Since the proposal for the bipartisan commision did not pass in the Senate, President Obama will be addressing the national debt and his idea of utilizing executive order in his State of Union speech tommrow.
Evidently, Republicans who disapprove of tax increases and the Democrats who dislike cutting spending in Medicaid and Medicare managed to get 46 votes against the commission. As we know, Senate needs at least 60 votes in order for it to pass. According to the article, President Obama's idea is to "reduce annual budget deficits and slow the growth of the national debt". Many are outraged at his decision to cut Medicaid and Medicare spending but not cut defense spending. I'm a bit aggrivated at that too but its either one or the other. People are really in need of medical assistance now with unemployment and people want to be secure at least in their own country with all the plane bombings and terrorist attacks that have been occuring. What would you give up? I don't really know at this point.
The Congressional Budget Office stated that the deficit of this year would be $1.3 trillion which is apparently better than last year. (ends Sept 30th) This $1.3 trillion equals about 9.2 percent of gross domestic product. Ouch! They believe that the unemployment rate in 2012 will be a little under nine percent. At least its an improvement...and when you think about it, even one percent indicates that a million more Americans have found jobs!
The budget office estimates that the high deficits may accumulate over the years to 2020 where it will equal the nation's economic output! Thats a bit scary. They also state that intrest payments "will more than triple in dollar terms over the decade." ($207 billion this year => $723 billion in 2020)
"The public's belief that spending is out of control is undercutting Mr.Obama's support, polls show." Is spending out of control? Hasn't President Obama been trying to cut down on spending this whole time? Why does the public believe this? I mean I use to believe this when George W Bush was president but not now with how President Obama seems to be addressing the issues.
Later this week will be a vote to increase the $12 trillion debt limit. I know its needed in order to borrow more money but I don't like how they are increasing it.
"Other Congressional Republican leaders have openly indicated they would refuse to serve on a commission, especially one that Mr.Obama creates" Really now? Our country is in a 12 trillion in debt and they won't cooperate with the president simply because of whatever their reasons are. I am almost completely sure that none of those reasons are even legitamate. I wish they would just get over the whole party, racial and other differences to actually figure out a good solution to the problem than fight over next election seats! I, for one, would defintely support and respect a person in Congress who votes for the good of the nation than to keep his seat!
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The Republican leaders who stated they would not serve on this committee, in my opinion, have a legitimate reason.
The proposal for the commission did not pass in Congress-- to use a circumventing way to try and reach the same objective seems arrogant and a little unnerving. The message that sends to me is that Obama is so incredibly sure that this is the solution that he is willing to disregard the vote of the Senate in order to impress his will.
It doesn't seem to be a very good leadership tactic to have the Congress vote on a proposal, and then try and disregard their opinion when it doesn't come out the way one wants.
So to me, the Republican leaders are perfectly justified in their distaste for the committee the executive order would create. Do I wish everyone would just lay aside their differences to better solve the economy crisis? Of course. But that's not going to happen for a very very very long time, and I don't think this commission is going to help the government reach that goal any faster.
As for the deficit...
There seems to be a lack of fiscal accountability in government. It's ironic that in our reading packet (the one with the Trump skating rink case study) that accountability was considered one of the reasons that government efficiency is different than corporation efficiency. If any corporation had a 1.3 trillion dollar debt from just one year, it would be ridiculously beyond bankrupt and would be considered a massive failure in the public eye. Yet the government continues to spend money it doesn't have and borrow money it's never going to pay back, which makes the government seem not too accountable when it comes to spending money.
Whether it's pay cuts, cut backs on benefits or pensions, or cutting back on programs, the government has got to find some way to reduce spending because now, the U.S. government spending IS out of control. Yes, that's the way it has been, and if no action is taken that's the way it's going to be.
Sorry this turned into a semi-angry but really just frustrated rant... Thanks for the post Lily, very interesting.
Well you put more thought into this than I did I guess. It does seem as if President Obama is forcing it even after Senate overall disapproved of the commitee which is somewhat contradictory to his attempt to listen to all sides. You are also right that at this point its almost impossible for people to set aside their differences to get this done. Sorry, I haven't really been following up on the news; but doesn't the government need the money to meet the public's expectations? (for instance health care)
" if no action is taken that's the way it's going to be. "
That's definitely true. How is there going to be action though if both sides disagree on what to cut spending on and whether to initiate a tax increase?
If Obama's concern is trying to unify America and trying to bring equality to all, my question is then why is he putting himself above all else? It's true that sometimes it's important for decisive leadership, but then like Kristyn said, it's kind of ridiculous that he went and disregarded Congress's opinion completely to impose his will upon the nation. An executive order should be used only when necessary not just whenever one individual deems it necessary.
It's also true that if no action is taken, then there will be no results... but at the cost of losing your approval amongst many Congressmen and women? and possibly at the disapproval among Americans? eh.
Ultimately, the Republicans are going to complain about SOMETHING. It's either, take action or sit and watch. Looking at it now, I have to say it's smarter to take action than to guess and check when the deficit might rebound.
"It's also true that if no action is taken, then there will be no results... but at the cost of losing your approval amongst many Congressmen and women? and possibly at the disapproval among Americans?"
I believe he said in a recent interview that he rather be a good one term president than a decent two term president. Good doesn't necessarily mean popular although sometimes there is a correlation. I like how he wants to act and do what he thinks is best as getting a bill passed in the Congress is hard enough but I still think he should try to appeal and get more supporters for his actions before he takes a leap and issues an executive order.
Post a Comment