House Democrats Pull Budget Offer: War funding deal appears to collapse

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: Washington Post

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 11, 2007; Page A03

A Democratic deal to give President Bush some war funding in exchange for additional domestic spending appeared to collapse last night after House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.) accused Republicans of bargaining in bad faith. Instead, Obey said he will push a huge spending bill that would hew to the president's spending limit by stripping it of all lawmakers' pet projects, as well as most of the Bush administration's top priorities. It would also contain no money for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Absent a Republican willingness to sit down and work out a reasonable compromise, I think we ought to end the game and go to the president's numbers," Obey said. "I was willing to listen to the argument that we ought to at least add more for Afghanistan, but when the White House refuses to compromise, when the White House continues to stick it in our eye, I say to hell with it."

House Democratic leaders were scheduled to complete work last night on a $520 billion spending bill that included $11 billion in funding for domestic programs above the president's request, half of what Democrats had initially approved. The bill would have also contained $30 billion for the war in Afghanistan, upon which the Senate would have added billions more for Iraq before final congressional approval.

But a stern veto threat this weekend from White House budget director Jim Nussle put the deal in jeopardy, and Obey said he is prepared for a long standoff with the White House....

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001615.html?hpid=moreheadlines

[TwilightGardener]

1. How stupid is it to try to wrangle more money for domestic spending

(which I may not necessarily agree with) by tying it to war funding? It makes us look craven and spend-happy. Democrats are the MAJORITY. We shouldn't have to beg and cut deals and attach items to war spending. I am disgusted. Fund the war, don't fund the war, but fucking don't try to piggyback onto it.

[IsItJustMe]

13. That piggy back method, is simply the way it works, not pretty, but it has been that way in DC for

as long as I can remember.

[trogdor]

17. Besides, it exposed Bush as childish.

Again. We gave him 99% of what he wanted, and he threw a hissy fit anyway, so Rep. Obey basically said, "fine. You get squat. So there." So we stick it in Bush's eye, and see how he likes it.

[alcibiades_mystery]

2. Yeah boy

Sounds like fun.

Stick it to 'em, Obey!

[Blue_In_AK]

3. This is good news, right?

I've read too much tonight - my brain is swimming.

[Toots]

16. IMO Short lived good news

They will buckle just as they always have. A small show of bravado just before the holidays but in the end Bush* will get his death money..

[bhikkhu]

4. A well deserved death. Mr 25% * is barely holding a card now

and yet congress insists it has to give him what he wants because he is so stubborn and resolute? Message to congress: grow a backbone or go home.

[rockybelt]

5. Question

Given the revelations of the past few days and past seven years.....what the hell is a reasonable compromise?

Give us some crumbs for little programs that might help people or crumbs for corporate sponsors? Give us that money and we will give you some more money to go kill more Americans and Iraqis?

Just what the hell is a reasonable compromise between war and no war?

[ShadowLiberal]

6. Byrd sums up how unreasonable republicans are being quite well

Read Byrd's quote at the end of the article, he really sums up republican's unreasonable attempt to regain the fiscal responsibility mantle. I mean seriously, they advocate all of these increases costing at least a hundred billion dollars, push for domestic cuts of $22 billion, and push for eliminating the AMT while refusing to consider adding a new tax to make up for the revenue that would be lost from repealing the AMT. Umm... obviously that doesn't equate to fiscal responsibility by eliminating any government overspending, rather it increases government overspending. And I was under the impression that a fiscally responsible politician would fight to not have the government spend more money then it takes in.

[Lasher]

10. Just who does Junior think he is, to preach to anyone about fiscal responsibility?

The numbers just scream at you.



Saint Ronnie: 1981-1988
Poppy: 1989-1992
Clinton: 1993-2000
Junior: 2001-present

How's that trickle-down theory workin' for ya?

If there is a party that can claim to be the champion of fiscal responsibility, it is Democrats, not Republicans.

Democratic Superiority, by the Numbers

[obiwan]

7. Balls. How refreshing!

[Rageneau]

8. Is Obey obeying?

Is he fighting back?

[truthisfreedom]

9. "when the White House continues to stick it in our eye, I say to hell with it." AMAZING!

Did someone just grow some DEMOCRATIC BALLS?

[izquierdista]

11. He's gonna get in trouble!

When Nancy hears about this, someone is going to wish he didn't shoot off his mouth. He'll have to apologize and return to being as insignificant as he should be.

[deacon]

12. Pelosi is leading the democrats down the toilet. n/t

[EnviroBat]

14. When I see a number like that, 520 Billion, Billion? Really?

Could someone, anyone please explain where all this endless money comes from? Has anyone seen our treasury lately? I really don't believe we have one anymore. It's like a fucking figment of the imagination or something. I read an interesting article in The Nation recently where the author was championing an idea I've been kicking around for a long time.

STOP PAYING INCOME TAXES.

If these fuckers continue to bankrupt us, then it's time my friends to turn off the spigot. I would require a huge grassroots effort, but let all go and jack up our exemptions on the old W4. When the bill comes due, refuse. Let them know that we are not interested in funding any wars of aggression. If Congress can't stand up to this lunatic, then we must.

[gratuitous]

15. The Republicans aren't negotiating in good faith

Well, duh. But since it hasn't cost them anything for the last 15 years (well, except for their congressional majorities), why would they change their tactics now?

But if Obey follows through on this (oh please, oh please), it just might make something positive happen for our country, after years of being battered by virtually every policy decision our leaders have made during that time.