get to his religious beliefs, abortion beliefs, human rights beliefs, gay rights beliefs, and actual amount of time he's spent in the state he's supposed to govern.

I can't help but feel he's a sort of GOP John Edwards figure. He's appealing but he has some sleeper issues that'll devour him.


Yet, you had no issue supporting Obama?

Awesome double standard.

[Warriorbird]

I dunno. Most of the Rove-manufactured Obama 'issues' didn't bother me as much as they clearly bothered Republicans. So he goes to one of those Bible-thumping preachers? That's fine if he doesn't wear it as a badge on his shoulder that it's effecting policy decisions (like Jindal or pretty much every Republican candidate recently other than Giuliani). Obama hadn't managed to piss off his own state party elite (like Edwards) and I'd rather a whole lot of Republican fake controversy (flag pins, terrorist fist bumping, fake birth certificates!) that can actually fire up a party than one Edwards house monstrosity or extra-marital affair.

The things with Jindal are things like him not supporting abortion even if the mother has been raped or it is a case of incest... him fucking up the state's budget while he talks big about Obama's plans... and the surprising light on corruption prosecution 'anti corruption' campaign.

Frankly... a lot of those Republican 'issues' made Republicans look bad.

[Parkbandit]

I dunno. Most of the Rove-manufactured Obama 'issues' didn't bother me as much as they clearly bothered Republicans. So he goes to one of those Bible-thumping preachers? That's fine if he doesn't wear it as a badge on his shoulder that it's effecting policy decisions (like Jindal or pretty much every Republican candidate recently other than Giuliani). Obama hadn't managed to piss off his own state party elite (like Edwards) and I'd rather a whole lot of Republican fake controversy (flag pins, terrorist fist bumping, fake birth certificates!) that can actually fire up a party than one Edwards house monstrosity or extra-marital affair.

The things with Jindal are things like him not supporting abortion even if the mother has been raped or it is a case of incest... him fucking up the state's budget while he talks big about Obama's plans... and the surprising light on corruption prosecution 'anti corruption' campaign.

Frankly... a lot of those Republican 'issues' made Republicans look bad.

Oh yes, yes.. ROVE MUST HAVE STARTED IT!! You do realize that Rove was working for Bush.. and Bush wasn't really trying for a 3rd term.. right?

But hey.. those are just vicious rumors.. unlike stuff like:


Bobby Jindal's a perfectly nice and well-meaning guy until you get to his religious beliefs, abortion beliefs, human rights beliefs, gay rights beliefs, and actual amount of time he's spent in the state he's supposed to govern.

Those are real issues and not manufactured or embelished for political reasons at all.

[Warriorbird]

Steve Schmidt worked for Rove and was one of his proteges. He functioned as an effective proxy for Rove in the McCain campaign (sort of like that guy Putin's got in office in Russia). I'm sorry you're not more up on the inner workings of your party. Maybe if McCain had been more of his own man they wouldn't have lost so badly.

It's all a matter of what you care about. I think the idea of denying abortions to women who are victims of rape and incest is ludicrous. Jindal doesn't. All of Louisiana's state departments are getting ravaged... but you don't care about that because you're not in Louisiana. He's stepped in a number of political wildfires (legislative pay issue, issues with the Jenkins campaign) that he wouldn't have if he had been in the state more, thus rendering that 'political' issue relevant.

Republicans seem to be deeply bothered by the idea of the Obama's fistbumping and the fact that he had a wacky preacher. Horrors. Jindal's attempting to 'counter' Obama's plan and he's got state budgetary issues.

[Parkbandit]

Steve Schmidt worked for Rove and was one of his proteges. He functioned as an effective proxy for Rove in the McCain campaign (sort of like that guy Putin's got in office in Russia). I'm sorry you're not more up on the inner workings of your party. Maybe if McCain had been more of his own man they wouldn't have lost so badly.

Ah.. the ol' 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon again.. "Well, he knows a guy who knew this guy who once shook hands with Rove.. it was like Rove controlled the entire thing!" I'm sorry.. I've spoken to Rove and he's confided in me that you are a fucking idiot... but thanks for thinking he controls everything. When it rains tomorrow, know Rove masterminded it.



It's all a matter of what you care about. I think the idea of denying abortions to women who are victims of rape and incest is ludicrous. Jindal doesn't. All of Louisiana's state departments are getting ravaged... but you don't care about that because you're not in Louisiana. He's stepped in a number of political wildfires (legislative pay issue, issues with the Jenkins campaign) that he wouldn't have if he had been in the state more, thus rendering that 'political' issue relevant.

You are right.. I don't care too much about Louisiana's state politics. I will say that the state is far better off with him in office than the dumb bitch you had before.



Republicans seem to be deeply bothered by the idea of the Obama's fistbumping and the fact that he had a wacky preacher. Horrors. Jindal's attempting to 'counter' Obama's plan and he's got state budgetary issues.

You brought up Ted Haggard for some reason.. but I don't remember him being so involved in any Republican's life like Wright was.. but whatever... it obviously deeply bothers you that he endorsed Bush. Did he baptise Bush's kids or reside over his wedding? Maybe Haggard was Bush's spiritual advisor, preaching black hate and white liberal theology? I must have missed that explosive news.

And name one state that currently doesn't have state budgetary issues? Even Alaska, who has banked over a billion dollars, has issues.

[Warriorbird]

No six degrees. He trained somebody. That somebody 'worked for McCain's campaign' because he couldn't be associated with it for image reasons.

Once again...

...Louisiana's going to have a really difficult time with their state agencies with the current state it is in. As little as I'm thrilled with Blanco's legacy... that falls on Jindal's shoulders and he's off trying to critique Obama and reject money that could keep his state going.

My point about religion was that Obama isn't using it to justify policy decisions... like, as I said, pretty much every Republican who wasn't Giuliani in recent times.

[Daniel]

Anyone else enjoying PB's ideology going down in flames?

Raise your hand.