Tuesday, July 26, 2011

How Serious Can It Be?

We keep hearing about the pending apocalypse when August 2nd comes. But if that is so, why then when the Speaker of the House announces a deal with spending cuts, revenue growth and a debt-limit increase to carry through November with provisions for a second massive debt increase at that time do we hear that the President will veto it and the Senate Majority Leader announces it dead on arrival?

And why does the majority party in the House have a rift?

House Vote Split, Tea Party Makes Demands

The President and his sock-puppet, Harry Reid, will be satisfied with only one thing. It is independent of spending cuts, tax code reform or any other provisions of a bill. It is the singular fact that a debt limit increase must be large enough to carry past the November 2012 election. They are totally dependent upon the demonstrably short memory of the electorate. Make the problem go away so the booboisie will go to the polls and vote for four more years of incompetence.

The Tea Party caucus is a more serious problem and not as easily solvable. While their motivation may be good, there are some realities of governing of which they seem unaware .

Boehner's bill has this handling of a Balanced Budget Amendment:
It would also require both the House andSenate to hold votes on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
That would seem to be a guarantee of debate, discussion and a recorded vote. You can't do better than that. But here is the Tea Party position:
But conservative Republicans in the House, many allied to the tea party movement, said they don’t just want votes on the amendment, they want an assurance it will be sent to the states.  
Have they not read the Constitution? Don't they know that the way a proposed amendment gets to the states for ratification is with approval of 2/3 of both chambers? It might be possible to deal with that hurdle in the House, but just barely. It is a total impossibility in the US Senate. It simply can't be guaranteed and it isn't even realistic to wish for it.

3 comments:

MagiK said...

Are you kidding, most people have no clue what is involved with passing a bill, let alone a Constitutional amendment...That is a sad fact.

Ed Skinner said...

The "rule of law" fails when those in power choose to ignore those rules.

And, it seems to me, that is one reason our founding fathers approved the Second Amendment and especially the words, "... being necessary to the security of a free State, ..."

greg said...

You are 100% right...even the Democrat's have admitted that at some point, the sacred cows will need some trimming.

The argument now is 100% over timing, and the length/size of the bump. Barry and his buddies DO NOT want to be talking about this again in the spring...at that point, even your average voters normally short attention span will HAVE to take notice.