Don’t you dare call it default!
The day of reckoning looms: Don’t you dare call it default!
The day of reckoning looms: Don’t you dare call it default!
Tag: Congress
Don’t you dare call it default!
“Long-term budget pressures on NASA mount.”
Why SLS will surely die: “Long-term budget pressures on NASA mount.”
Whether the cheaper, more efficient, and competitive commercial space program will survive remains unknown. It could be that our brilliant Congress, which wants SLS, will keep that very expensive program alive just long enough to choke the life out of the commercial space program. Then, with the government part of private space dead from lack of support, they will suddenly be faced with the gigantic bill from the NASA-built SLS and will, as they have done repeatedly during the past four decades, blanch at paying the actually construction and launch costs, and will kill that too.
Why SLS will surely die: “Long-term budget pressures on NASA mount.”
Whether the cheaper, more efficient, and competitive commercial space program will survive remains unknown. It could be that our brilliant Congress, which wants SLS, will keep that very expensive program alive just long enough to choke the life out of the commercial space program. Then, with the government part of private space dead from lack of support, they will suddenly be faced with the gigantic bill from the NASA-built SLS and will, as they have done repeatedly during the past four decades, blanch at paying the actually construction and launch costs, and will kill that too.
The Democratic senator seeking the chairmanship of the Senate Budget Committee has refused to promise to write a budget next year.
What Americans apparently wanted: The Democratic senator seeking the chairmanship of the Senate Budget Committee has refused to promise to write a budget next year.
This will be the fourth year in a row that the Democrats in the Senate have failed to write a budget. And note, they don’t need a single Republican vote to do it, since budget bills cannot be fillibusted.
As I like to say, the day of reckoning looms.
What Americans apparently wanted: The Democratic senator seeking the chairmanship of the Senate Budget Committee has refused to promise to write a budget next year.
This will be the fourth year in a row that the Democrats in the Senate have failed to write a budget. And note, they don’t need a single Republican vote to do it, since budget bills cannot be fillibusted.
As I like to say, the day of reckoning looms.
Harry Reid said Thursday that the Democrats intend to raise the debt limit another $2.4 trillion.
The day of reckoning looms: Harry Reid said Thursday that the Democrats intend to raise the debt limit another $2.4 trillion.
The day of reckoning looms: Harry Reid said Thursday that the Democrats intend to raise the debt limit another $2.4 trillion.
Wall Street stocks plummeted today for the second day in a row.
The new America: Wall Street stocks plummeted today for the second day in a row.
I wonder why. What happened two days ago that might have shaken the confidence of the business world?
The new America: Wall Street stocks plummeted today for the second day in a row.
I wonder why. What happened two days ago that might have shaken the confidence of the business world?
The federal government is expected to hit its debt ceiling before the end of the year.
The day of reckoning looms: The federal government is expected to hit its debt ceiling before the end of the year.
The federal government is bankrupting the country, and it will take hard sacrifices to rein in that federal government. I fear that, regardless of how today’s election ends, neither party will be willing to propose those sacrifices, mostly because they will believe the voters are not willing either.
The day of reckoning looms: The federal government is expected to hit its debt ceiling before the end of the year.
The federal government is bankrupting the country, and it will take hard sacrifices to rein in that federal government. I fear that, regardless of how today’s election ends, neither party will be willing to propose those sacrifices, mostly because they will believe the voters are not willing either.
Why I spent $50 at a political fundraiser today
Two days ago Ralph Kayser, head of the Tucson Tea Party, sent out an email announcing that the Republican Congressional candidate for my district, Jonathan Paton (pictured on the right), was going to hold a luncheon fundraiser today. Ralph wanted to know if anyone was interested in attending.
Normally, I detest giving money to politicians, from either party. I consider them to be the worst form of bloodsuckers. They don’t produce any wealth, cannot create jobs no matter how hard they try, add restrictions to our lives that squelch freedom, and generally only serve to squeeze tax dollars from us all for wasteful government projects, money that we would better left in our own hands to use as we each saw fit. And then they go on the campaign trail, begging for more money so that they can beat the other guy.
Like I say, bloodsuckers.
Nonetheless, to me this election is different, in the same way the 2010 election was different.
» Read more
Boeing and the fear of competition
Boeing has indicated that it might shelve its CST-100 manned capsule, despite their recent almost half a billion dollar contract award from NASA.
