Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP: Highlights of budget and debt limit pact

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:38 PM
Original message
AP: Highlights of budget and debt limit pact
A bit more detail beyond the headline items:

(snip)

--Create a 12-person, House-Senate committee evenly divided between the political parties; charged with producing up to $1.5 trillion more in deficit cuts over 10 years. If a majority of the committee agrees on a plan, it would receive a vote in both the House and the Senate. If the panel deadlocks or fails to produce at least $1.2 trillion in additional cuts, or if Congress fails to enact its recommendations, the White House budget office would impose across-the-board spending cuts across much of the federal budget, including the Pentagon, domestic agency budgets and farm subsidies. Many federal benefits programs, however, would not be covered by this, including Social Security, Medicaid, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement benefits.

--Require both House and Senate to vote on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

--Establish "program integrity" initiatives aimed at stemming abuses in benefits programs like Social Security.

--Increase funding for Pell Grants for low-income college students by $17 billion over 2012-13, financed by curbs in student loan subsidies.


Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2011/07/31/highlights_of_budget_and_debt_limit_pact/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. What's missing are tax increases on the wealthy. They get off again
Edited on Sun Jul-31-11 10:40 PM by neverforget
So much for "shared sacrifice"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Maybe the committee, if they're truly non-partisan, will recommend
that. I think the CBO figures support that retrieving that revenue would go a LONG way in addressing the debt.

And I've actually heard some Republicans agree that the loopholes need to be closed.

Anyway, the tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012, and hopefully we will get our sound bites in a row before then and the masses will realize the facts.

I'm not willing to give up - it's not over 'til it's over. :hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. If they do it won't pass
And then of course we get the "automatic" cuts, which kinda suck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Definitely a possibility, but I'm still not willing to give up. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. Maybe., just maybe
This sets up a way for the republicans to actually get behind cuts to defense?

Certainly, it is the largest and most bloated budget. Easiest to cut back with little pain.
What I like is that now we can focus our efforts of limiting the defense budget on just 12 congress critters. It makes the odds far better, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
southerncrone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. Why do Dems give away the farm & don't even get magic beans in return?
We got ziltch.

Plus STILL no jobs.
:puke:




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. "Many federal benefits programs, however, would not be covered by this"
"Many federal benefits programs, however, would not be covered by this, including Social Security, Medicaid, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement benefits."

WIN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. It's $1.5 trillion over 10 years. What are people screaming about around here?
No tax increase on the upper brackets? Is there a chance that sunsetting the Bush Tax Cuts could be prevented somehow?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
7. Here's a LINK to the White House fact sheet regarding the DEAL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
10. This statement is curious
--Establish "program integrity" initiatives aimed at stemming abuses in benefits programs like Social Security

It would seem to me that there isn't a whole lot of abuses in social security. It is pretty cut and dried how much one gets. The disability part of it is very difficult to get and you are told to expect to be turned down at least twice when you apply. I am sure there are a small amt of scammers in the program but not enough to really drive up the costs in a significant way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Those are my thoughts on that, but I guess every dime counts. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-31-11 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
11. Sounds like a good compromise
The committee should be essentially the focus on "fraud and waste" which has been on the agenda since the campaign. The balanced budget amendment will fail, but its probably just there to allow some teabagger chest-thumping. They're welcome to it.

...and the "across the board cuts" - including the pentagon - pretty much makes the whole amount easy, spread over 10 years. I think the military draw-downs themselves could almost do it.

Basically, it wound up being a huge show over practically nothing - all the hoopla but the baggers got nothing, social spending is preserved, and the debt limit is raised.

Kudos to the president!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC