Dudewho
Member
- Location
- NORTH CAROLINA
From your lips to Gods ears. It will only happen if we get LEADERSHIP from the Republican Brass. Don't hold your breath.
Boehner to step down in October!
- Thread starter QuickSilver
- Start date
From your lips to Gods ears. It will only happen if we get LEADERSHIP from the Republican Brass. Don't hold your breath.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
Get over it already.... The ACA is the LAW... and the ACA is hear to stay.. Not saying that it cannot be improved and expanded though... however.. it is NOT going away.
Dudewho
Member
- Location
- NORTH CAROLINA
Being faced with the fact of how it was really passed by sidestepping the house 2/3 vote the argument you give me is for me to get over it. When the Constitution is used as a floor mat for the members of the House and the Senate to enter the chambers nobody in America wins. Not a real good presidents to be setting.
But you're correct it could be improved, it could be expanded but hopefully it will get repealed.
I was hoping that after Obama is gone and we get a less determined far far left bunch as Democrats that Obama care as it is today would be removed. I don't think the US can maintain the program if it just continues to create large debts.
I would like to see it go back to a federal overview and then the states run it however they wish to as each state has different needs and requirements. For example, Florida is heavy on senior and middle age folks and is mid size physically. Other states are near empty of people but high in agriculture meaning more in the younger and family stages. Some states are heavy in industry, big cities, universities, big hospitals and lots of technology and have a good mix of all ages. Each should be able to address their needs independent of the one size fits all scheme we now have. Some states are so small they aren't as big as some counties in our larger states. One size does not fix all.
Medical support will continue as it has for approx 50 years now. Medicare does work for many but some, like me, I have bought other insurances to make it near painless to have to go to a hospital and seek out specialist to help care for the problems.
Right now I don't know what I have as my original insurer, ex employer, drop out saying Obama care was to be too high for him. So each year I get a credit to use for replacing with Obama care and the supplemental insurances that I like to add.
I would like to see it go back to a federal overview and then the states run it however they wish to as each state has different needs and requirements. For example, Florida is heavy on senior and middle age folks and is mid size physically. Other states are near empty of people but high in agriculture meaning more in the younger and family stages. Some states are heavy in industry, big cities, universities, big hospitals and lots of technology and have a good mix of all ages. Each should be able to address their needs independent of the one size fits all scheme we now have. Some states are so small they aren't as big as some counties in our larger states. One size does not fix all.
Medical support will continue as it has for approx 50 years now. Medicare does work for many but some, like me, I have bought other insurances to make it near painless to have to go to a hospital and seek out specialist to help care for the problems.
Right now I don't know what I have as my original insurer, ex employer, drop out saying Obama care was to be too high for him. So each year I get a credit to use for replacing with Obama care and the supplemental insurances that I like to add.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
Yes... You are just going to have to get over it... THe ACA is here to stay..
it seems that McCarthy knew he didn't have backup and withdrew his name. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...eaker-if-that-occurs-heres-what-happens-next/
The House of Representatives is, quite simply, a mess. Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) plans to get the heck out of Dodge by the end of the month. Speaker-in-Waiting Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) abruptly withdrew his name from consideration after he angered many fellow Republicans by suggesting that a committee ostensibly formed to investigate the Benghazi attack was actually formed to undermine Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
The House Freedom Caucus, a faction of hardline Republicans who are likely to push for aggressive tactics such as a government shutdown, endorsed an obscure lawmaker named Daniel Webster who has only served in the House since 2011, to be the next speaker.
It is possible that there is no one in America who can win an absolute majority of House members votes, the amount that is necessary to become the next speaker.
A prolonged period when the House is unable to agree on a new speaker is not unprecedented, although it has not happened for a very long time. Speaker Nathaniel Prentice Banks, who served from 1855-1857, was elected on the 133rd ballot, in part because disagreements over slavery prevented a majority of the House from coalescing around a single candidate. In 1859, similar disagreements eventually led the House to chose a freshman congressman, William Pennington, as House speaker.
Under ordinary circumstances, the House is highly constrained in its ability to act before a speaker is elected. The current uncertainty over who will be the next speaker, however, is unlike the impasses that eventually ended with Banks and Pennington’s elections because it comes midway through the current Congress’s two year term — and it also comes after the House already elected John Boehner as its speaker.
In an email, George Washington University political science Professor Sarah Binder explains that this enables Boehner himself to prevent chaos if his soon-to-be-former colleagues cannot agree on a replacement. Boehner, she notes, could “simply stay on as Speaker until the balloting is resolved.” At least one of Boehner’s allies in Congress says that the sitting speaker is likely to do this if necessary.
But what if Boehner refuses to serve through a drawn out process to choose his successor — of if he is overthrown in an intraparty coup? Binder points to a provision of the House rules that govern vacancies in the speakership after a speaker has already been elected as a likely solution. “As soon as practicable after the election of the Speaker and whenever appropriate thereafter, the Speaker shall deliver to the Clerk a list of Members,” this provision provides. The rules add that “in the case of a vacancy in the Office of the Speaker,” the first name on this list becomes Speaker pro tempore and “may exercise such authorities of the Office of Speaker as may be necessary and appropriate to that end.”
A spokesperson for the House Clerk confirmed to ThinkProgress that Speaker Boehner has delivered such a list of names, and an entry in the Congressional Record also confirms that Boehner delivered the list on January 6. The Clerk’s office, however, would not reveal who is in line to become speaker pro tempore should the speakership become vacant. A request to the speaker’s office was not returned as of this writing.
Ironically, however, the most likely name to appear at the top of this list is the man who just withdrew his name from consideration for the speakership. Rep. Kevin McCarthy, after all, remains the House majority leader and Boehner’s top deputy.
The good news for the nation’s economy, however, is that there will at least be someone who will take on the speaker’s power to bring bills to the floor in the event that the House cannot select someone to fill a vacant speakership. The speaker pro tempore, should their services become necessary, is likely to have a very difficult first few weeks on the job.
Legislation raising the debt ceiling is necessary by early November to prevent the United States from defaulting on its debts, and the government shuts down after December 11 unless Congress enacts new funding.
Legislation raising the debt ceiling is necessary by early November to prevent the United States from defaulting on its debts, and the government shuts down after December 11 unless Congress enacts new funding.
Why should the Congress have to keep raising the debt ceiling. It seems that whomever is constantly spending more than what we have allowed should be shown the door. Want money here, take it from there. Get our budget back in balance or even reducing our debt. Just like we have to do at home.
Why should the Congress have to keep raising the debt ceiling. It seems that whomever is constantly spending more than what we have allowed should be shown the door. Want money here, take it from there. Get our budget back in balance or even reducing our debt. Just like we have to do at home.
Last edited:
I never kept up with any of this, as I've never been very politically minded, but here's a review of the debt ceiling for anyone who wants to know more.
http://billmoyers.com/2013/01/11/the-partisan-history-of-the-debt-ceiling/
As we head toward what will likely be another rancorous debt ceiling debate, the writers at The Guardian’s Datablog have updated their great series of charts that tell the ceiling’s story.
Since 1944, America’s debt ceiling has been increased 94 times. Up until the mid-90s, it was a pretty routine part of congressional business. But in the fall of 1995, Republican House leaders Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey and John Boehner announced that within seven years they wanted $245 billion in tax cuts, entitlement reform and a balanced budget. President Clinton refused to give in and Americans dealt with the most serious government shutdown in U.S. history. In early 1996, when Moody’s announced they were considering downgrading America’s debt rating, the Republicans finally folded.
“The most crucial difference between Clinton’s debt limit battle and the current crisis is that, in 1996, the Republicans were bluffing. No Republican seriously considered defaulting on the debt to be a viable option,” Kara Brandeisky wrote inThe New Republic.
A decade and a half later, in 2011, the debates created a stalemate that lead to an actual credit downgrade. (Clinton said that if he were still president, he would use the 14th Amendment — which many think makes the concept of debt ceilings unconstitutional — to bypass Congress. President Obama, a former professor of constitutional law, has so far resisted that option.)
Given the recent reluctance of the more conservative wing of the GOP to raise the ceiling, and the general GOP resistance to raising taxes, you may be surprised to learn that over the years Republican presidents have raised the debt ceiling more times than Democratic presidents.
http://billmoyers.com/2013/01/11/the-partisan-history-of-the-debt-ceiling/
As we head toward what will likely be another rancorous debt ceiling debate, the writers at The Guardian’s Datablog have updated their great series of charts that tell the ceiling’s story.
Since 1944, America’s debt ceiling has been increased 94 times. Up until the mid-90s, it was a pretty routine part of congressional business. But in the fall of 1995, Republican House leaders Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey and John Boehner announced that within seven years they wanted $245 billion in tax cuts, entitlement reform and a balanced budget. President Clinton refused to give in and Americans dealt with the most serious government shutdown in U.S. history. In early 1996, when Moody’s announced they were considering downgrading America’s debt rating, the Republicans finally folded.
“The most crucial difference between Clinton’s debt limit battle and the current crisis is that, in 1996, the Republicans were bluffing. No Republican seriously considered defaulting on the debt to be a viable option,” Kara Brandeisky wrote inThe New Republic.
A decade and a half later, in 2011, the debates created a stalemate that lead to an actual credit downgrade. (Clinton said that if he were still president, he would use the 14th Amendment — which many think makes the concept of debt ceilings unconstitutional — to bypass Congress. President Obama, a former professor of constitutional law, has so far resisted that option.)
Given the recent reluctance of the more conservative wing of the GOP to raise the ceiling, and the general GOP resistance to raising taxes, you may be surprised to learn that over the years Republican presidents have raised the debt ceiling more times than Democratic presidents.
Well you might consider that spending money on guns and bombs for the military is still spending, every bit as much as helping citizens with medical coverage.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
Bob.. first... Apparently you have no clue what the debt ceiling is. It does not allow for MORE spending... it allows us to pay the debt that is already there. Do you understand how credit cards work? If not.. I'll explain it to you.. You go out and purchase an item.. and then in a month or so a bill comes to your house and you have to pay it.. IS that simple enough for you? It's the same with the debt ceiling.. We have already made the debt.. and now we need to pass legislation to allow us to borrow more to pay it.. It's NOT NEW SPENDING.... If we don't raise the debt ceiling we then default on our loans.. LIke how a credit card company turns someone over to a collection agency and your credit rating goes down the toilet. If we default then our national credit rating goes down...
You talk about getting the debt down.. Well... how can we do that if congress does not raise the debt ceiling in order to make the payments? That's ok Bob... Ben Carson doesn't understand what the debt ceiling is either..
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/10/08/stupid-gop-ben-carson-idea-debt-limit.html
The proof that ignorance has overtaken the Republican Party can be found in a recent interview where Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson appeared to have no clue about the debt limit.
Transcript of Carson struggling with trying to answer a debt limit question on American Public Radio’s “Marketplace:”
Ryssdal: All right, so let’s talk about debt then and the budget. As you know, Treasury Secretary Lew has come out in the last couple of days and said, “We’re gonna run out of money, we’re gonna run out of borrowing authority, on the fifth of November.” Should the Congress then and the president not raise the debt limit? Should we default on our debt?
Carson: Let me put it this way: if I were the president, I would not sign an increased budget. Absolutely would not do it. They would have to find a place to cut.
Ryssdal: To be clear, it’s increasing the debt limit, not the budget, but I want to make sure I understand you. You’d let the United States default rather than raise the debt limit.
Carson: No, I would provide the kind of leadership that says, “Get on the stick guys, and stop messing around, and cut where you need to cut, because we’re not raising any spending limits, period.”Ryssdal: I’m gonna try one more time, sir. This is debt that’s already obligated. Would you not favor increasing the debt limit to pay the debts already incurred?
Carson: What I’m saying is what we have to do is restructure the way that we create debt. I mean if we continue along this, where does it stop? It never stops. You’re always gonna ask the same question every year. And we’re just gonna keep going down that pathway. That’s one of the things I think that the people are tired of.
Ryssdal: I’m really trying not to be circular here, Dr. Carson, but if you’re not gonna raise the debt limit and you’re not gonna give specifics on what you’re gonna cut, then how are we going to know what you are going to do as president of the United States?
Carson: OK, let me try to explain it in a different way. If, in fact, we have a number of different areas that are contributing to the increasing expenditures and the continued expenditures that are putting us further and further into the hole. You’re familiar I’m sure with the concept of the fiscal gap.
A candidate who knew what they were talking about would have answered yes or no to this simple question. Since Ben Carson seemed to have no idea what the debt limit is, his answer turned into a stumbling expedition for an explanation.
Between Donald Trump’s lack of knowledge on everything and Carson’s lack of understanding of the issues, it is clear to see that stupid has risen to the top of the Republican Party.A person can make a lot of money in business or be a successful brain surgeon and not be prepared to be president. Ben Carson is Donald Trump without the offensiveness and bluster.Carson isn’t fit to be president, and to trust this man with the direction of the country would be a collective act of self-destructive irresponsibility.
Long lecture saying nothing. With credit cards and we do not pay, the credit card gets cancelled and no more debts but likely a court whatever to force us to pay or do punishment time. The point being that somehow, Congress must find a way to end this going over budget all the time. Make the decisions to add costs show how that money could be made available before it gets passed.
That is what should be happening in our Congress. They stop adding more debts and start paying down. Solutions might need fixing our tax system so none of the rich can hide their wealth in other countries and no businesses can do similar and companies like GE would need to start paying taxes in the US. Our tax rates then might be lowered to be likke other countries, after it is shown that taxpayers are now paying in the US.
That is what should be happening in our Congress. They stop adding more debts and start paying down. Solutions might need fixing our tax system so none of the rich can hide their wealth in other countries and no businesses can do similar and companies like GE would need to start paying taxes in the US. Our tax rates then might be lowered to be likke other countries, after it is shown that taxpayers are now paying in the US.
Scary really to think of him being in charge of our country. I've said before that he may be a fine surgeon, but he should stick to doctoring or perhaps being a preacher, something he would do well.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
What kind of magic credit card do YOU have Bob? Run up the balance and you refuse to pay and your credit card company says.. "that's OK Bob.. You don't have to... we will cancel your obligation"? lol!! PLEASE tell me so I can sign up for one of those cards.. lol!!
Again... the debt ceiling simply authorizes payment of existing debt... Do you think the USA should default? Do you think our credit rating should be lowered? Again and again you prove your limited understanding of the issues. What's sad is that there are about 40 congressmen in the House that also have a limited understanding.. and would rather destroy the country than actually find solutions...
Please re read my post as you are quoting it entirely wrong.
I used the credit card situation to show how the Congress is wrong. They tell us the limits, debt ceiling, and we have to abide by it or be in real trouble. Credit card cancelled or maybe even end up in court if we don't pay up the debt. And yes that is a limit for debts and should be watched and honored. Should we default, not at all. And that puts the burden right into the hands of Congress to avoid going over that target any more. As that 18.5 trillion debt does get paid down, I would hope they then lower the debt ceiling accordingly.
Now we have a congress that has a debt ceiling already posted. To avoid breaking that limit they need to pass balanced budget items that take from one place to another use, if needed to be done. Our government is not to be just another crap shoot as it has done for far too many years. No reason for continuing to just keep on raising the debt ceiling over and over.
Time for an honest government and not the way it has been running. We know how much our taxes bring in so expenditures should never be that high or higher. If our Congress folks can not add or subtract then we need to hire some accountants to help them put together new budget items.
You notice that I am not blaming one side or the other, it is our Congress that has folks from all persuasions overseeing our budgets.