The only reason that I bother to ask the question is because judging by the type of behavior and the various lackluster actions taken by our esteemed Speaker of the House, I thought that just maybe I might have dreamt the whole thing up. I gotta be honest with you here, with each passing day I loose just a bit more confidence in those who were supposed to be, or at least as described to me, individuals who would form a rather stellar "leadership" team over there in the House. Imagine my surprise when I heard that, despite renewed pressure from Tea Party conservatives, House Speaker John Boehner had made the comment on Thursday that Republicans "can't impose our will" on the White House and Senate Democrats regarding legislation to cut tens of billions of dollars in federal spending. Why the HELL not? Come on John, for crying out loud, I'm pullin my hair out here! Grow a pair will ya? Geez. Why must it always be like pulling teeth to get our Republican leadership to remain stiff whenever confronted with even the slightest level of Democrat opposition? It seems like all the Democrats need to do is to say boo, and Republicans go scurrying off to the nearest corner. And I've had enough of that kinda crap!
I'm very quickly coming to the conclusion that Boehner may very well prove to be nothing more than a major disappointment. While he has repeatedly denied Democrat accusations of having already agreed to jettison nearly half of the $61 billion in cuts passed by the House only a month ago, I'm just not sensing that he's being entirely honest with us. Unfortunately, it is more often the case, that the more enthusiastic the denials, the more accurate are the accusations being made. Because as was the case with that other apparent eunuch in the House Republican hierarchy, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., earlier in the week, Boehner also refuses to say that the demand to reduce spending by the full $61 billion was non-negotiable. "Our goal is to cut spending, not shut down the government," he said. Look, if shutting down the government is what's needed here in order to get the requisite amount of attention focused on this ongoing budgetary issue, then in the words of C-3PO, "Shut it down, shut it all down!" And then work to properly communicate to the American people exactly whose at fault and why we're in this mess in the first place. It's Barry's and "Dingy" Harry's fault! They want a shutdown, so let's give it to them!
The government is now running on the second of two short-term spending bills, and at the insistence of Republicans, a total of $10 billion has so far been cut. Big Whoop, a whole 10 billion dollars. Let's get real, in the big scheme of things that is absolutely nothing, a mere drop in a vast bucket that has a rather large sized hole in the bottom. It's a joke! So we now find ourselves in the position where without action by Congress, the money will run out on April 9. Lawmakers are seeking some kind of a "compromise" that will extend things to the September 30 which is the end of the current fiscal year. I think we are all very much aware, that the Democrats don't want a compromise, at least one that calls upon them to modify, in any constructive way, their out of control spending habits. What they want is for Boehner and the Republicans to cave on this whole budget cutting idea, and it looks like that's exactly what might happen. Ya know, I'm not sure what's worse, gutless Republicans or corrupt Democrats, because far too often the net result is pretty much the same. The American people end up getting screwed!
So it was then that some senior House and Senate aides, supposed "experts" in the intricacies of spending legislation, met to explore the chances of the afore mentioned “compromise” actually coming to fruition. Of course you and I both know what the definition of an expert is, it's a drip under pressure. And yet, officials in both parties said the Democrats still have not managed to provide Republicans with anything that would even remotely resemble a detailed list of their proposed cuts, a very clear indication that negotiations, at least at this point in time, are not very far along. Democratic officials added that some of their proposed reductions would cut $3 billion or so from the Pentagon budget. Now that's a brilliant idea that makes terrific sense. At a time when Barry has us spending roughly half a billion dollars per month on his new "Oversea Contingency Operation" in Libya, the imbecilic Democrats want to slash $3 Billion from defense. DUH! Is it me? Am I missing something? The Democrats want to cut at the same time that the House-passed legislation that calls for an increase in defense spending, reserving spending cuts for domestic programs. What we have here is a failure to communicate.
While Boehner exhibited evidence of possible going squishy in the face of Democrats and they’re blatantly obstinate, Tea Party activists demonstrated within shouting distance of the Capitol and a pair of potential GOP presidential contenders injected themselves into the first real test for the GOP majority elected last fall. Concerns may be bubbling just below the surface that if Boehner proves that he's not up to the challenge, we could, in about a year and a half, once again be faced with a rejuvenated Speaker Pelosi, the sequel! The few hundred protesters bore signs demanding that the Republican majority they helped vote into office remain true to campaign pledges. "Remember your promises — WE DO," read one. "Extreme spending requires extreme cuts," was another. They drew encouragement from several Republican lawmakers. "Stay courageous and I know you will. Don't back down and I know you won't," Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, a potential presidential contender, exhorted on a cold, drizzly day. "We will stand for cutting the size of government we won't change our principle," she said. Boehner, however, has made comments of late that have been marked with hints of there being a certain amount of flexibility just two days after Senate Majority Leader "Dingy" Harry offered some hints of his own.
