PDA

View Full Version : GOP Sen.-elect Paul: Attach spending cuts to every 'major' piece of legislation



Parker2112
12-30-2010, 12:43 AM
GOP Sen.-elect Paul: Attach spending cuts to every 'major' piece of legislation


By Jordan Fabian - 12/27/10 04:22 PM ET

GOP Sen.-elect Rand Paul said Monday that he wants to attach spending cuts to every major piece of legislation that comes before the Senate next year.

Paul (Ky.) — who won his race with strong support from the Tea Party movement — said he will "pressure" Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to take simple majority votes on spending cut amendments in the next Congress.

"I think that every piece of major legislation that goes forward from now on needs to have attached to it spending cuts," Paul said during a podcast with conservative blogger Ben Domenech (http://newledger.com/2010/12/rand-paul-on-his-plans-for-2011/). If Congress is serious about the nation's ballooning debt and deficits, Paul said, "We have to be serious and introduce spending cuts.

"That's one thing that I will do when I am there, is introduce it at every opportunity and we will have votes on it," he said.

Many political observers have taken a keen interest in Paul to see if his priorities next year will clash with those of Senate GOP leader Mitch
McConnell, who happens to be Kentucky's other senator.

Some have suggested that new independent-minded GOP senators such as Paul and Utah's Mike Lee could cause problems for McConnell, who largely held his conference in lockstep during the 111th Congress. McConnell originally endorsed Paul's primary opponent, Trey Grayson, but he eventually presented a united front with the son of libertarian Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) following his primary victory.

Unlike GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), who accused party members of "capitulation" (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/134719-graham-gop-to-blame-for-capitulationof-dramatic-proportions-in-lame-duck)for allowing Democrats to pass key legislation during the lame-duck session, Paul praised McConnell for leading the fight against the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill, which collapsed due to lack of support.
"I'm encouraged by the stand on the omnibus bill, and I think that showed a united Republican front, essentially," Paul said.


The newly elected Kentuckian said that he wants to focus on big-picture items such as government reform and the size of government when he gets to Congress, and is unconcerned with getting his name on major pieces of legislation.


"I want to be part of the reform movement that the Tea Party is on a national stage. I'm not there and interested in passing one bill that has my name on it," he said. "I'm there and interested because I think government is broken and really needs serious reform."



http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/135223-rand-paul-attach-spending-cuts-to-every-major-bill

Winehole23
12-30-2010, 06:23 AM
Sen. Paul is no outsider anymore, but he is a newcomer. We'll see.



naD7gyhAPUQ

boutons_deux
12-30-2010, 06:29 AM
Let's start with halving Congress's bloated benefits, staffing, expenses, salary, health plans.

What say you, Rand, Lee?

Or are your beloved cuts just for The Rest of Us?

Winehole23
12-30-2010, 06:38 AM
ChbqRzTngU0

Parker2112
12-31-2010, 02:05 AM
naD7gyhAPUQ

WH, are you in this vid?

Parker2112
12-31-2010, 02:24 AM
Jt856_nRxQk

TheSullyMonster
12-31-2010, 11:47 AM
Let's start with halving Congress's bloated benefits, staffing, expenses, salary, health plans.

What say you, Rand, Lee?

Or are your beloved cuts just for The Rest of Us?

That's stupid. Ostensbily, you want to enable anybody who can get elected to take the job, and do the job. Not just those independently wealthy and don't need to work.

But yeah, their benefits shouldn't be better than military benefits or any other federal employees.

boutons_deux
12-31-2010, 12:57 PM
"you want to enable anybody who can get elected to take the job"

money decides who gets elected, and often who even is a candidate, since elections are for sale.

Winehole23
12-31-2010, 02:43 PM
WH, are you in this vid?Not fit to touch their mikestands, I'm afraid.


(There can only be one devil chicken. It ain't me.)

