We Aren't Spending Enough: House Raises Deficit Spending Ceiling By Another $1.9 Trillion, Receives No GOP Support/Update: Democrats Applaud

One week after Obama declared a "spending freeze" on "non-security discretionary spending", the House has voted to spend $1.9 Trillion morethan we have ever spent before:

The House on Thursday voted to allow the government to go $1.9 trillion deeper in debt — or about $6,000 more for every U.S. resident.

The measure, approved 217-212, would raise the cap on federal borrowing to $14.3 trillion. That's enough to keep Congress from having to vote again before the November elections on an issue that is feeding a sense among voters that the government is spending too much and putting future generations under a mountain of debt to do it.

The legislation only passed by 5 votes. After you take into account that not one Republican voted for the bill, Pelosi would have had keep her fellow Democrats in line and not have too many defections in order to pass it. She barely managed to get just enough. However, not all Democrats were amused by this passing:

"I can't think of a more reckless or irresponsible act. Defaulting is not an option," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. "If the United States defaults, investors will lose confidence that the U.S. will honor its debts in the future.

There had to be a provision added to the bill in order to get just enough Democrats on board to pass the bill. However, it seems to be punishing the wrong people, if Congress overspends the ceiling, the American people:

To help win passage, Democrats are also adopting — in a vote later Thursday afternoon — budget rules designed to curb a spiraling upward annual deficit — projected by Obama to hit a record $1.56 trillion for the budget year ending Sept. 30. The new rules would require future spending increases or tax cuts to be paid for with either cuts to other programs or equivalent tax increases.

If the rules are broken, the White House budget office would force automatic cuts to programs like Medicare, farm subsidies and unemployment insurance. Current rules lack such teeth and have commonly been waived over the past few years at a cost of almost $1 trillion.

So, if you are a farmer, a senior citizen, or unemployed, screw you. They're going to steal your money and spend it on whatever they want to spend it on. Congress can spend your money better than you can. To be fair, Medicaid, Social Security and food stamps will be exempt from the cuts, but the cuts that would be made would hurt those who are hurting from the bad economy the most. They should find somewhere else to cut spending.

The article goes on to point out that, in a few years, taxes would have to be raised in order to pay for this spending frenzy.

This spending orgy is getting way out-of-line. We need to be spending less on frivlous pet projects not spending more.

Update: The Democrats applaud getting the ability to spend more of your children's money:

Great News: New Report Shows Pelosicare Will Raise Costs, Lower Quality of Medicare

A new report that studied what impact Pelosicare will have on Medicare has come out, and the finding are not good for granny:

A plan to slash more than $500 billion from future Medicare spending — one of the biggest sources of funding for President Obama's proposed overhaul of the nation's health-care system — would sharply reduce benefits for some senior citizens and could jeopardize access to care for millions of others, according to a government evaluation released Saturday.

The report, requested by House Republicans, found that Medicare cuts contained in the health package approved by the House on Nov. 7 are likely to prove so costly to hospitals and nursing homes that they could stop taking Medicare altogether.

This gives "Throw Mama Off the Train" a whole new meaning. This is one reason why many seniors are against the bill, no matter what the AARP thinks.

Not only will it lessen the quality of their own healthcare and quality of life, but it, also, burden their children and grandchildren with the added costs:

In the face of greatly increased demand for services, providers are likely to charge higher fees or take patients with better-paying private insurance over Medicaid recipients, "exacerbating existing access problems" in that program, according to the report from Richard S. Foster of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

"This report confirms what virtually every independent expert has been saying: [House] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi's health-care bill will increase costs, not decrease them," said Rep. Dave Camp (Mich.), the senior Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. "This is a stark warning to every Republican, Democrat and independent worried about the financial future of this nation."

When will Pelosi and the Democrats realize or admit that the bill that they created is the worst bill evah and chunk it in the trash? I'm not going to hold my breath.

House Democrats Cut War Funding, Ban on Release of Touture Photos While Earmarking Over $100B For Global Bailouts

House Democrats are "playing politics" with our soldiers lives. Why do they hate our military?

As HUMAN EVENTS has been reporting all week, House Democrats have been playing politics with the War Supplemental Bill that funds the military efforts in both Afghanistan and Iraq.  The House and Senate versions of the bill moved into conference and House Democrats have been making substantial changes to the bill behind closed doors. These changes have outraged the Senate and lost support from the entire Republican caucus that is usually a sure vote for passing troop funding.