It was on this past Tuesday that "Dingy" said that "his side" may be willing to entertain certain limitations on some government regulators as well as other non-spending items that the House is seeking, but in return Democrats would then expect Republicans to scale back on some of their demands for spending cuts. Scale back? Just how much farther can things be scaled back before they become absolutely meaningless? Lets be honest here, with the minuscule amount of money that we are currently talking about being cut, how could things be "scaled back" any further. "Dingy's" whole argument reveals the total lack of seriousness of those on "his side" regarding the making of cuts that are of the size that are now urgently required. "Dingy" has been purposely vague in identifying any specifics regarding any proposed limitations, but other officials have said curbs on the Environmental Protection Agency and other government regulators would be likely candidates. Another is a proposed ban on the use of government funds to pay for abortions for poor women living in the District of Columbia.
The showdown over spending has dominated Congress in recent days, but it is sure to be only the first in a series of collisions expected in the coming months as the Republicans push to rein in the size and scope of government. Now while they House Republicans are expected many to unveil a budget for the next fiscal year next week that includes deep spending cuts in domestic programs as well as steps to remake Medicare and Medicaid, the questions remains. If once proposals are made, how forceful will the Republicans be in defending them? Will the Republicans be willing to rigorously defend their attempt to restore some level of fiscal sanity, or will they instead chose to wilt in the face of the onslaught that will most definitely head their way from the Democrats and their many minions in the state controlled media. Officials have said that in private conversations, Republicans have set an informal target of reducing budget deficits to $1 trillion by next year, down from about $1.5 trillion for the current year. But will they possess the necessary courage to see things through to the end?
With FY-2012 budget details still unseen, Democrats are already eager to attack it as being too harsh, or to use typical Democrat lingo, too extreme. But conservatives in the Republican Study Conference are expected to outline an alternative with even tighter deficit cuts. The Treasury also has put lawmakers on notice that an increase in the government's borrowing authority will be needed later this spring. Some conservatives have already announced they will oppose any such measure, while others have laid down conditions that appear unlikely to be met. Boehner and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky have said the GOP will demand changes to rein in future spending before the increase can pass. One priority, unveiled in the Senate with the support of all 47 Republicans, is a constitutional amendment to require a balanced federal budget except in cases of war or national security emergency. We'll see if the Republicans will remain united or if the will be the first one to blink.
As you can probably figure out, I'm more than just a little pissed off at our current batch of supposed Republican "leaders" in the House. This is not what I was lead to believe would happen if we the voters were to take a chance on these guys and hand control back over to them. I feel somewhat betrayed. But all hope is not yet lost because it has been suggested that since the Republicans find themselves stuck in a bit of a budget quagmire with Senate Democrats and Barry "Almighty," that the House Republicans run the government without them. Supposedly, Republicans are pushing for a House vote that would declare their $61 billion in budget cuts the law of the land if the Senate and Barry choose not to act on the spending measure before April 9. That's the day the government would shut down if Congress doesn't pass a budget for the next six months, or another, shorter interim. The House passed its version in February, but the Democratic-led Senate rejected it. Republicans say the vote Friday is intended to hold Democrats accountable if there's a shutdown. They acknowledge, however, that Friday's bill would have no practical effect unless the Senate passed it, too.
So we continue to limp along regarding a situation that is in urgent need of being addressed. While we selling off the future of our kids, our politicians are busy playing games. If the Republicans can’t manage to bring themselves to rustle up the necessary courage to stand with the American people and against the Democrats then a solution to our worsening fiscal situation is not going to be forthcoming any time soon. The time has come for our supposed “conservative” leaders to step up, apply a little adult supervision and bring about some level of sanity to this continuing spending madness. Are they up to the job, or will they prove to be all show and no go, too squeamish to do what they know needs to be done?
No comments:
Post a Comment