House, Senate pass one-week spending bill to buy time for deal

By Pete Kasperowicz and Josiah Ryan - 04/09/11 12:39 AM ET

The House approved a one-week spending bill at about 12:39 a.m. Saturday morning to avoid a government shutdown.
The bill cuts $2 billion from discretionary spending and gives Congress more time to finalize a fiscal 2011 spending deal that Republicans and Democrats agreed to late Friday evening.
The short-term stopgap bill was approved by a 348-70 vote in which just 28 Republicans and 42 Democrats opposed passage. The Senate had approved the same language by unanimous consent less than 90 minutes earlier.
With approval from both chambers, the bill headed to the White House, where President Obama was expected to sign it promptly to keep the government funded through April 15.
Party leaders on both sides seemed pleased with the agreement. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said the process had been "grueling," but said members had "not worked to this late hour for the drama, but because it's been hard."
"There have been many tough choices but tough choices are what this job is all about," Reid said. "This is historic what we have done … what we have done has been difficult but important for this country."
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) hailed the agreement as one that would allow "the largest non-defense spending cut in the history of the nation."
Appropriations ranking member Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) also supported the decision to pass what he said was essentially a "clean" continuing resolution.
"It is basically a clean CR, in the sense of, there's no ideologically driven language," Dicks said. "I think this is acceptable."
Possible GOP presidential candidate and Tea Party darling Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) was among the dissenters.

In a statement released shortly after the vote, Bachmann said she was protesting the overall agreement on the long-term funding measure, which she called a "disappointment for me and millions of Americans" who, she said, "expected" $61 billion in cuts from current spending levels.

House and Senate negotiators reached an eleventh-hour agreement to cut $39 billion in spending from current levels that would allow for an up-or-down vote on controversial policy riders in the Senate. Funding for Planned Parenthood and the president's healthcare law were among the policy riders approved in a previous House version of the spending bill that the Senate will vote on next week.

However, Bachmann said that deal was unsatisfactory.

“We’ve been asked to settle for $39 billion in cuts, even as we continue to fund Planned Parenthood and the implementation of ObamaCare. Sadly, we’re missing the mandate given us by voters last November, and for that reason I voted against the Continuing Resolution," Bachmann said in her statement.
Under the full fiscal 2011 deal reached, $39.5 billion would be cut from 2010 levels, about two-thirds of the $61 billion cut passed by the House earlier this year. The one-week spending bill approved early Saturday cuts the first $2 billion of the $39.5 billion, and the rest will be cut in the longer-term bill to be taken up next week.
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, most of the $2 billion in cuts in the one-week bill come from a $1.5 billion reduction in the Federal Railroad Administration's High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail program. Another $220 million was cut from the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Fund.
A summary of the cuts is provided here.
For most of the day, the two parties were split on funding for Title X, the federal women's health program. While Republicans were looking to give Title X funds to states to distribute as they see fit, Democrats were arguing that this would undermine women's health.
Democrats also see the Republican demand as a way of attacking Planned Parenthood, which receives a significant portion of Title X money and provides abortion services, even though the group is prohibited by law from using federal funds for those services.
Late Friday night, Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said he believed House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) was willing to accept some form of compromise on this issue.
Molly K. Hooper contributed. Updated at 1:29 a.m.

Freshman Republican expects backlash over support for budget deal

By Shane D'Aprile - 04/09/11 08:15 AM ET

Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.) says the budget deal reached late Friday between congressional leaders and the White House is less than ideal, but she's urging her fellow freshmen to "hold your nose and vote for it."

The bipartisan deal averted a government shutdown, but falls short of the House Republican campaign pledge to cut $100 billion in fiscal 2011 spending. It cuts $39 billion in actual spending, which is $22 billion less than the bill the House passed in February.

The House passed a short-term one-week measure early Saturday to fund the government through April 15, clearing the way for a later vote on the long-term deal.

Ellmers said she would support the long-term compromise and is encouraging her fellow House freshmen to do the same.   

"I wish it were more, but I told my freshmen class in one of our meeetings, 'Hold your nose and vote for it,'" Ellmers said. "And yeah, there's going to be some backlash back home, but I'm ready for it."

Ellmers, who defeated Democrat Bob Etheridge last November, said the real battle will be over Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wis.) budget plan and she'd rather move on and focus on cutting "trillions rather than billions."
"Time is marching on without us," she said. "And now that I've seen the Ryan budget laid out, that's where the real money is ... My folks back home said $100 billion [in cuts] wasn't enough anyhow."
A number of other freshman Republicans took issue with the deal, however. Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) said he would not support the long-term compromise, calling the $39 billion number too low.
At least a dozen other freshman members voted against the short-term CR early Saturday, with several indicating they're also likely to oppose the long-term deal.

Comments

The RINOS left standing now will NOT be after 2012. Everyone that votes for the CR & for this budget will be ejected. What part of Nov did they not get. BY victoria_29 on 04/09/2011 at 09:53

GOD HELP US … Obama and the Democrats are on a mission to bankrupt our once great nation!BY REALITY CHECK on 04/09/2011 at 11:18

Next up, Paul Ryan and his voodoo budget. Ryan's budget cuts taxes on the rich, while cutting spending on popular programs that benefit the middle and lower classes. Which is the REVERSE-ROBBIN HOOD agenda of the Tea Party. We will see how it plays with mainstream America. At best, the Ryan budget breaks even over the next 10 years: it claims $1.4 trillion in phantom deficit reduction for repealing healthcare reform, which the CBO has said will increase deficits by $200 billion. Can Ryan add 2+2? 

BY carl1 on 04/09/2011 at 11:21

The GOP should KEEP THEIR PLEDGE to Americans and vote down this fiscally reprehensible budget compromise agreement. We cannot afford, and it is totally unethical, to compromise the future of our grandchildren and nation. BY CONCERNED CITIZEN on 04/09/2011 at 11:24

What reality check doesn't mention is how America is spending more than the top how many? 5? or 15? countries combined on a military every year.

Who really needs 12 aircraft carrier groups in the name of 'common defense' as stated in the constitution? What should America's foreign policy be for the next 20-40 years. no one is talking about THAT.. 

BY Lloyd C on 04/09/2011 at 11:25

Democrats will have to do battle with the Tea Party every day until 2012. Let's get our voters registered, and stand strong for all Americans.BY carl1 on 04/09/2011 at 11:27

Republican Tea Party will keep doing what they do best: ROBBIN' THE HOOD. Where you live. 

