It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Congressional Budget Office has forecast that over the next 10 years defense spending will grow at an average rate of 2.3 percent a year, while Medicare will grow by nearly 7 percent a year, Medicaid by 9 percent a year and Social Security by nearly 6 percent a year.
Even if all the Progressives and all Tea Party members were to vote ‘no,’ the opponents of the plan would still need to persuade 84 more House members to join with them in opposition in order to defeat the proposal.
If the borrowing limit is reached, Geithner has said, the government will be forced to make a 40 percent cut in outlays. Geithner has been unwilling to discuss in public how the Treasury would manage its cash if it exhausts its borrowing ability.
But Bloomberg News reported Friday that the Treasury would give priority to making interest payments to holders of Treasury bonds if lawmakers fail to reach an agreement to raise the debt ceiling.
So one must ask what is their motivation for doing such an apparently stupid thing that on the surface seems to have no real benefit for the banks?
Exactly. No bank in their right mind takes a spendaholic that has reached their debt limit, has no method of repayment, has declining income, and is about to default, and then loans them more money?
This funding supports diplomats and development experts who are working every day to protect
our national security, promote our economic growth, and project our values in virtually every
country on Earth. They are carrying out a robust foreign policy that is leading the world in
solving the most complex challenges of our time, from thwarting international terrorism to
stopping the spread of catastrophic weapons, fixing the global economy, and advancing human
rights and universal values. They are helping identify and prevent conflicts before they start.
They are helping to secure nuclear materials, fight international crime, assist human rights
defenders, restore our alliances, promote the rights of women and girls, and ensure global
economic stability.
Secretary Clinton
The President’s FY 2012 Budget for the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) furthers United States national security, advances
America’s economic interests, protects Americans at home and abroad, elevates
America’s global leadership through diplomacy and development, and reflects our
values.
The Department of State/USAID budget for sustainable, long-term investments in
operations and assistance totals $47.0 billion1—only 1 percent more than comparable
FY 2010 levels. The request provides the necessary resources for diplomats and
development experts to address complex threats to our national security.
Core Foreign Assistance (including food aid): $32.9 billion
Core Department of State Operations: $14.2 billion
He then said that they simply don't realize that the people are beyond fed up with the antics in DC and that the days of posturing are over.
It remains unclear whether congressional leaders have the votes to ensure the bill's passage, particularly in the House. Democrats are livid over the extent of the deal's domestic spending cuts, as well as the absence of any immediate tax hikes on wealthier Americans. A number of Republicans are worried about cuts in defense spending and the lack of a required balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
"This isn't the greatest deal in the world," Boehner said, according to excerpts of his remarks. "But it shows how much we've changed the terms of the debate in this town."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, refused to immediately endorse the deal, and said she would meet with fellow House Democrats on Monday to discuss it.
"I don't know all the particulars of what the final product is in writing and what the ramifications will be," Pelosi said Sunday night.
Asked about the outcome, she warned: "We all may not be able to support it, or none of us may be able to support it."
Originally posted by getreadyalready
Of course the mainstream party goers like McCain are voting for it, despite their troubling issues with it. The question is why? Why would they vote for something they think won't work?
Originally posted by getreadyalready
Apparently it isn't a done deal just yet? A lot of rumors that they don't have the votes!!
CNN 2 minutes ago
It remains unclear whether congressional leaders have the votes to ensure the bill's passage, particularly in the House. Democrats are livid over the extent of the deal's domestic spending cuts, as well as the absence of any immediate tax hikes on wealthier Americans. A number of Republicans are worried about cuts in defense spending and the lack of a required balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
"This isn't the greatest deal in the world," Boehner said, according to excerpts of his remarks. "But it shows how much we've changed the terms of the debate in this town."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, refused to immediately endorse the deal, and said she would meet with fellow House Democrats on Monday to discuss it.
"I don't know all the particulars of what the final product is in writing and what the ramifications will be," Pelosi said Sunday night.
Asked about the outcome, she warned: "We all may not be able to support it, or none of us may be able to support it."
Fox News reporting that an online poll shows 93% oppose this compromise!!
Most Headlines saying it is a bad deal Of course the mainstream party goers like McCain are voting for it, despite their troubling issues with it. The question is why? Why would they vote for something they think won't work?
edit on 1-8-2011 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)