This possibility illustrates why Boeing is losing market share, not only in space, but in the aviation industry. The article suggests that the NASA contract might not be enough to pay for CST-100, and that Boeing is unsure there is enough private market to make up the difference.
“That’s just for the ISS. That’s kind of the basement,” adds Elbon. More flights than those to the ISS are required he says, and Boeing is cautious about over-committing itself while future revenue streams are unclear.
I say bull hockey.
» Read more
The Non-Leadership Act
Six Congressmen have introduced a bill that would have the NASA administrator serve a ten year term, and put the running of the space agency in the hands of an unelected board of directors.
Some details:
» Read more
The cost of regulations is 80 times higher than OMB’s estimate, according to the estimates of each individual government agency.
We’re more doomed than we know: The cost of government regulation is actually 80 times higher than OMB’s estimate, according to the estimates made by each individual government agency.
“While OMB officially reports amounts of only up to $88.6 billion in 2010 dollars,” said Crews, “the non-tax cost of government intervention in the economy, without performing a sweeping survey, appears to total up to $1.806 trillion annually.”
The $1.8 trillion number comes from looking at the estimates made by each agency and then adding them up.
We’re more doomed than we know: The cost of government regulation is actually 80 times higher than OMB’s estimate, according to the estimates made by each individual government agency.
“While OMB officially reports amounts of only up to $88.6 billion in 2010 dollars,” said Crews, “the non-tax cost of government intervention in the economy, without performing a sweeping survey, appears to total up to $1.806 trillion annually.”
The $1.8 trillion number comes from looking at the estimates made by each agency and then adding them up.
The automatic budget cuts triggered by sequestration appear increasingly likely according to two defense analysts.
Good news: The automatic budget cuts triggered by sequestration appear increasingly likely according to two defense analysts.
Now that the Obama administration has released some details on how these 8.2 and 9.4 percent cuts will be imposed, I find them a refreshing change from business-as-usual in Washington. As far as I can tell, the only thing really wrong with them is that they only scratch the surface of the federal budget debt.
Good news: The automatic budget cuts triggered by sequestration appear increasingly likely according to two defense analysts.
Now that the Obama administration has released some details on how these 8.2 and 9.4 percent cuts will be imposed, I find them a refreshing change from business-as-usual in Washington. As far as I can tell, the only thing really wrong with them is that they only scratch the surface of the federal budget debt.
Congress is on a pace this year to pass the fewest laws in a single year since World War II.
Gridlock is good! Congress is on a pace this year to pass the fewest laws in a single year since World War II.
Just 61 bills have become law to date in 2012 out of 3,914 bills that have been introduced by lawmakers, or less than 2 percent of all proposed laws, according to a USA Today analysis of records since 1947 kept by the U.S. House Clerk’s office.
Gridlock is good! Congress is on a pace this year to pass the fewest laws in a single year since World War II.
Just 61 bills have become law to date in 2012 out of 3,914 bills that have been introduced by lawmakers, or less than 2 percent of all proposed laws, according to a USA Today analysis of records since 1947 kept by the U.S. House Clerk’s office.
“Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”
Another whining article about sequestration: “Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”
Let’s be blunt. An 8.2 percent cut in NASA’s budget will not destroy the agency. It will hurt them, surely, but it will only bring their budget back the agency’s 2005 budget. Considering the deficit and debt, this is hardly a draconian cut.
If the Republicans are serious about getting the budget under control — as they say they are — then these automatic cuts imposed by sequestration should not give them heartburn.
As for the Democrats, no point in caring what they think or do. We already know they aren’t serious about getting the budget under control, considering the budgets Obama has proposed, all of which were rejected unanimously by both Houses of Congress, and the refusal of the Democrats in the Senate to even offer a budget for the past three years.
Another whining article about sequestration: “Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”
Let’s be blunt. An 8.2 percent cut in NASA’s budget will not destroy the agency. It will hurt them, surely, but it will only bring their budget back the agency’s 2005 budget. Considering the deficit and debt, this is hardly a draconian cut.
If the Republicans are serious about getting the budget under control — as they say they are — then these automatic cuts imposed by sequestration should not give them heartburn.
As for the Democrats, no point in caring what they think or do. We already know they aren’t serious about getting the budget under control, considering the budgets Obama has proposed, all of which were rejected unanimously by both Houses of Congress, and the refusal of the Democrats in the Senate to even offer a budget for the past three years.
The U.S. government’s credit rating has been downgraded again.
The day of reckoning looms: The U.S. government’s credit rating has been downgraded again.