BY carl1 on 04/09/2011 at 11:41

If the Republicans cave in on the 2012 Budget they can be sure to face retaliation at the polls in the next election. We The People are Disgusted with Politics as usual in Washington and the Carreer Crook Politicians whipsawing everyone around the feather their own special interest. I personally will keep voting people out until we finally get someone who will have the intestinal fortitude and the political will do what is right for America.BY ron on 04/09/2011 at 12:00

Carl,
We are currently at 80% debt to GDP. In a year there will be no more money for Robin to steal, then what?BY Mateo on 04/09/2011 at 12:03

I agree with Lloyd C. We need to determine how to make very large cuts in defense spending. If we are going to entertain budget cuts on the scale of the cuts proposed by Paul Ryan, we need to see defense budget cuts of at least three trillion dollars over the next ten years.BY Ted Atkinson on 04/09/2011 at 12:08

Boehner caved and got rolled — again, by the most radical, inexperienced president in history. The so-called "cuts" are laughable.

This is why I do not contribute to the GOP anymore.

DUMP BOEHNER NOW!! 

BY dump boehner now on 04/09/2011 at 12:19

Years ago I served on a contract negotiating committee for the union I belonged to at the time.. Both sides go in with long lists of demands and those get whittled down one by one until an agreement is reached on what each side will give. Even though you work hard to get the best deal possible, there will always be the rumblings of "they sold us down the river". Boehner probably struck the best deal he could short of shutting down the government. A government shutdown, just like a strike, rarely yields much more in benefits and can even backfire resulting in a loss. BY tar ball on 04/09/2011 at 12:22

but you cannot cut defense spending without formulating a new foreign policy for at least the next 20-25 years.

Tho, if someone could explain why American needs 12 aircraft carrier groups for a 'common defense' of the network, that would be good too 

BY Lloyd c on 04/09/2011 at 12:26

You're wrong Tarball. This joke of a deal shows that the Republicans will quickly fold on Ryan's budget like a cheap tent — and furthermore Boehner will start crying again rather then truly fight to repeal Obamacare. 

BY shut it down on 04/09/2011 at 12:28

boehner is a sellout
he must go.he should resign 

BY Philabias on 04/09/2011 at 12:59

All the Republicans have to do is vote NO on raising the debt ceiling and all the desired cuts . . . and more . . . will be made. There will be no other choice.BY pnutbutter on 04/09/2011 at 13:22

Always remember…Marines run toward their bullets…BY Grandma on 04/09/2011 at 13:33

To you tea partiers and loudest protesters on the left: no, I think you miss something. The vast majority of Americans on the left and in the middle, understand that the only way democracy works is compromise. It is the main point to the way our Constitution organized the government. Compromise. All of us will not be happy all the time, and some of the time, none of us will be entirely happy. It is just as likely that if the Tea Party continues to sound so shrill and if "no compromise" and "cut it or shut it" remains their mantra, they may find THEMSELVES out a seat in Congress. Because an imperfect government is better than one which is simply shut down by a party which refuses to compromise. The budget will be cut. It will simply be cut more slowly than some would like. That's life. Britain has not done very well with its extreme austerity measures anyway. They have NOT increased employment levels which is the most important thing right now. BY Ruby on 04/09/2011 at 13:41

Victoria_29, grow up, we are not RINO's, you guys are. Those of us moderate or pragmatic Republicans are tired of your ilk (who by the way were only converts to the party in the past 20 to 30 years) telling us how to run the party. You are extreme in nature, and very vocal, but guess what…you are in the minority. We need compromise for this country to work. Those of you who will not compromise have probably been through a string of marriages and divorce…grow up!BY Kevin on 04/09/2011 at 14:09

And there are those who think money grows on trees. There are none in my neighborhood.BY Jerry on 04/09/2011 at 15:01

Kevin: Tell it like it is..Kudos…BY Jerry on 04/09/2011 at 15:04

TED ADKINSON & LLOYD C, most all agree that War Spending needs to be cut … SO WHY DID OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP START A 3RD WAR IN LIBYA ?????????????????????????? BY PROGRESSIVE on 04/09/2011 at 15:14

Progressive: Uh. they fought, and then, you know, the rest of nato actually did something

Please do not talk in all caps. Its highly annoying

I'm the only one raising the question of what shoudl US foreign policy be for the next 20 years?.

All it says in the constitution is for America to provide a common defense of the nation.

SO .. can any conservative explain to me why america needs 12 aircraft carrier groups to do that?

amongst the other thingsBY Lloyd C on 04/09/2011 at 15:29

progressive really is missing a few facts

America really doesn't care if a couple of awacs planes and a few EW aircraft take part.. That is more along the lines of 'on the job training'.

France, italy. canada, spain, bahrain is doing most of the work now :)BY Lloyd C on 04/09/2011 at 15:30

This woman is a idiot. If it stinks you flush it down Obama's throat. I guess it must be her time of month and she could not think with her brain.They just pushed this down the road for another day,it makes no sense. We need to accept the fact that we will suffer some pain if we stop it now,if we wait the pain only grows and become worse.BY Lawrence Brown on 04/09/2011 at 17:13

HEY REPUBLICANS you got PUNKED..

Once it appears in 2010 and now again in 2011. All John "THE TOWN CRYER" did was show the democrats he is mallable.

We are counting on the Freshmen to vote this DOWN. WE THE PEOPLE are counting on the Freshmen to SUPPORT AND DEFEND. 

BY plainolamerican on 04/09/2011 at 17:38

Mateo,

the tax revenue to gdp ratio is currently the lowest in 60 yrs. in relation to the economy size, taxes are really low..we need compromise of both spending clips and increased revBY Pragmatist on 04/09/2011 at 18:00

Carl1…If this Federal gov't doesn't get its fiscal house in order…meaning reduction of expenditures to reduce the magnifying fiscal deficit,,,,,,th is country will become an economic 'basket case'. Instead of tauting the same old liberal diatribes, please brush up on ECON 101. It doesn't take a mathematical or financial wizard to know that with the unsustainable growth of the USA's debt…this country will not be able to financially survive in the same economic life as we have all experienced during our life time. Please do some very serious studying of economics and you will change your ideas quickly! Until the USA citizen takes it upon themselves to do their own due diligence of economics…this country will continue to on its downward economic path. And, I don't think ANY American is going to like what is coming in the near future. There will be riots, looting and arson and perhaps Martial Law will have to instigated in America because of the fiscal monetary debacle that is soon to be in crisis mode.. A very very concerned citizen of the Middle Class America!!!!! 

BY kingdoms on 04/09/2011 at 18:12

Awesome List for Twitters'

Key Twitters

The Hill Twitters The Hill Congress Blog Pundits Blog Twitter Room Briefing Room Hillicon Valley E2 Wire Ballot Box On The Money Healthwatch   Publications CNN Breaking News NY Times CNN NPR Politics Fox News Wall Street Journal BBC Heritage Foundation Huffington Post Politico Fishbowl DC Daily Caller   Dem Lawmakers Rep. Gary Ackerman Rep. Joe Baca Rep. Tammy Baldwin Rep. John Barrow Rep. Karen Bass Rep. Xavier Becerra Sen. Mark Begich Sen. Michael Bennet Rep. Shelley Berkley Rep. Howard Berman Rep. Sanford Bishop Rep. Earl Blumenauer Rep. Leonard Boswell Sen. Barbara Boxer Rep. Robert Brady Sen. Sherrod Brown Sen. Benjamin Cardin Rep. Dennis Cardoza Rep. Russ Carnahan Rep. Andre Carson Rep. Yvette Clarke Rep. Steve Cohen Rep. John Conyers Rep. Jim Cooper Rep. Jerry Costello Rep. Joe Courtney Rep. Mark Critz Rep. Diana DeGette Rep. Rosa DeLauro Rep. Ted Deutch Rep. Norman Dicks Rep. John Dingell Rep. Lloyd Doggett Rep. Joe Donnelly Rep. Mike Doyle Sen. Richard Durbin Rep. Donna Edwards Rep. Keith Ellison Rep. Anna Eshoo Rep. Sam Farr Rep. Chaka Fattah Rep. Bob Filner Sen. Al Franken Rep. Marcia Fudge Rep. John Garamendi Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Rep. Gene Green Rep. Raul Grijalva Rep. Luis Gutierrez Sen. Kay Hagan Rep. Colleen Hanabusa Sen. Tom Harkin Rep. Jane Harman Rep. Brian Higgins Rep. Jim Himes Rep. Maurice Hinchey Rep. Ruben Hinojosa Rep. Mazie Hirono Rep. Michael Honda Rep. Steny Hoyer Sen. Daniel Inouye Rep. Steve Israel Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson Rep. Henry Johnson Sen. Tim Johnson Sen. John Kerry Rep. Ron Kind Rep. Dennis Kucinich Rep. Jim Langevin Rep. John Larson Sen. Frank Lautenberg Sen. Patrick Leahy Rep. Sander Levin Rep. John Lewis Rep. Nita Lowey Rep. Ben Ray Lujan Rep. Carolyn Maloney Sen. Joe Manchin Rep. Ed Markey Rep. Jim Matheson Rep. Carolyn McCarthy Sen. Claire McCaskill Rep. Jim McDermott Rep. James McGovern Rep. Mike McIntyre Rep. Gregory Meeks Sen. Robert Menendez Sen. Jeff Merkley Rep. Michael Michaud Rep. George Miller Rep. Jim Moran Rep. Grace Napolitano Sen. Ben Nelson Sen. Bill Nelson Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton Rep. Bill Owens Rep. Frank Pallone Rep. Nancy Pelosi Rep. Ed Perlmutter Rep. Gary Peters Res. Comm. Pedro Pierluisi Rep. Chellie Pingree Rep. Jared Polis Rep. Mike Quigley Rep. Charlie Rangel Sen. Harry Reid Rep. Silvestre Reyes Rep. Laura Richardson Rep. Mike Ross Rep. Timothy Ryan Rep. Loretta Sanchez Rep. Jan Schakowsky Rep. Adam Schiff Rep. Kurt Schrader Rep. David Scott Rep. Jose Serrano Sen. Jeanne Shaheen Rep. Brad Sherman Rep. Albio Sires Rep. Louise Slaughter Rep. Adam Smith Rep. Jackie Speier Sen. Debbie Stabenow Rep. Paul Tonko Rep. Edolphus Towns Rep. Niki Tsongas Rep. Pete Visclosky Sen. Mark Udall Sen. Tom Udall Sen. Mark Warner Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Rep. Maxine Waters Rep. Anthony Weiner Rep. Lynn Woolsey   GOP Lawmakers Rep. Robert Aderholt Rep. Todd Akin Sen. Lamar Alexander Rep. Rodney Alexander Rep. Justin Amash Rep. Steven Austria Rep. Michele Bachmann Rep. Spencer Bachus Rep. Lou Barletta Sen. John Barrasso Rep. Joe Barton Rep. Charles Bass Rep. Dan Benishek Rep. Rick Berg Rep. Judy Biggert Rep. Brian Bilbray Rep. Gus Michael Bilirakis Rep. Diane Black Rep. Marsha Blackburn Sen. Roy Blunt Rep. John Boehner Rep. Jo Bonner Rep. Mary Bono Mack Rep. Charles Boustany Rep. Kevin Brady Rep. Mo Brooks Rep. Paul Broun Sen. Scott Brown Rep. Vern Buchanan Rep. Larry Buchson Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle Rep. Michael Burgess Sen. Richard Burr Rep. Dan Burton Rep. Ken Calvert Rep. Dave Camp Rep. John Campbell Rep. Francisco Canseco Rep. Eric Cantor Rep. John Carter Rep. Bill Cassidy Rep. Steve Chabot Rep. Jason Chaffetz Sen. Dan Coats Sen. Tom Coburn Rep. Mike Coffman Sen. Susan Collins Sen. Bob Corker Sen. John Cornyn Rep. Chip Cravaack Rep. Ander Crenshaw Rep. John Culberson Sen. Jim DeMint Rep. Jeff Denham Rep. Scott DesJarlais Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart Rep. Robert Dold Rep. Sean Duffy Sen. John Ensign Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick Rep. Jeff Flake