Winehole23
12-31-2010, 02:57 PM
<<Tomahawk vid>>You're way too hung up on titles and headlines IMO, but that sounds pretty tight. I liked this from the comment thread:


Actually, see... Mike Patton really sucks on planet music, where he comes from. Occasionally they exile their shittiest musicians to Earth. Kind of like a intergalactic Siberia. It's just that talent and skill are relative, and quite frankly Patton kicks the shit out of just about every Earth vocalist. If you go to planet music, your love for Patton will be destroyed, but at least all the music there will be awesome. I like to call this phenomenon "Superman Syndrome".


blameitonhoffman (http://www.youtube.com/user/blameitonhoffman) 2 days ago

boutons_deux
12-31-2010, 03:06 PM
More Repug nasty shit about how they intend to fuck up govt

Proposed House GOP Rules Give Rep. Ryan ‘Stunning And Unprecedented’ Power To Shape Budget

laid out a series of changes it would like to make to the House rules, including replacing the current “pay-go” rules — which require all spending increases to be offset with spending cuts or tax increases — with a rule called “cut-go,” which requires that new spending programs — but not new tax cuts — be offset with spending cuts. The GOP has also proposed a new rule requiring that each piece of new legislation include a statement justifying the legislation’s constitutionality.

That’s not all, however. As National Journal reported today, “a little-noticed detail in the new rules proposed by House GOP leaders would greatly increase the power of Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the incoming chairman of the House Budget Committee.” Indeed, under the proposed rules, if the House and Senate do not agree on a budget resolution (a distinct possibility with a divided Congress), Ryan will be able to unilaterally set spending levels that are binding on the House, and any attempt to lessen the impact of these cuts can be ruled out of order.

This rule change has immediate, far-reaching implications. It means that by voting to adopt the proposed new rules on January 5, a vote on which party discipline will be strictly enforced, the House could effectively be adopting a budget resolution and limits for appropriations bills that it has never even seen, much less debated and had an opportunity to amend. (There is no requirement for Representative Ryan to make his proposed spending and revenue limits available to Members or the public before the vote on the new rules.)…Once Rep. Ryan places in the Congressional Record discretionary funding limits set at the [2008] level, they will become binding on the House, and any attempt to provide funding levels that allow for less severe cuts will be out of order.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/30/ryan-rules/

===========

They'll never kill or even shrink govt (they've failed for 35 years), but they will do their "best" to fuck up and castrate govt, while tranferring taxpayer wealth to corps/capitalists, as they've been doing for 35 years.

Parker2112
12-31-2010, 07:41 PM
You're way too hung up on titles and headlines IMO, but that sounds pretty tight. I liked this from the comment thread:

"make a meal of your asssss-hole, gnaw on your sack" didn't cut to the chase? I thought it summed up politics in general pretty well :lol

that first album is AWESOME. I actually like all three. Third one is not anywhere close to the first two though. Glad you dug it.:toast

Had you heard them before?

TheSullyMonster
12-31-2010, 08:32 PM
"you want to enable anybody who can get elected to take the job"

money decides who gets elected, and often who even is a candidate, since elections are for sale.

I'm speaking ideally.

The percentage of money spent on those things vs the federal budget is beyond inconsequential, anyways.:whine

boutons_deux
12-31-2010, 09:36 PM
yep, there's no higher ROI than corps and capitalists buying elections and Congresscritters, all of which is cheap, maybe a few $100Ms max, compared to the return of $100Bs.

Winehole23
01-01-2011, 06:39 AM
"make a meal of your asssss-hole, gnaw on your sack" didn't cut to the chase? I thought it summed up politics in general pretty wellMe, not so much. Vive la difference.


that first album is AWESOME. I actually like all three. Third one is not anywhere close to the first two though. Glad you dug it.:toast

Had you heard them before?No, thx for posting it. I like stuff I've never heard before. I'm slightly familiar with Mr. Bungle and Faith no More, and aren't there members of Primus and Jesus Lizard involved, or something like that?

(On the side: my buddy says Mike Patton will take a piss in your beer and watch you drink it in front of him.

And J Bone's a fan. A pretty big one.)