obama's earmarks

[Holden McGroin]

I don't think the part in bold is correct. Congress makes the budget and the President either approves or disapproves it. He can make requests but it is up to Congress to decide if they wish to grant those requests.

There is a law, written and passed by Congress, that requires the executive branch to give the congress a budget.  This is a starting point for their work in bankrupting the country.  This budget request is by no means binding upon the congress.

The way in which Congress develops tax and spending legislation is guided by a set of specific procedures laid out in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.  The centerpiece of the Budget Act is the requirement that Congress each year develop a “budget resolution” setting overarching limits on spending and on tax cuts.  These limits apply to legislation developed by individual congressional committees as well as to any amendments offered to such legislation on the House or Senate floor.

The following is a brief overview of the federal budget process, including:

the President’s budget request, which kicks off the budget process each year;
the congressional budget resolution — how it is developed and what it contains;
how the terms of the budget resolution are enforced by the House and Senate; and
budget “reconciliation,” a special procedure used in some years to facilitate the passage of spending and tax legislation.

[Elfie]

There is a law, written and passed by Congress, that requires the executive branch to give the congress a budget.  This is a starting point for their work in bankrupting the country.  This budget request is by no means binding upon the congress.

Gotcha, thanks. 

[Holden McGroin]

Stating that Congress alone is responsible for the budget, is like saying a account it is responsible for your own household budget. Sure the account can do the paper work and give you and idea of what you can spend, but it's up to you to make the decision on what actually gets spent.

Have you even read the Constitution of the United States of America?

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

In your example, the accountant is the President.

[Hangtime]

The Congress has the power to not be idiots and spend like there is no tomorrow!

It is possible for ethical lawmakers to exist!  

Thomas Jefferson, Benjimen Franklin, John Hancock were real men!

Get a congress that balances a budget and puts country before self!

We all hear of the Presidential race, but how much do we hear about or Reps and 1/3 of the Senate?

Yup... so we go after the senators that 'ok' pork. Term limits will help...

One of the poll agencies ran a poll awhile back, the question was : "Is Your Senator / Congressman Corrupt?"

The answer was, nationally, an overwhelming 'No.' This was at the same time congress had a single digit approval rating with the same poll agency.

Seems folks are convinced THEIR congressman is ok, it's all the other ones that are corrupt.

Change won't occur till we ALL refuse to send back our incumbents.

ALL INCUMBENTS. Local, state and federal.

So, if we want change.. we gotta change our politicians. Picking a president or a congressman based on Party does not cut it... change the body in the suit. The corpses in 'em is what's stinking.

[crockett]

Well IMO a lot of change would occur if we got rid of career politicians via term limits. Ted Stevens is a perfect example of why not having term limits are a bad thing. The guy has been in power so long and was so corrupt that his state doesn't vote him out because he has so much political power.

I say give them 6 years in congress & the senate. That give them a max of 12 years if they can get elected to both branches.

[1pLUs44]

I wouldn't mind if Nancy Pelosi were to just 'disappear' from congress and America. She is a parasite, nothing else.

[Elfie]

Well IMO a lot of change would occur if we got rid of career politicians via term limits.

We do agree on something.

Congress passed term limits on the office of the Presidency. If term limits are good enough for the President then they are good enough for Congress as well.

[sluggish]

Well IMO a lot of change would occur if we got rid of career politicians via term limits. Ted Stevens is a perfect example of why not having term limits are a bad thing. The guy has been in power so long and was so corrupt that his state doesn't vote him out because he has so much political power.

I say give them 6 years in congress & the senate. That give them a max of 12 years if they can get elected to both branches.

While I agree that something needs to be done, one look at the Michigan state legislature shows that term limits are not the end-all be-all.  What we have is a never ending cavalcade of first termers with absolutely no experience in the art of diplomacy.  This has greatly effected our state's progress (I'm not going to give all the credit to the commie Canadian in the governor's mansion...)

In fact, the Michigan state government could be used as a microcosm of what to expect with a federal government packed full of a bunch of first term Dem's in congress and Obama at the helm in the White House.

cod hep us all...

