HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » ugh. Why hasn't the Demo...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:29 PM

ugh. Why hasn't the Democratic-led Senate submitted/passed a budget in 3 years?

My google skills are lacking and I haven't been able to find a good explanation.

Help me shut up my conservative brother who's a lawyer.
Thanks!

41 replies, 6654 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply ugh. Why hasn't the Democratic-led Senate submitted/passed a budget in 3 years? (Original post)
Pryderi Jun 2012 OP
mfcorey1 Jun 2012 #1
coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #2
Blue_In_AK Jun 2012 #3
FBaggins Jun 2012 #6
Yupster Jun 2012 #25
tritsofme Jun 2012 #39
tabatha Jun 2012 #4
GarroHorus Jun 2012 #5
TheWraith Jun 2012 #8
Yupster Jun 2012 #26
GarroHorus Jun 2012 #34
Blue_In_AK Jun 2012 #9
dems_rightnow Jun 2012 #10
Pryderi Jun 2012 #13
FarLeftFist Jun 2012 #18
Yupster Jun 2012 #28
GarroHorus Jun 2012 #35
tritsofme Jun 2012 #40
Enrique Jun 2012 #7
Pryderi Jun 2012 #11
kentuck Jun 2012 #17
coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #27
freshwest Jun 2012 #33
Pryderi Jun 2012 #38
GarroHorus Jun 2012 #36
demtenjeep Jun 2012 #12
Yupster Jun 2012 #29
GarroHorus Jun 2012 #37
Tennessee Gal Jun 2012 #14
kentuck Jun 2012 #20
HopeHoops Jun 2012 #15
YellowRubberDuckie Jun 2012 #19
HopeHoops Jun 2012 #22
YellowRubberDuckie Jun 2012 #24
Yupster Jun 2012 #30
HopeHoops Jun 2012 #31
Yupster Jun 2012 #32
Yupster Jun 2012 #21
HopeHoops Jun 2012 #23
The Second Stone Jun 2012 #16
B Calm Jun 2012 #41

Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:31 PM

1. Because of the number of votes needed and the toxic makeup from the right in the senate. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:33 PM

2. Bookmarking for later. I think your brother is wrong on the facts or, at best,

 

creating a straw man solely in order to knock it over. But I need to do a little checking first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:33 PM

3. Because the House does budgets

and it is controlled by the Republicans? Just guessing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #3)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:41 PM

6. Well... Except they've passed some.

Bad ones... But something.

The real reason is simple. Any budget has good things and things that can be targeted for attack. Why would we pass something that we know can't ever become law and will only become the subject of attacks? A Democratic budget would necessarily raise taxes and spending. How would that be spun in November?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #6)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:47 PM

25. A correct answer

There is an awful lot of wrong information on this thread.

Normally, the House passes a budget. The Senate passes a very different budget.

A conference committee works up a compromise that is then voted on and passed by each house. Then the President signs it.

Often the budgets each house passes are not taken too seriously because both sides know the real plan will be written in the Conference Committee anyway.

So what's been different the last few years?

Just like Fbaggins said.

The House passed their budget, the Ryan budget.

They have been roundly criticized for the decisions they made in the budget.

The Senate has made no attempt to pass one.

Why?

They don't want to pass one and get roundly criticized for whatever decisions they will have to make. Better to just criticize the one the other guys passed.

They could pass one if they felt like it. Budget bills only require 51 votes as they can't be filibustered.

We'll see if Harry Reid's strategy works politically.

I guess you could call it the audacity of cowardice.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #25)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 12:38 AM

39. Budget resolutions set targets for Congress, they are not law.

The president does not sign or veto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:39 PM

5. Because the budget includes raising revenue and under the constitution ALL bills for raising...

 

revenue MUST originate in the House of Representatives:

United States Constitution

Article I.

Section 7.

All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GarroHorus (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:44 PM

8. Bing! It's literally illegal for the Senate to create a budget.

People need to go back to civics class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheWraith (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:49 PM

26. Gosh - so all these years that each house would pass their budget

and then the Conference Committee would come up with a compromise plan for each house to vote on again -- you mean all those years, the senate was breaking the law?

Who knew?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #26)

Wed Jun 13, 2012, 01:21 AM

34. Might want to check the wording of the constitution

 

The budget bill can be amended and acted upon as any other bill once the House submits it. Senate is free to change things prior to a conference committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GarroHorus (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:50 PM

9. Okay, that's what I was thinking of.

I knew it had something to do with the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GarroHorus (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:53 PM

10. Budgets are plans, not spending bills

Both the Senate and House are to pass budgets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GarroHorus (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:03 PM

13. It looks like the President is the one that actually submits a budget.

http://www.results.org/issues/the_federal_budget_process/

Federal Budget Process
Step 1: President’s Budget Request
The budget process begins with the president’s submission to Congress of the administration’s proposed budget for the coming fiscal year, which begins on October 1. The budget must be submitted by the first Monday in February. The president’s proposal does not have the force of law, but includes detailed spending levels for all programs. Though only input to the budget process, it generally sets the tone for the process in three ways:
It reveals the president’s beliefs about how much money the federal government should spend (not only in the coming fiscal year, but also in the following five years or more) as well as how much it should tax.
It sets the president’s priorities for spending, such as how the president would like to fund issues including education, defense, and health.
It suggests changes to spending and tax policies.
The president’s proposal is formally written up by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and it usually includes thousands of pages of supporting information, such as historical tables of past budget statistics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Reply #13)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:28 PM

18. The President has submitted a budget. It didn't pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #18)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:50 PM

28. And then the house presented a budget and it did pass

Next comes the senate proposing and passing a budget.

Then the Conference Committee goes to work ironing out the differences.

Except the senate hasn't done one for a few years now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #28)

Wed Jun 13, 2012, 01:22 AM

35. Once the House passes a budget, it takes 60 votes in the Senate to do anything.

 

You cannot get 60 members of the Senate to agree the sky is blue, much less anything else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GarroHorus (Reply #35)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 12:39 AM

40. Budget resolutions pass the Senate with 50+1 votes. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Enrique (Reply #7)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:58 PM

11. Thanks. I guess it proves my brother is correct. :( n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:26 PM

17. They passed the Budget Control Act...

These are the automatic cuts that will kick in later this year if nothing is agreed upon. Both sides signed off on this legislation but the Repubs are saying they will not abide by their agreement because they do not want to cut defense spending.
---------------------

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/01/congress-s-budget-delay-is-no-big-deal.html

<snip>
But outside Washington spin rooms, a question emerges: is a 1,000-day lag since the last budget such a terrible thing?

No, say several policy and governance analysts consulted by The Daily Beast. Since 2009, Congress has funded itself on a series of continuing resolutions (CRs), pieces of legislation affirming current spending levels. Congress also can pass new spending bills at any time, or drain a program’s budget if it’s underperforming, which legislators occasionally do. CRs don't include the enforcement bite of a formal budget, but that naunce might come across as inside Washington baseball. “I can’t imagine who would be truly upset about this,” says Stephen Hess, a governance analyst with the Brookings Institution. “ ultimately result in a budget, just not a new budget. I don’t see it as a question worth going to the barricades for.”

<snip>
What irks Republicans so much is that current spending levels are unsustainable, adding about $1 trillion to the national debt each year. The budget needs to be cut, they say, and without a new budget up for debate, Republicans have little power to slash programs and agencies they dislike. (Yet Hess notes a hidden benefit of CRs for Republicans: no new budget means that spending is unlikely to go up dramatically, either.)

<snip>
To defend against the GOP attacks, Democrats point to spending caps that both chambers, and both parties, agreed to in August, including a spending reduction measure known as the Budget Control Act. Hoping to quell the media storm, the White House also notes that Obama will submit a new budget proposal on Feb. 13. Afterward, Senate Democrats will have an opportunity to debate it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:49 PM

27. Your brother may be technically correct that the Senate has

 

not passed a budget for three years, but he ignores a salient fact you might throw in his face:

"For fiscal 1999, 2005 and 2007, the House and Senate failed to reconcile their different bills and pass a compromise measure. In these latter three cases, the Republicans were in the majority in both chambers of Congress."

