Fri Feb 15, 2013, 12:41 AM
TomCADem (8,430 posts)
Senate Democrats offer plan replacing automatic budget cuts
Democrats in the Senate on Thursday rallied around a $110 billion tax increase and spending cut plan that would postpone more severe automatic spending cuts set to begin on March 1.
The proposal, which is expected to get shot down by Republicans who oppose raising taxes any further to reduce budget deficits, might never come to a Senate vote. But some of its components could be included in future budget negotiations.
Before the plan was formally unveiled, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell called it "a political stunt" and "a total waste of time."
The Senate Democrats' plan would cancel the across-the-board spending cuts, known as a sequester, through December 31. The cuts would be revived in January 2014 unless replaced as part of a more comprehensive deficit reduction deal.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-usa-fiscal-cuts-idUSBRE91D1JB20130215?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=71&google_editors_picks=true
Here is the fact that the corporate media refuses to point out. For all of the Republican complaints about how the sequester will hurt our national security and the economy, apparently the threat to our national security and the economy is not enough to cause them to reconsider their opposition to tax increases to the rich. Worse, the media lets Republicans use the talking point that we have already raised taxes without asking them haven't we already cut a trillion in spending?
4 replies, 1483 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Senate Democrats offer plan replacing automatic budget cuts (Original post)
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Fri Feb 15, 2013, 09:10 PM
24601 (3,723 posts)
4. So how long has it been since the Senate passed a budget at all? Is it 3 years? And the majority
can't blame the minority since Senate rules don't allow a budget resolution to be filibustered. This has been absolutely unacceptable. They should have passed a budget and, presuming it would differ from the House, send it on to a conference committee.