Rep. Chuck Fleischmann Rep. John Fleming Rep. Bill Flores Rep. James Randy Forbes Rep. Jeff Fortenberry Rep. Virginia Foxx Rep. Trent Franks Rep. Elton Gallegly Rep. Cory Gardner Rep. Jim Gerlach Rep. Bob Gibbs Rep. Chris Gibson Rep. Phil Gingrey Rep. Bob Goodlatte Rep. Paul Gosar Rep. Trey Gowdy Sen. Lindsey Graham Rep. Kay Granger Sen. Charles Grassley Rep. Tom Graves Rep. Tim Griffin Rep. Morgan Griffith Rep. Frank Guinta Rep. Richard Hanna Rep. Gregg Harper Sen. Orrin Hatch Rep. Nan Hayworth Rep. Joe Heck Rep. Dean Heller Rep. Jeb Hensarling Rep. Tim Huelskamp Rep. Randy Hultgren Rep. Robert Hurt Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison Sen. James Inhofe Rep. Darrell Issa Rep. Lynn Jenkins Sen. Mike Johanns Rep. Bill Johnson Sen. Ron Johnson Rep. Walter Jones Rep. James Jordan Rep. Pete King Rep. Steve King Rep. Jack Kingston Sen. Mark Kirk Sen. Jon Kyl Rep. Jeff Landry Rep. James Lankford Rep. Thomas Latham Rep. Steve LaTourette Rep. Robert Latta Rep. Jerry Lewis Rep. Frank LoBiondo Sen. Richard Lugar Rep. Cynthia Lummis Rep. Connie Mack Rep. Don Manzullo Rep. Kenny Marchant Rep Tom Marino Sen. John McCain Rep. Kevin McCarthy Rep. Michael McCaul Rep. Tom McClintock Rep. Thaddeus McCotter Rep. Patrick McHenry Rep. Buck McKeon Rep. David McKinley Rep. Cathy McMorris Rogers Rep. Patrick Meehan Rep. Candice Miller Rep. Gary Miller Rep. Jeff Miller Sen. Jerry Moran Rep. Mick Mulvaney Sen. Lisa Murkowski Rep. Tim Murphy Rep. Sue Myrick Rep. Randy Neugebauer Rep. Kristi Noem Rep. Rich Nugent Rep. Devin Nunes Rep. Alan Nunnelee Rep. Pete Olson Rep. Ron Paul Rep. Erik Paulsen Rep. Steve Pearce Rep. Mike Pence Rep. Joseph Pitts Rep. Ted Poe Rep. Mike Pompeo Sen. Rob Portman Rep. Bill Posey Rep. Thomas Price Rep. Ben Quayle Rep. Tom Reed Rep. Dennis Rehberg Rep. David Reichert Rep. Jim Renacci Rep. Reid Ribble Rep. Scott Rigell Rep. David Rivera Sen. Pat Roberts Rep. Martha Roby Rep. Phil Roe Rep. Mike Rogers (AL) Rep. Dana Rohrabacher Rep. Todd Rokita Rep. Tom Rooney Rep. Peter Roskam Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Rep. Dennis Ross Sen. Marco Rubio Rep. Paul Ryan Rep. Bobby Schilling Rep. Aaron Schock Rep. David Schweikert Rep. Austin Scott Rep. Tim Scott Sen. Jeff Sessions Rep. Pete Sessions Sen. Richard Shelby Rep. John Shimkus Rep. Bill Shuster Rep. Lamar Smith Rep. Steve Southerland Rep. Cliff Stearns Rep. Steve Stivers Rep. John Sullivan Rep. Lee Terry Rep. Glenn Thompson Sen. John Thune Rep. Scott Tipton Rep. Fred Upton Sen. David Vitter Rep. Tim Walberg Rep. Greg Walden Rep. Joe Walsh Rep. Allen West Sen. Roger Wicker Rep. Addison Wilson Rep. Robert Wittman Rep. Steve Womack Rep. Kevin Yoder Rep. Don Young   Executive Branch Barack Obama EPA OPM SEC NASA The White House CDC Emergency Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen   Other Political Figures 10 Downing Street Mike Bloomberg Committee on Natural Resources, Republican Website DNC DCCC Al Gore HASC Republicans Health Care Caucus Mike Huckabee Boris Johnson Gavin Newsom NRCC NRSC Sarah Palin Tim Pawlenty Ross Perot Rick Perry Karl Rove Arnold Schwarzenegger Senate Republicans Rob Simmons Andy Stern Don Stewart Pat Toomey Joe Trippi   Political Pundits David All Marc Ambinder Saul Anuzis Atrios Fred Barnes Christina Bellantoni Mark Blumenthal Amanda Carpenter Stephen Colbert Anderson Cooper Anna Marie Cox Crooks & Liars Daily Kos Erick Erickson Glenn Greenwald David Gregory Mary Katharine Ham Hugh Hewitt Hotair Instapundit Aaron Keyak Rick Klein Nicholas Kristof Michael Patrick Leahy Kathryn Lopez James Lileks Rachel Maddow Michelle Malkin Meghan McCain Ed Morrissey Markos Moulitsas Grover Norquist Andy Roth Patrick Ruffini David Sirota Ben Smith Kate Snow Andrew Sullivan George Stephanopoulos Talking Points Memo The Fix Wonkette

Palin: It's 'appalling' Obama threatened to veto GOP stopgap

By Alicia M. Cohn - 04/08/11 12:30 PM ET

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) said it was "appalling" that President Obama had threatened to veto the Republicans’ latest continuing resolution.
In back-to-back messages, Palin tweeted:

Appalling Commander in Chief action: Announce veto of troop funding in time of war. Troops sacrificing life & limb & he plays politics at...

....their expense. UNBELIVEABLE. Memo to the President: Insurgents won't stop & wait for govt shutdown to end before resuming actions.

House Republicans passed a bill Friday that would fund the government for another week, and would also fund the troops through the reminder of the fiscal year, effectively eliminating the military from consideration in the ongoing 2011 budget debate.

The measure is considered dead-on-arrival in the Senate, where Democrats oppose the nature of cuts in the bill as well as some of the policy language on abortion. The president said he would veto it.

The president, along with many Democrats in the House, has maintained the party will only agree to a “clean” short-term spending plan that would allow those on both sides of the aisle more time to make decisions on what would be included in a final budget bill.

The current resolution funding the government expires at midnight.

Comments

Harry and Obama are saying it is much more important to fund abotion than our troops fighting in three seperate wars. Wow and they wonder why the lost the last election. BY swamper on 04/08/2011 at 12:55

Why the heck does it matter what some person who lives in Alaska has to say? It's not news, it's not thought out, and it's totally irrelevant! Please provide opinions of policy makers, not someone from a hockey game!BY Johnld777 on 04/08/2011 at 13:09

its appalling that far right wing radicals who refuse to put their own names down are lying to the american people

yeah, there is accountability .You say obama is all of these bad things and obama wants to do this and that and the other thing

but you won't even put your name to it. so who are you!BY Lloyd C on 04/08/2011 at 13:15

Does either of these guys know whats really going on in the big picture of thing globally?BY star2thenorth on 04/08/2011 at 13:25

What's wrong Lloyd somebody picking on little Obama for wanting to fund abortions and not fund the troops that are fighting for America. Go cry for the Won that will do a lot of good, better than what he is doing for America.BY swamper on 04/08/2011 at 13:31

It's appalling that the Republicans will not pass a clean bill to pay the troops. They want to hold the troops' pay hostage to try to pass social issues.BY Connie O on 04/08/2011 at 13:37

Hey Sarah: Your opinion means nothing. Regardless of what you believe, you are fading fast… 25% approval rating. You really should stop embarrassing yourself. BY sweetpea on 04/08/2011 at 13:39

Yes Sarah we all agree but most people don't care,especially after they hear that the stopgap has the abortion thing, and it's those people that count.If abortion were such a big deal to most people it would have been banned a long time ago. Stick to the $$ that's why it's called a budget rather than an Evangelical pulpit.BY Holyman on 04/08/2011 at 14:07

Sweetpea,
Envious because your approval rating is less than .000000000000000 25%? Try commenting on the merits vice slamming the person making them (like I just did - sorry (NOT!). In this case Gov. Palin's comment is spot on.BY Buffalo on 04/08/2011 at 14:12

I wish Sarah Palin would just keep her mouth shut. She really has no idea. Why do people listen to what a failed ex governor says. She couldn't even finish the job she took on in Alaska. She had to quit when the going got tough. BY A Realist on 04/08/2011 at 15:35

I think its mildly embarrassing that republicans believe removing federal contributions to the largest provider of contraceptives will lower abortion ratesBY Lloyd C on 04/08/2011 at 15:38

yes indeed Ms. Palin. it is appalling.
how so many people still stand by this man is also appalling.when did this country come to this?BY 2010, 2012 on 04/08/2011 at 16:19

I think its mildly embarrassing that republicans believe removing federal contributions to the largest provider of contraceptives will lower abortion rates
BY Lloyd C on 04/08/2011 at 15:38
-=-=-=
but not even on the same planet as APPALLING as obama's opinion that he might veto support to our troops in a time of war. you see you have way, waaaay bigger fish to fry.BY factually speaking on 04/08/2011 at 16:20

Factually speaking: what a shutdown means. shutting down. Not pay this person and that person and the other person
So please factually speaking If you want to avoid troops not getting their pay. I suggest you write to your house representative and let them know :)

instead of you know, blaming one side. Everyone is guilty here. If a shutdown occurs, the house and senate should be fired (all of them) and they should all be banished from ever running from every public office anywhere in America for life.

Watch budgets get passed quickly 

BY Lloyd C on 04/08/2011 at 16:44

Palin go away

 BY From Alaska on 04/08/2011 at 17:14

have you seen this video from 1/11, David Remnick on President Obama? http://f4a.tv/ggEP0d  

BY Alyson on 04/08/2011 at 17:18

You know what's 'appalling' sister sarah bimbo? THAT ANYONE.. ANYWHERE ACTUALLY GIVES YOU ANY PRESS COVERAGE!

 BY nun on 04/08/2011 at 17:21

Go Sarah, you tell them! Some the country from going bankrupt! Palin 2012! 

BY fifthfantasy on 04/08/2011 at 18:01

Who cares what you think Palin. You're a failed former beauty queen, a failed governor that quit half way through your term because it was 'too hard' a job, a failed vice presidential candidate and freak show star, and as phony as they come! When will you get it through your head that your 15 minutes of fame are OVER!BY over and out on 04/08/2011 at 18:46

Sarah phobia lives! I don't understand why so many people go nuts over her - one way or the other. She's entitled to her opinion like anyone else - if you wish to criticize anyone, it is much more appropriate to criticize the media which reports her opinions. Or are some of you rabid anti-Sarah types just DNC or Dem congressional staffers assigned to monitor and criticize her every utterance? What a laugh that she is taken so seriously!BY Amused on 04/08/2011 at 19:39

At least she is a legal citizen of the U.S. unlike our so called President! She does have an idea of what people are concerned about. We are concerned about the senseless spending of this administration. The only reason unemployment is decreasing is because unemployed people can't refile for benefits, while the illegal's and dead can vote for President, even one that is not vetted! Everything he has done will be removed from the books when he has to provide the information he has spent so much to hide to be put on the ballot in the states that are smart enough to make it a requirement!! So all you Demorats get off the soapbox and start getting things done as your job is supposed to require! Make sure the military is paid or look for another job!BY Birther by Birth on 04/08/2011 at 19:40

Reminder to REALIST - Obama quit his job in the US Senate in early 07 to run for POTUS - seated in 05 - he waited until 08 to resign, but voting present in 05 and 06 and 07 wasn't difficult work. From mid 07 he was too busy campaigning to even vote present most of the time.

PAY the troops! They're essential personnel.

Abortion funding is for those who want abortions - it violates core values of other voters. It's a rider -drop it and pick it up again at a later date. Abortion is BIG $$$$$ business, they'll survive. BY AmericanCherokee on 04/08/2011 at 19:55

Sarah Palin is the real deal not like these phoney libs.BY joe alexich on 04/08/2011 at 20:22

Obama is the Prez…he can veto what he wants. Sarah,
you are a media darling…nothing more. Keep your mouth shut..no one cares what you have to say!BY who cares on 04/08/2011 at 20:39

Seriously, I thought Americans were educated. Go back and take Civic's 101.. As for Palin she has to keep yapping to keep her brain from become more stagnate. Oh and Tea Parties I would like to know how you funded your election BY Sick and disgusted on 04/08/2011 at 21:12

I agree with "Realist" READ her comments again and again.Palin should keep her mouth shut. Look what happened to our Gabby.I wonder what her husband thinks and feels right now. Does he have a moment (when he is out in space)he doesn't think of his lovely wife. A couple so in love with each other, the pain he felt for his "love" showed in his eyes
.Look at the monument of the little 9 year old girl who died on that day because PALIN couldn't keep her mouth SHUT.All the people who died and were wounded.She didn't finish her governor position cause she was bored.Don't ever let her become PRESIDENT BY cameron3825 on 04/08/2011 at 21:14

Palin go home & watch your kids - you never now when those pedophile Russians on snowmobiles might kidnap them. If you REALLY want to do something positive for America you can sit on your porch and watch out for that South Korean missile that could hit Wasilla at any moment. Have your Daddy show you how to load that rifle again - just in case Putin's head starts floating in the airspace over your backyard.BY J. Kingsbury on 04/08/2011 at 21:38

Just stop Sarah Palin. 

BY DUMB on 04/08/2011 at 21:48

It should be noted that there's a planned debate in May for those r's interested in running for the highest office in this country. And Ms Palin has not yet commited. Five others have. Mitt is also missing. If it's important to express your views of how to solve the countries problems, other than complaining about the present office holder, why not plan to be present. Tweeting your answers most likely won't be acceptable, Ms Palin. Time to put up or shut up… BY MURPHYSLAW on 04/08/2011 at 21:53

SWAMPER and HOLYMAN — One more time (and using very little words): NO FEDERAL DOLLARS GO TO PAY FOR ABORTIONS!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! [And they have not since the 'Hyde Amendment' was first enacted in 1976.] The Title X Family Planning program was enacted in 1970 as Title X of the Public Health Service Act. Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services. Under the pretext that they are eliminating taxpayer funding of abortions, Republicans are holding passage of a stopgap funding measure hostage to the de-funding of the Title X Family Planning program (which, of course, includes the funding for Planned Parenthood). And, via that assertion, Republicans are (once more) lying to the public. De-funding Planned Parenthood will have absolutely no impact on the number of abortions that are performed. It will have a serious impact on the preventative health services available to the poor, especially poor women. For those of you who have said that asking the very richest to pay slightly more in taxes is tantamount to class warfare — I ask you, what is this if not class warfare? When did we become a nation where the rich get richer, and the poor get nothing — not even access to basis preventative health services? BY ENOUGH! on 04/08/2011 at 22:02

I think a case can be made that defunding any planned parenthood monies will just increase abortion rates.BY Lloyd C on 04/08/2011 at 22:20

Dead on Governor Palin . Tell the truth and scare the left Chitless !
Barry can't pay the troops but will fund "Cowboy Poet and Baby Killers ." BY Nam Vet USA on 04/08/2011 at 22:51

And she speaks, FINALLY! BY Norma Perez on 04/08/2011 at 22:51

If the Democrats had passed the budget when they had both houses of Congress and the White House we wouldn't be in this mess. But you liberals would rather bash Sarah Palin. Get real! 

BY Nick on 04/08/2011 at 22:53

A REALIST needs to do some homework before bashing Sarah Palin. Quiting, when she did was not due to "going got tough". America, Please refrain from childish comments just to send a blog. Is she a presidential hopeful, no. Failed Gov. I DON'T THNK SO!
BY donotreelect on 04/09/2011 at 06:39

The libtards on here are showing their typical Palin Derangement Syndrome. Sarah must be such a threat to your little commie fantasy in your heads. Obonehead is an AWOL President who only shows upon the scene when it's time to take credit for something done without his help. Even Democrats question his nonexistent leadership "skills." At least Sarah has the guts to take a stand on an issue unlike Obonehead who had a long, distinguished career of voting present. It's appalling that so many people were fooled by a 2 year senator who never met a payroll, wasn't a governor for A SINGLE DAY, and never worked in the private sector. BY redpens on 04/09/2011 at 07:37

It is appalling to have to listen to your opinion and blunt ignorance… I'm sure our forefathers would have put stipulations on "freedom of speech" if you were around back then!BY c2xist on 04/09/2011 at 10:29

These far right wing radicals try to bully and harass and censor people that do not have opinions they agree with
I feel that everyone that has an opinion should have that right to express it. Whether anyone believes that opinion, well, that is another story.BY Lloyd C on 04/09/2011 at 11:27

Ever wonder where this thing from Wasilla got the word "appalling" to begin with?BY Herb on 04/09/2011 at 12:22

Introducing the people's budget

By Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) - 04/08/11 02:58 PM ET

As I mentioned in an op-ed in The Hill earlier this week, I have been working with my Congressional Progressive Caucus colleagues, economists and tax policy experts to develop a budget that eliminates the deficit (which Ryan fails to do), puts America to work building a competitive economy, invests in our schools, brings the troops home, protects social security and represents a fair deal for working families.  We make the tax code fair, asking the wealthiest individuals, corporations hiding money overseas, oil companies raking in record profits and Wall Street banks that gambled away our money to pay their fair share. We fix roads, bridges and waterways, we build a world-class high-speed rail system and broadband, we end our addiction to oil and the endless wars that come with it, we meet our obligations to seniors and we educate our children for the global workforce. Our budget does all this while eliminating the deficit, cutting nearly $1 trillion in waste, and reducing debt burden.
Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are introducing this “People’s Budget” next week, which world-renowned economist Dr. Jeffrey Sachs just endorsed. Dr. Sachs, whom CNN’s Fareed Zakaria this week called “one of the world's leading economists, the go-to man for guiding countries out of economic crises, ”explains the need for the “People’s Budget” in this morning’s column on the Huffington Post. In addition to eliminating the deficit, Dr. Sachs calls it “humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy.
Here’s what Dr. Jeffery Sachs said about the “People’s Budget”:  “Just when it seemed that all of Washington had lost its values and its connection with the American people, a bolt of hope has arrived. It is the People's Budget put forward by the co-chairs of the 80-member Congressional Progressive Caucus. Their plan is humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy. Unlike Paul Ryan's almost absurdly vicious attack on the poor and working class, the People's Budget would close the deficit by raising taxes on the rich, taming health care costs (including a public option), and ending the military spending on wars and wasteful weapons systems.
There are now four budget positions on the table. Far to the right is Paul Ryan's plan, an artless war on the poor that would take a meat-cleaver to Medicaid (health care for the poor), food stamps, support for child care, the environment, and the rest of government other than the military, Social Security, and Medicare (that is, until 2022, when the slashing would begin on Medicare coverage as well). Ryan would keep taxes below 20 percent of GDP (specifically, 19.9 percent of GDP in 2021), at the cost of destroying entitlements programs and other civilian spending.
Then there is President Obama's budget, which is really a muddled proposal in the center-right of the political spectrum. It would keep most of the Reagan-era and Bush-era tax cuts in place. Like the Ryan proposal, Obama's tax proposals would keep total taxes at around 20 percent of GDP. The result is a major long-term squeeze on vital programs such as community development, infrastructure, and job training. Also, Obama's plan never closes the budget deficit, which remains as high as 3.1 percent of GDP in 2021.
In the progressive middle is the People's Budget. Like Ryan's plan, the People's Budget would cut the budget deficit to zero by 2021, but would do so in an efficient and fair way. It would close the budget deficit by raising tax rates on the rich and giant corporations, while also curbing military spending and wrestling health care costs under control, partly by introducing a public option. By raising tax revenues to 22.3 percent of GDP by 2021, the People's Budget closes the budget deficit while protecting the poor and promoting needed investments in education, health care, roads, power, energy, and the environment in order to raise America's long-term competitiveness. The People's Budget thereby achieves what Ryan and Obama do not: the combination of fairness, efficiency, and budget balance.
The fourth position is the public's position. The Republicans often say that they want Congress to respect the voice of the people. The voice of the people is crystal clear. In one opinion survey after the next, the public says that the rich and the corporations should pay more taxes. The public says that we should tamp down runaway health care costs through a public option, one that would introduce competition to drive down bloated private health insurance costs. The public says that we should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and reduce Pentagon spending. (Just yesterday, Defense Secretary Gates let loose the predictable Pentagon canard that we should stay in Iraq if the Iraqi government asks for it. Better yet, we should respond to what the American people are asking for: to bring our troops home).
The fact is that the People's Budget is the public's position. That's why it is truly a centrist initiative, at the broad center of the US political spectrum. Ryan reflects the wishes of the rich and the far right. Obama's position reflects the muddle of a White House that wavers between its true values and the demands of the wealthy campaign contributors and lobbyists that Obama courts for his re-election. Many Democrats in Congress have also gone along with the falsehood that deficit cutting means slashing spending on the poor and on civilian discretionary programs, rather than raising taxes on the rich, cutting military spending, and taking on the over-priced private health insurance industry. Only the People's Budget speaks to the broad needs and values of the American people.
The current budget negotiations have been a dialogue among the wealthy. The big debate has focused on which programs for the poor should be axed first. There has been no discussion of raising taxes on the rich, and quite the contrary, the White House and the Republican leadership agreed to further tax cuts last December. Obama has repeatedly expressed regret at slashing community development, energy support for the poor, and other programs, but he is not fighting the trend, only regretting it.
Most of Washington has stopped listening to the people. Campaigns are now so expensive that most politicians do anything to court the favor of the rich. Yet ultimately the public will prevail. Twice before in American history - during the Gilded Age of the 1880s and in the 1920s, just before the Great Depression - big corporate money effectively owned Washington. But in both eras great progressive leaders (including the two Roosevelts, Theodore and Franklin) came along to restore the true meaning of American democracy: a government truly of the people, by the people, and for the people. With public protests against government by the rich now spreading in Wisconsin, Ohio and beyond, and with the launch of the People's Budget by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a great national movement to restore American democracy has begun.”
Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Comments

we just want our country back, and to not go to bed today and wonder if we will be able to afford tomorrow

jessica cervantez
NVBY jessica on 04/08/2011 at 16:49

This sounds very interesting, Rep. Honda, and I look forward to seeing it and hearing critical evaluations. A few obvious flaws present themselves in just what you've hinted at and I hope you can address this one at least. As you raise taxes on the rich, what will stop them from shifting their businesses and wealth to overseas shelters as happened in England in the 70s-80s and elsewhere since? And assuming you can't stop that exodus, what might this do to your calculations? And if I may, since you think Pres. Obama is "middle-right" (almost cheek-to-cheek with the Tea Party) will the Progressives support him again, knowing he dances to our extremist tune?BY Edwin Loftus on 04/08/2011 at 17:05

If we pass "The People's Budget" can we also change our name to "The People's Republic"?BY Edwin Loftus on 04/08/2011 at 17:23

I'm sorry to keep asking questions, this one is serious, though. Are you saying that when my ancestors left
Kentucky to clear land and build cabins in the Ohio wilderness that what they were really hoping is that the government would come along soon after and provide them with a free doctor? Or earlier, when the same leader of this clan left home to join Roger's Rangers what he was really fighting for was the right of politicians in Pennsylvannia to regulate his farm and take half of it when he died to give to poor widows in Boston?BY Edwin Loftus on 04/08/2011 at 18:27

Gentle Readers,

The so-called ' peoples budget ' does not serve the American people for the following reasons:

#1: This budget confuses TAX RATES with TAX REVENUES. Our historical experience of the past 50 years in the United States has been that reductions in TAX RATES in the Kennedy, Reagan and GW Bush administrations all led to increased TAX REVENUES by
increasing the rate of economic growth and job creation.

Increasing tax rates is counterproducti ve in a Recession.
Any Keynesian economist will agree.

#2: There is no need to end our ' addiction to oil '. Should we end our ' addictions ' to refrigerators, washing machines, or fresh milk for our children?

Oil is simply a commodity used to provide the ordinary comforts of life.

The United States has at least 85 billion barrels of oil in our Outer Continental Shelf and 16 billion barrels of oil in Alaska which are currently off limits to production due to artificial legal constraints. Remove those constraints and there is plenty of oil

The United States has the worlds largest coal reserves and abundant natural gas, and large hydroelectric potential. Modern atomic reactors ( pebble reactors ) are literally 1000 times safer than the reactors damaged by the earthquake in Japan, and I would ask the reader to notice that no one in Japan died from radiation from those reactors even while thousands died in the earthquake and some died afterwards from exposure to cold.

#3. Maintainance of a powerful military is far less expensive than fighting wars. This plan fails to consider the cost should deterrence fail and a general war break out.

It costs money to support our allies, but having a powerful military and many allies helps the United States keep the peace.

Sincerely,John Lepant Brighton CO BY John C Lepant on 04/08/2011 at 18:37 

Face it. People are tired of paying for the bloated military. What good is a strong country if it costs $100 dollars to see a doctor? What good is a strong country if I can't make a decent wage? What good is a strong country, if the food I eat and the water I drink are becoming polluted due to no oversight? You can take this military machine back as I want no part of it. I am glad to see a budget propsal that scales back this bloated military!BY A good budget on 04/08/2011 at 18:55

Enough of your 'trickle down' JOHN C LEPANT. We're heard all those GOP talking points a million times and none of them are true. We've lived with this 'trickle down' crap of giving tax cut after tax cut to the top 2% and have no jobs to show for it! Where are the jobs? We should have full employment if 'trickle down' worked. IT DOESN'T WORK! IT'S A SCAM. IT MAKES THE RICH RICHER AND THE MIDDLE CLASS POORER!
You've done your duty today JOHN. You can collect your paycheck at the RNC.

 BY ENOUGH JOHN on 04/08/2011 at 18:56

reaganomics failed. as per reagan's own budget directorBY Lloyd C on 04/08/2011 at 19:15

Progressivism is a malignant cancer upon this country and has brought us to the breaking point where we find ourselves today. The Progressive Caucus it the epicenter of all that is parasitic within Congress. Take a hard look at the members of the PCC and you will see those who only pander to special interests rather than representing all of the people in their district. You will see Congress members who's sole objective is to feed at the trough of the taxpayer and re-distribute the earnings of the productive to the base to which they pander. Instead of upholding the constitution to which they pledge their loyalty they work to destroy it. No one group is more cozy with the globalist Marxists and their goals to bring down the USA than are the members of the Progressive Caucus.BY Jane on 04/08/2011 at 19:29

Tax cuts have never produced revenue..that is factual. Tax extensions didn't produce jobs either. Oil is equated
to refrigerators or fresh milk as a comfort? Are you really serious? Maintence of a military is cheaper than a war.
How would we remember/know since we have been in wars continously?

John and Edwin seem to be in the same boat without a paddle. Narrow focus. 

BY Duh on 04/08/2011 at 19:35

Totally amazes me to see someone write about re-distribution of wealth. The nation has had the highest wealth transfer in the history of the US during the Bush years. Progressives had nothing to do with it. Upholding the constitution I guess includes the Supreme Court making laws instead of upholding them. Marxists??
Jane, you have made every talking point right off the Beck
program. Why bother with this trash

.BY Sam on 04/08/2011 at 19:54

Jane, I suppose that you would like to go back to the days of a 12-hour workday, child labor, starvation, tenements, monopolistic business practices, and all of the other things that the progressives did away with. I mean, I guess you also think that locking the doors from the outside is a good way to increase productivity. People like you won't appreciate these things until they're taken away. I'm moving to France, and I hope you people get what you want, because you'll be the first up against the walls when the revolution starts.

 BY Harry on 04/08/2011 at 20:07

Gentle Readers,

Dear Lloyd C,

From 1981 - 1989 under what you call ' Reaganomics ' the US annual GDP doubled from $3 trillion a year to $6 trillion a year and the economy added 18 million jobs on a base of 55 million, the equivalent of over 30 million added jobs in the current US economy.

Jobs & Prosperity: You and Mr. Stockman are entitled to your opinions, yet most Americans would call that a policy that worked.

Dear DUH,

Oil provides the transportation fuels here in the U.S. and around the world that make the ordinary comforts of your life, including fresh milk for your children, available and affordable.

As to deterrence being cheaper than war, please visit the ARIZONA memorial at Pearl Harbor and ask the men interred in that ship about the cost of failed deterrence.

Dear Enough John,

I work for a living, thank you. Don't get anything from RNC.
Just another fed up American who just can't fathom the foolish policies coming from the Democrat Party today.

I used to be a Democrat. Honestly. Democrats used to be for a strong national defense and fiscal responsibility. The KENNEDY TAX CUTS brought full employment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU

When did prudent tax & fiscal policy become Republican?
If so, why should anyone vote for any Democrat?
Sincerely,

John Lepant Brighton CO BY John C Lepant on 04/08/2011 at 21:05

Thank you for The People's Budget. Now if only our "representatives " would represent us people, instead of corporations and the top 1% of wealthy, we might actually get it passed and the US government might start working on real solutions to real problems.  

BY A Wilson on 04/08/2011 at 23:12

Well it would seem that we have a sort of budget voters but the question is where do we go from here. Continue down the road we are on or strike out in a new direction I wish i could say the choice was yours to make. But we both know the answer to that question however you can regain that choice through hard work. Both parties are infected with the same problem and you really can't tell the players without a score card. Let there actions define them boys and girls and that means paying attention.

BY brainmaggot on 04/08/2011 at 23:53

This proposal is the most sane and reasonable I've read in a long time. I think it should be a call to action for all progressives. We need to get familiar with the details and get on the offensive to get the public aware of it's existence. That makes more sense to me than just being on defense, trying to discredit the Ryan mess. I think most people who were aware of both would be easily persuaded to support this.
I am so tired of trying to combat the idiocy of the right wing. The latest things I've seen are that Beck left Fox because Murdoch has joined the Saudis to promote the caliphate and the Saudis made Ailes fire Beck. How do you deal with that mentality? It's a waste of time! We must give people something sensible to consider.

Progressives, lets get behind this People's Budget and spread it far and wide as quickly as we can. I am going to copy Rep. Honda's blog post and send it to every one I know. Also I'm going to contact his office to learn more about what we can do and offer a few suggestions about how to get this more widely known. Anyone else in? 

BY Smilinjack on 04/09/2011 at 01:36

Ahh, the 'People's Budget', another screed of greed … greed for the belongings of others, a paean to the insatiable appetite progressives have to dispossess others while empowering themselves.

You could tax 100% of every dollar over $250,000 made, in essence, abolish rich people in this country, liquidate the defense department and trust in the kindness of strangers not to attack us, confiscate the wealth of every Fortune 500 company (thus destroying them for a one-time payoff to sate left-wing covetousness), and you STILL would not balance the budget for ONE YEAR. This is not a revenue problem 'People's' budget. It is a spending problem.

'People's' Budget. That's an insult to people.

You selfish, selfish lefties. Stop stealing from my kids to feed your power bloc. 

BY Sasha on 04/09/2011 at 02:13

My dad told me about "Penny Health Insurance" or something which helped him to find a lower priced health insurance (with ALMOST similar benefits) he is recommending this to me. Any suggestion? What do you think of them? 

BY pennyfraser on 04/09/2011 at 06:01

OK a$$ ache, where is the money supposed to come from? How will businesses have money to hire if you tax them to death? If you took every penny from every rich person in America, there still wouldn't be enough to fund your "Utopian dream."

Go ahead, raise taxes on businesses and the wealthy and they will flee this country in droves, leaving you no way to fund your "progressive" world. God you libs are dumb.BY Honda is dilusional on 04/09/2011 at 07:11

Why do you keep calling your party progressive?why not just call it what it is.COMMUNIST

.BY c wilson on 04/09/2011 at 13:19