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2012/apr/26/john-boehner/john-boehner-says-senate-dems-havent-passed-budget/

Question to your brother: Why didn't the Repigs pass a reconciled budget the three years when Repigs controlled both houses of Congress? Answer: they're demagogic hypocritical pieces of shit, just like your brother.

Don't know your brother, so please take use of 'Repig' under advisement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 08:52 PM

33. Hope he returns soon to get this for his brother. Kicking it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #27)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 12:21 AM

38. Thanks!!! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 13, 2012, 01:25 AM

36. Ask your brother if he believes he could get 60 Senators to agree the slky is blue.

 

Since the answer to that for anybody who actually, you know, follows the Senate is a resounding "not only no but FUCK ASS NO!!!", it's pretty clear why the Senate hasn't passed shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:59 PM

12. because money bills start in the house

It is in the constitution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demtenjeep (Reply #12)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:51 PM

29. They did indeed start it

In fact, they passed their budget.

Now it's the senate's turn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #29)

Wed Jun 13, 2012, 01:25 AM

37. Senate requires 60 votes.

 

You cannot get 60 Senators to agree the sky is blue, much less anything else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:13 PM

14. Fact Sheet Responding to Republican “No Budget” Claims

Republican Claims That the Senate Has Not Passed a Budget Are WRONG

(Prepared by Majority Staff, Senate Budget Committee)

It is wrong to assert that there is no budget. The Budget Control Act enacted in August contained the budget for this year. It was passed by both the House and Senate, signed by the President, and enacted into law.

The Budget Control Act achieved all of the essential elements of a traditional budget – setting discretionary caps, providing enforcement mechanisms, and creating a process for addressing entitlement spending and revenues.

In many ways, the Budget Control Act was even more extensive than a traditional budget:

It has the force of law, unlike a budget resolution that is not signed by the President.
It set discretionary caps for 10 years, instead of the one year normally set in a budget resolution.
It provided enforcement mechanisms, including a two-year “deemer,” allowing budget points of order to be enforced.
And it addressed entitlement spending and revenues by creating the “Super Committee,” which was given explicit authority to
reform entitlements and the tax code. The Super Committee process represented an enhanced version of the reconciliation
process that can be established under a budget resolution. And it was further backed up with a $1.2 trillion sequester.


http://democrats.senate.gov/2012/01/24/fact-sheet-responding-to-republican-no-budget-claims/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tennessee Gal (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:29 PM

20. Yep.

They passed the Budget Control Act which means there is no need at present to pass a budget bill every year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:14 PM

15. Filibuster without having to actually speak for hours on end.

 

It's as simple as that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:29 PM

19. Ding Ding Ding Ding!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YellowRubberDuckie (Reply #19)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:41 PM

22. Thanks, but that's the real problem with it. As per the Constitution...

 

A simple majority vote is all that is required, with the VP standing in to break a tie. The filibuster only exists because the Senate is allowed to set its own rules at the beginning of every new session (2 years) and they have kept it in place. It used to have a valid reason for existing (think Strom Thurmond here), but it's time has expired. Now all the GOP has to do is threaten it but they haven't done it in its intended sense in decades. Yeah, I'm pissed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:45 PM

24. I agree...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:52 PM

30. The filibuster does not apply to budget bills

It only takes 51 votes to pass a budget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #30)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 08:18 PM

31. Yeah but they throw in irrelevant shit like abortion legislation to get around that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #31)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 08:47 PM

32. Harry Reid could write whatever budget he wants

He could pass it with 51 Democratic votes and defeat any Repub amendments with 51 Democratic votes.

Then the real bargaining would start behind closed doors at the Conference Committee.

Why are people making excuses for him.

It's a political strategy. Maybe a brilliant one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:41 PM

21. Budget bills aren't filibustered

They only take 51 votes to pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #21)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:43 PM

23. No. They only require a majority of those present. But they've still been filibustered.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Tue Jun 12, 2012, 07:25 PM

16. Budget bills must originate in the House

of Representatives. There is no good reason the Senate cannot modify a bill that comes to it by amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pryderi (Original post)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 12:40 AM

41. Republican Obstruction, and your brother

is a lawyer. . damn. . . is he really that dumb that he didn't know the answer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread