Broun Say No To “Cut, Cap And Balance”

By a vote of 234-190 the US House passed the “cut, cap and balance” plan to address the bloated federal budget. 9 Republicans voted “no”, and 5 Democrats voted “yes.” GOP Presidential hopefuls Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul voted no.

Other Republican “no” votes were Reps. Paul Broun (Ga.), Francisco Canseco (Texas), Scott DeJarlais (Tenn.), Morgan Griffith (Va.), Walter Jones (NC), Connie Mack (Fla.) and Dana Rohrabachder (Calif.).

Only five Democrats voted for the controversial bill: Reps. Dan Boren (Okla.), Jim Cooper (Tenn.), Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike McIntyre (NC), and Heath Shuler (NC).

Congressman Paul Broun said of his no vote (via press release):

“I gave my word to my constituents in Georgia and to the rest of the American people that I would not vote for any bill that increases the debt limit. Although the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill is a step in the right direction, it still raises the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion, and we simply cannot afford it.

Obama says he’ll veto “cut, cap and balance” because it requires spending cuts and action on a balanced budget amendment before raising the debt limit. Meanwhile Bill Clinton says Obama should bypass Congress and raise the debt ceiling himself, and Senator Saxby Chambliss and the “Gang of Six Five” put forward a plan, but it won’t be ready before August 2nd when Timothy Geithner’s Doomsday Device activates.

Mark Steyn said on Rush Limbaugh’s show:

We’re asking the world to lend us 1/5 of their GDP, and there’s no evidence they’re willing to do it. That’s the real debt limit.

As Emmett Tyrrell says “the crisis continues.”

21 comments

  1. Ha last time I checked treasury bonds were selling for close to 0% interest. Sounds like the world is still willing to loan us some money. What a crock of bs.

    • Harry says:

      Who do you think is buying treasuries? The Chinese? The Fed? Other central banks? To-big-to-fail banks? What’s their motivation? Fear of unknown? False security?

      • CBM says:

        Who’s buying:
        6/30/11 52week T-bill auction (amounts in billions): Total 24, Fed banks 0; Depository institutions 0.6; Individuals 0.104; Dealers/brokers 16.907; Pension/Retirement funds 0; Investment funds 1.057; Foreign/International funds 4.248; Other 1.084.

        6/30/11 7-year Note auction (Billions): Total 29.93; Fed .934; Banks .12; Individuals 0.22; Dealers; 18.337; Pensions .1; Funds 4.235; Foreign 6.1887; Other 0.00.

        So yes, Chris is right that the world is still very willing to lend us a whole lot of money and doesn’t see our current debt levels as unsustainable.

        Why are they buying? Perhaps a flight to quality because of the damage austerity measures are inflicting on the Euro zone or the impression that the stock market will suffer much more greatly than the bond market when we hit the ceiling. Also a general idea that this is all political posturing and the politicians aren’t really stupid enough to not raise the debt ceiling and prevent American default. Most comments that I’ve heard are along the lines of “It’ll be done because it has to be done”…even though no one really knows how its going to get there.

    • John Konop says:

      This bill is more BS posturing rather than solving the problem. Why would any serious congressman vote for this? We are facing a massive economic collapse and this is what we get?

      Ron Paul Shreds “Cut, Cap, And Balance”, And Basically Calls House Leaders Liars

      ……First, it purports to eventually balance the budget without cutting military spending, Social Security, or Medicare. This is impossible. These three budget items already cost nearly $1 trillion apiece annually. This means we can cut every other area of federal spending to zero and still have a $3 trillion budget. Since annual federal tax revenues almost certainly will not exceed $2.5 trillion for several years, this Act cannot balance the budget under any plausible scenario……….

      Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ron-paul-slams-cut-cap-and-balance-2011-7#ixzz1SdetfCsz

      • John Konop says:

        Erick Erickson pushes a bill full of “lies’? Does anyone think Erick Erickson crowd is serious about the budget and the economy or are they just playing politics?

        Today, We Must Give Mitch McConnell His Due Credit

        Today comes word that Mitch McConnell has signed on to the DeMint strategy of cutting, capping, and balancing the budget.

        Legislation has been introduced by the Republicans and they are calling it CCB, for “cut, cap, and balance.”

        With Moody’s statement yesterday that the nation’s credit is at stake and demanding a long term plan to deal with our debt, it seems McConnell’s own plan is off the table. It does nothing to deal with the debt to income ratio of the country and is a short term $2 trillion increase in debt with no real cuts.

        So it is nice to see McConnell now signing on to the conservative plan. More striking, Eric Cantor and John Boehner have still not. In fact, conservatives in Congress are insisting that CCB be dealt with even before a Balanced Budget Amendment.

        McConnell seems game to proceed on that front. Hopefully Boehner and Cantor will listen.
        McConnell deserves our credit today for doing the right thing. I can only hope that he will, now signed on, aggressively push CCB and not be a supporter in name only.
        Republicans have an easy battle cry thanks to Moody’s.
        CCB=AAA rating.

        Meanwhile, back at the White House, the President still won’t show us what he actually wants to cut.

        http://redstate.com/tags/tag/cut-cap-balance/

        • Romegaguy says:

          Thought Erick was too busy running his Asian massage parlors in Macon to worry about politics. Isnt that why he quit his seat on the City Council?

      • Scott65 says:

        Let us all remember this “impending crisis” is 100% manufactured by hypocrite Republicans who voted without issue to raise the debt limit numerous times in the past 20yrs. The only “smoke and mirrors” is that the republicans have deflected any talk about jobs, and more working people=more revenue, less people needing assistance, more taxes coming in. Thats whats turns things around every time in a recession…NOT tax cuts alone (anyone arguing that point can simply reference the last 10 yrs) . The republicans so loathe the poor and the new deal reforms that they are now holding a gun to the nations head…lovely bunch we have up in Washington dont you think?

  2. saltycracker says:

    Condensation is available on Wikipedia – Social Security takes in more than it pays out, right now.

    “Social Security is a social insurance program officially called “Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance” (OASDI), in reference to its three components. It is primarily funded through a dedicated payroll tax of 12.4%.

    During 2009, total benefits of $686 billion were paid out versus income (taxes and interest) of $807 billion, a $121 billion annual surplus.

    An estimated 156 million people paid into the program and 53 million received benefits, roughly 2.94 workers per beneficiary.[33] Since the Greenspan Commission in the early 1980s, Social Security has cumulatively collected far more in payroll taxes dedicated to the program than it has paid out to recipients—nearly $2.4 trillion by 2008. ”

    The federal government’s expenditures in FY2010 included Medicare & Medicaid ($793B or 23%), Social Security ($701B or 20%), Defense Department ($689B or 20%), non-defense discretionary ($660B or 19%), other ($416B or 12%) and interest ($197B or 6%). Expenditures are classified as mandatory, with payments required by specific laws, or discretionary, with payment amounts renewed annually as part of the budget process.

    During FY 2010, the federal government spent $3.46 trillion on a budget or cash basis, down 2% vs. FY 2009 but up 16% versus FY2008 spend of $2.97 trillion. Expenditures averaged 20.6% GDP from 1971 to 2008, generally ranging +/-2% GDP from that level. In 2009 and 2010, expenditures averaged 24.4% GDP.

    • saltycracker says:

      P.S. The deficit is out of control and our politicians are not rationally addressing it.

  3. Since bills these days actually do the opposite of what they’re named, what we need is one titled, Spending, To infinity,… and beyond!

    Thanks for the principled ‘No’ votes on this bill.

  4. SOGTP says:

    I doubt if a Balanced Budget Amendment will be ratified by the states. It takes 38 states to ratify an Amendment to the Constitution. Proponents tell us the states will ratify, because 49 out of 50 states have balanced budget requirements in their individual Constitutions.

    The problem is none of these states balance their budgets now. Even Georgia violates their own Constitution each and every year. The states cover their red ink from profligate spending with national dollars. If the states sign-on to the Amendment the money they suckle from the national government will either; 1) dry-up or 2) the national government will need to radically raise taxes to cover the sloth being pushed into the states.

    If national money dry’s-up then the states will need to radically raise taxes on their citizens or drastically curb spending. If the national government radically raises taxes the states will grow even fatter as we are taxed into oblivion. Nothing will change.

    Either way the “Tony Soprano’s” under the Gold Dome loathe the thought of less wasteful spending in the state that flows into their favorite constituents. They may talk a good game, but they sign -on to every national money laundering scheme.

    National dollars serve their purposes and enrich and reward voting blocks. They love the national government, it’s like a favorite bookie. The crime family in Washington DC knows there is no chance a Balanced Budget Amendment will ever fly in the states.

    The cut, cap, and balance bill was a charade to appease the tea party. It raised the debt ceiling $2.4T and gives them the ability to continue to spend. Some but not all tea partiers fell for this nonsense. Good on Paul Broun, Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann for seeing through this charade.

    Shame on Kingston, Graves, Price, Woodall, Westmoreland, Scott and Gingrey. The NO votes by the Democrats are probably because they can’t read.

    Georgia
    Aye GA-1 Kingston, Jack [R]
    No GA-2 Bishop, Sanford [D]
    Aye GA-3 Westmoreland, Lynn [R]
    No GA-4 Johnson, Henry [D]
    No GA-5 Lewis, John [D]
    Aye GA-6 Price, Tom [R]
    Aye GA-7 Woodall, Rob [R]
    Aye GA-8 Scott, Austin [R]
    Aye GA-9 Graves, Tom [R]
    No GA-10 Broun, Paul [R]
    Aye GA-11 Gingrey, John [R]
    No GA-12 Barrow, John [D]
    No GA-13 Scott, David [D]

  5. There is nothing here but a “feel good” title to a bill.

    ‎”First, it purports to eventually balance the budget without cutting military spending, Social Security, or Medicare. This is impossible. ” “Second, it further entrenches the ludicrous beltway concept of discretionary vs. nondiscretionary spending.” “Third, the Act applies the nonsensical narrative about a “Global War on Terror” to justify exceptions to its spending caps.” “Finally, and most egregiously, this Act ignores the real issue: total spending by government.See More

  6. Shep says:

    “Mandrake…I can no longer sit back and allow…Democrat infiltration, Democrat indoctrination,
    Democrat subversion, and the International Democrat conspiracy…to sap and impurify…all our
    precious bodily fluids!”

Comments are closed.