Democrats reduced the troop funding in the bill by $5 billion and added in $108 billion in unrestricted funds to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a global bailout package.  They also stripped out the Graham-Lieberman amendment language that would bar the release of terrorist detainee photos being sought after by the ACLU.

They want to take money from our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and give over 20 times that amount to international companies to bail them out. Is the survival of foreign companies more important than the survival of our men and women in uniform?

They want to release the "torture" photos that will endanger our troops by enflaming Muslims in the region with picutres of their fellow Muslims being "tortured" by our troops.

This shamelessly shows their contempt our troops. The chance this will pass the Senate is remote, but it is despicable that the House Democrats even thought that this is a good idea.

House Approves "Cash For Clunkers" Money Waster

This is a follow-up of a story that I reported on earlier. Thanks to the House, your tax dollars are one step closer to going down the drain with no chance of a return on or investment:

The House on Tuesday approved a "cash for clunkers" bill that aims to boost new auto sales by allowing consumers to turn in their gas-guzzling cars and trucks for vouchers worth up to $4,500 toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.

President Barack Obama has encouraged Congress to approve consumer incentives for new car purchases as part of the government's work to restructure General Motors and Chrysler. The House approved the bill 298-119.

How much is this abomination of a bill going to cost us?

Separately, House and Senate appropriators were discussing providing $1 billion to a supplemental war funding bill for the "cash for clunkers" program, which aims to generate about 1 million new auto sales. Since the yearlong vehicle program is expected to cost $4 billion, lawmakers would attempt to find the additional money later this year.

Where are they going to find this "additional money"? We're already in a deep enough deficit hole as it is. There aren't any money trees or pots of gold at the end of any rainbows in DC last time I checked.

They are just trying to boost sales of Government Motors. They've made the mistake of taking it over, and now, they have to cover their tracks and make it profitable at all costs.

New York #20 Heartbreak: Murphy Wins House Seat As Tedisco Concedes Race

There is heartbreaking news from the 20th district of New York:

Democrat Scott Murphy is the new representative of a Capital Region congressional district.

On Friday afternoon, Republican opponent James Tedisco conceded the race. Murphy has at least a 401-vote edge over Tedisco, according to the most recent state tallies.

The two competed in the 20th congressional district (of New York). The sprawling district covers part or all of 10 counties—including six in the Capital Region.

Republican Tedisco had a very good showing in this New York district. The district is slightly more conservative than most in the very liberal state of New York, but it has been leaning Democratic for the past few years. So, this election results weren't altogether surprising, but it was disappointing.

It was the first real test for Obama's policies and administration in the voting booth. Obama and the Democrats passed, but not by much. Murphy should've had a easier time winning considering Obama's still high, but slowly dropping approval ratings. He should've coasted into the House on the president's coattails. The closeness of this race isn't a good sign for the Democrats.

Even though it was a loss, I can see some hope for the GOP to make a comeback in a year to seriously challenge the Democrats in 2010.

House GOP Finally Develops Backbone Over Dems Stimulus Package

The GOP Wises Up Strategically attacking Obama's $825 billion stimulus bill.
January 19, 2009 - by Jennifer Rubin

House Democrats have come up with an $825 billion stimulus bill. Republican Minority Leader John Boehner’s initial reaction — “Oh, my God!” — expressed the abject disgust that many will feel once they learn what is in it. Boehner’s office put out a handy guide to some of the “lowlights”:

1. The House Democrats’ bill will cost each and every household $6,700 additional debt, paid for by our children and grandchildren.

2. The total cost of this one piece of legislation is almost as much as the annual discretionary budget for the entire federal government.

3. President-elect Obama has said that his proposed stimulus legislation will create or save three million jobs. This means that this legislation will spend about $275,000 per job. The average household income in the U.S. is $50,000 a year.

4. The House Democrats’ bill provides enough spending — $825 billion — to give every man, woman, and child in America $2,700.

5. $825 billion is enough to give every person living in poverty in the U.S. $22,000.

6. $825 billion is enough to give every person in Ohio $72,000.