[bongaroo]

I wouldn't mind if Nancy Pelosi were to just 'disappear' from congress and America. She is a parasite, nothing else.

Funny, someone said the same about you and the BBS!  Zing!

jk, but seriously, quit just flaming the boards with this troll flame war crapola.

[lazs2]

one can only hope that Mccain  is telling the truth.  He says..  admits that..  congress spent too much and that he will use the power of the veto to end such spending. 

I am not sure that osamabinbiden would ever even dare promise such a thing..  they have both voted for billions of dollars every year to be spent on worthless goodies.   They claim they want to spend even more.

lazs

[GodinagreyHoody]

A crowd that had control of the country for eight years and did nothing but spend us into oblivion, gave Palin a standing ovation.

Scary

There was a poll around here right before Palin's RC speech that had asked if Palin was a good choice. The results showed 37% yes, 63% no. Right after her speech the poll was taken again and the results reversed.

I wonder how much support Ron Paul could muster if he were allowed to speak with such a prime time audience.

[lazs2]

Don't know... seems logical to me.. You ask people about a woman that they have never even heard of if she is a good pick..  when your party needs a boost.

Then they hear her speak and realize she is someone who connects even better than osamabama at a welfare office..

You get a guy (and gal) who say that their own party spent like drunken sailors..  when have you ever heard a person running that said something like that?   and that they are going to end it?

As for ron paul... when given a test most people will lean to libertarian.   but..  When told that the government will shrink to the point that their goodies will go away.. or told that they may have to deal with individual freedom and the individual freedom of their fellows..  they universally shun libertarian principles as "fringe" and "nutball".

lazs

[Hangtime]

Well IMO a lot of change would occur if we got rid of career politicians via term limits. Ted Stevens is a perfect example of why not having term limits are a bad thing. The guy has been in power so long and was so corrupt that his state doesn't vote him out because he has so much political power.

I say give them 6 years in congress & the senate. That give them a max of 12 years if they can get elected to both branches.

Well..  The Term Limit legislation requires an amendment to the Constitution. 2/3 majority required. The two times Newt's congress brought it to a vote, (part of the contract with america) the democrats refused to get on board, the vote went down on party lines.

Quite a few states enacted state legislature term limit legislation, most that have run 8 years, some 12.

I doubt seriously the congress, of it's own accord, could EVER be brought to execute a term limits amendment... unless we execute it for them by simply refusing to vote for an incumbent that hasn't already signed on to the existing self-imposed term limit contracts. If a candidate doesn't sign the contract, he doesn't get state party funding.

Regardless of the apparatus.. state party imposed or voter imposed; we need to get rid of incumbent roll-in power development to crack the corruption problem. McCain is correct in pointing out that washingtons elected elite are more into staying in power than they are in representing the will of their constituents. 

I'd urge all of us to NOT return a single incumbent that hasn't come out for and promised work on Term Limits Legislation.

[Elfie]

I doubt seriously the congress, of it's own accord, could EVER be brought to execute a term limits amendment...

Of course they won't. Term limits were good enough to impose on the office of the President but aren't good enough (or maybe to good) for Congress.

[crockett]

While I agree that something needs to be done, one look at the Michigan state legislature shows that term limits are not the end-all be-all.  What we have is a never ending cavalcade of first termers with absolutely no experience in the art of diplomacy.  This has greatly effected our state's progress (I'm not going to give all the credit to the commie Canadian in the governor's mansion...)

In fact, the Michigan state government could be used as a microcosm of what to expect with a federal government packed full of a bunch of first term Dem's in congress and Obama at the helm in the White House.

cod hep us all...

Well how long is the term limit for them?  I'd think 6 years would be a pretty reasonable amount of time for them to get experience but not enough time set up too many long term contacts or budies which tends to give them too much power.  It's also a short enough time to keep a steady flow of new faces and new ideas flowing through.

If you figured everyone had the same term limits then it would kind of equal out I'd think.