7. Although the House Democrats’ proposal has been billed as a transportation and infrastructure investment package, in actuality only $30 billion of the bill — or three percent — is for road and highway spending. A recent study from the Congressional Budget Office said that only 25 percent of infrastructure dollars can be spent in the first year, making the one year total less than $7 billion for infrastructure.

8. Much of the funding within the House Democrats’ proposal will go to programs that already have large, unexpended balances. For example, the bill provides $1 billion for Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), which already have $16 billion on hand.  And, this year, Congress has plans to rescind $9 billion in highway funding that the states have not yet used.

9. In 1993, the unemployment rate was virtually the same as the rate today (around seven percent). Yet, then-President Clinton’s proposed stimulus legislation ONLY contained $16 billion in spending.

10. Here are just a few of the programs and projects that have been included in the House Democrats’ proposal:

• $650 million for digital TV coupons.
• $6 billion for colleges/universities — many which have billion dollar endowments.
• $166 billion in direct aid to states — many of which have failed to budget wisely.
• $50 million in funding for the National Endowment of the Arts.
• $44 million for repairs to U.S. Department of Agriculture headquarters.
• $200 million for the National Mall, including grass planting.
• $400 million for “National Treasures.”

11.  Almost one-third of the so called tax relief in the House Democrats’ bill is spending in disguise, meaning that true tax relief makes up only 24 percent of the total package — not the 40 percent that President-elect Obama had requested.

12. $825 billion is just the beginning — many Capitol Hill Democrats want to spend even more taxpayer dollars on their “stimulus” plan.

But the House Republicans are not simply saying “no.” (Or even “Hell, no!”) They are taking seriously Obama’s offer to listen to their ideas. They are holding hearings and presenting their ideas — mostly in the form of tax cuts or defense spending.

The House Republicans, not always know for finesse, seem then to be operating on a clever two-track process. On one hand, they are lambasting the existing Democratic plan, which certainly bears the Obama administration’s imprint, but for now is presented under the House Democrats’ name. The Republicans are making clear it isn’t a stimulus plan, isn’t going to do much for economic recovery, and isn’t going to get many of their votes. On the other hand, they are ignoring the Obama team’s influence in shaping that very plan and instead answering his high-minded calls for input with plenty of constructive and conservative ideas of their own.

Will it work? It depends, as Bill Clinton might say, on what the definition of “work” is. If they are aiming to refashion the Obama stimulus plan into one all conservatives could embrace the answer is almost certainly “no.” But two other outcomes are possible, and either could be termed a success of sorts.

First, the Obama might embrace their ideas — add meaningful tax rate cuts, swap domestic pork for needed defense spending, and reduce the overall level of spending. The Republicans would thereby demonstrate their relevance and influence — and deal a setback to their House counterparts who would then be characterized as to the left of Obama. Triangulation would be back.

The more likely result, however, will be that virtually none of their ideas gets into the bill. In that case they can in good conscience vote against it, making clear that “bipartisanship” is a flimsy façade and that the responsibility for the bloated deficit and useless spending bonanza rests solely with the Democrats. That “works” too.

Now all of this will take place before the bill reaches the Senate. Then it will be Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s chance to perform the same task: force the new administration to give ground or corral his caucus to vote en masse against the spend-a-thon.

Republicans haven’t always played their cards well over the last couple of years. Their tone has often been off-putting and their policy muddled. And they were hampered to a large extent by the pressure to defend the Republican president. Nevertheless, they have learned to operate in the minority with limited parliamentary rights and a dwindling caucus. And they found out the hard way that it doesn’t pay to get buffaloed into support for ill-conceived rescue plans.

So for now, they are doing the best with what they have — which isn’t much. And they are posing a challenge to the new administration: does the Obama team really want to reenact the New Deal or do they want a bipartisan plan that might just work to promote growth and lift the economy out of recession? We’ll find out the answer soon enough.
______________________________
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-gop-wises-up/
______________________________

My Thoughts

It's good to see Republicans actually acting like fiscal conservatives. After Bush and Congress inflated the deficit to monstrous proportions, the GOP needed to take a stand against the Bailoutpalooza that is running wild in Washington. The little piggies that are lining up at the stimulus trough needs to be stopped before all of our children and grandchildren are paying for our financial gluttony and stupidity into the poor house for generations to come.