And we’ve only just begun!
The day of reckoning looms: The U.S. government’s credit rating has been downgraded again.
And we’ve only just begun!
The science cuts from sequestration
The journal Science today published this detailed look at the cuts that would occur in all the federal government’s various science programs should the automatic budget cuts outlined in the sequestration legislation occur on January 2, 2013.
Not surprising, the article includes a great deal of moaning and groaning about the terrible harm the cuts would have on science research should they occur. From the Obama administration:
» Read more
The Obama administration will miss the legal deadline — from a law he signed only less than a month ago — to provide details on implementing the required budget cuts under sequestration.
The law is such an inconvenient thing: The Obama administration will miss the legal deadline — set by a law he signed only a month ago — to provide details on implementing the required budget cuts under sequestration.
This is only one data point in a long string of data points that have consistently illustrated how disinterested the Obama administration is in dealing with budget issues and the federal debt. And disinterested might be too kind a word. Incompetent also comes to mind.
The law is such an inconvenient thing: The Obama administration will miss the legal deadline — set by a law he signed only a month ago — to provide details on implementing the required budget cuts under sequestration.
This is only one data point in a long string of data points that have consistently illustrated how disinterested the Obama administration is in dealing with budget issues and the federal debt. And disinterested might be too kind a word. Incompetent also comes to mind.
Congress wonders why NASA is sending “50 or more” employees to a conference in Italy.
Congress asks NASA why it is sending “50 or more” employees to a conference in Italy.
Congress asks NASA why it is sending “50 or more” employees to a conference in Italy.
Ryan’s speech
If you depend on the conservative commentary about Paul Ryan’s acceptance speech yesterday at the Republican convention to find out how he did, you would have no doubt that this was the greatest and most effective speech since Genesis. To quote just one report:
Paul Ryan’s speech, in two words? Nailed it. Everything that I like (and surmise that others will like as he becomes more and more familiar to them) about Paul Ryan was on perfect display during his half hour-ish on stage. He was intelligent without being intimidating; he was stern and serious but still optimistic and even funny; and he hinted at his wonkiness without getting into jargon and maintained his approachability. But the most beautiful thing about Paul Ryan as the potential vice president of the United States is his uncanny knack for breaking through populist myths and shrill leftist attacks and instead communicating the merits of free-market economics and small government, all without being shrill or polarizing.
Because I’m not spending a lot of time watching these conventions, mostly because they really are nothing more than public relations events staged by both parties, I didn’t see the speech live. After reading reports like the one above, however, I decided late last night to go to youtube and dig up Ryan’s speech and see this amazing performance for myself.
» Read more
It’s the ideology, stupid.
It’s easy to forget, but Republicans swept the 2010 midterms not through a sweeping indictment of Obama’s economic stewardship, but by hammering Congressional Democrats over their support of the president’s health care law, the stimulus and Democrats’ pursuit of a cap-and-trade energy policy. Running on a firmly ideological agenda, House Republicans picked up 63 House seats – a larger pickup for Republicans than in any election since 1946.
What’s remarkable is that all the fundamental indicators from that historic moment have hardly changed – and in some ways, have worsened for the president. The 2010 midterm NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed 32 percent believing the country was headed in the wrong direction; their latest poll shows that “right track” number exactly the same, with even more believing the country was on the wrong track. Obama’s job approval in the October before the midterm was at 47 percent; it’s only inched upwards to 48 percent in the most recent survey. [emphasis mine]
2010 wasn’t a fluke, it was a trend. And running on the “ideology” of fiscal responsibility, a balanced federal budget, and a smaller federal government does not seem to me to be very ideological. Rather, it is simple common sense, which is why it worked in 2010 and will work again in November.
It’s easy to forget, but Republicans swept the 2010 midterms not through a sweeping indictment of Obama’s economic stewardship, but by hammering Congressional Democrats over their support of the president’s health care law, the stimulus and Democrats’ pursuit of a cap-and-trade energy policy. Running on a firmly ideological agenda, House Republicans picked up 63 House seats – a larger pickup for Republicans than in any election since 1946.
What’s remarkable is that all the fundamental indicators from that historic moment have hardly changed – and in some ways, have worsened for the president. The 2010 midterm NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed 32 percent believing the country was headed in the wrong direction; their latest poll shows that “right track” number exactly the same, with even more believing the country was on the wrong track. Obama’s job approval in the October before the midterm was at 47 percent; it’s only inched upwards to 48 percent in the most recent survey. [emphasis mine]
2010 wasn’t a fluke, it was a trend. And running on the “ideology” of fiscal responsibility, a balanced federal budget, and a smaller federal government does not seem to me to be very ideological. Rather, it is simple common sense, which is why it worked in 2010 and will work again in November.
Romney, the Republicans, and Space
The Republican Party, as part of their national convention taking place in Florida this week, yesterday released their party platform for the upcoming election campaign.
Normally, I don’t waste my time with party platforms. No one really reads it, and no president ever follows it. Granted, it can give you a general sense of where a party and candidate is headed philosophically, but this is politics. If you think philosophy is their number one priority then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you.
However, this document is helpful to us, at least when it comes to the nation’s space effort, as it actually devotes one entire (though short) section on the subject. Considering how vague Mitt Romney has been on what he will do with NASA and space, and how schizophrenic the Republicans in Congress have been, any hint on how they might approach this particular program should they win the election is helpful.
Here is the entire statement of the Republican party platform on the subject of space exploration:
» Read more
More than 2,200 hospitals face penalties under Obamacare for how they decide to treat patients.
Finding out what’s in it: More than 2,200 hospitals face penalties under Obamacare for how they decide to treat patients.
Starting in October, Medicare will reduce reimbursements to hospitals with high 30-day readmission rates — which refers to patients who return within a month — by as much as 1 percent. The maximum penalty increases to 2 percent the following year and 3 percent in 2014. Doctors are concerned the penalty is unfair, since sometimes they have to accept patients more than once in a brief period of time but could be penalized for doing so — even for accepting seniors who are sick.
The penalties are bureaucratic and statistical in nature, and have no relationship to the actual treatment of patients. Thus, they illustrate in one bold sweep the idiocy of Obamacare and why it must be repealed.
Finding out what’s in it: More than 2,200 hospitals face penalties under Obamacare for how they decide to treat patients.
Starting in October, Medicare will reduce reimbursements to hospitals with high 30-day readmission rates — which refers to patients who return within a month — by as much as 1 percent. The maximum penalty increases to 2 percent the following year and 3 percent in 2014. Doctors are concerned the penalty is unfair, since sometimes they have to accept patients more than once in a brief period of time but could be penalized for doing so — even for accepting seniors who are sick.
The penalties are bureaucratic and statistical in nature, and have no relationship to the actual treatment of patients. Thus, they illustrate in one bold sweep the idiocy of Obamacare and why it must be repealed.
The Congressional Budget Office yesterday projected this year’s deficit will be $1.1 trillion dollars, making it the fourth year in a row that the deficit has broken the trillion dollar ceiling
The day of reckoning looms: The Congressional Budget Office yesterday projected this year’s deficit to be $1.1 trillion dollars, making it the fourth year in a row that the deficit has broken the trillion dollar ceiling.
In the entire history of the U.S. the deficit never exceeded one trillion dollars, until Barack Obama became president. In fact, it never came close until Obama arrived.
The day of reckoning looms: The Congressional Budget Office yesterday projected this year’s deficit to be $1.1 trillion dollars, making it the fourth year in a row that the deficit has broken the trillion dollar ceiling.
In the entire history of the U.S. the deficit never exceeded one trillion dollars, until Barack Obama became president. In fact, it never came close until Obama arrived.
Contrasting Paul Ryan with Barack Obama.
Contrasting Paul Ryan with Barack Obama.
The next month, both [budget] plans came to a vote in the Senate. Ryan’s budget lost on a party-line vote; Obama’s lost 0-97. Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff to Bill Clinton, and Obama’s own appointee to the deficit-control panel whose recommendations Obama completely ignored in that budget proposal, told a University of North Carolina audience in September 2011 that Ryan had proposed “a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion.” In contrast, Bowles told the audience, “I don’t think anyone took [Obama’s] budget very seriously.”
In February 2012, Obama proposed yet another unserious budget that ignored all of the realities of our short- and long-term fiscal shortfalls, with yet another trillion-dollar deficit. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to tell Ryan and the House Budget Committee that Obama’s budget proposal would “stabilize” the deficits. This time, Ryan only needed four minutes to dismantle that argument, showing that Obama’s long-term budget only “stabilized” deficits for a decade, after which they escalated out of control — unlike Ryan’s long-term budget reforms, which solved the problem of escalating costs. “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem,” Geithner finally exclaimed. “What we do know is we don’t like yours.”
Bluntly put, Obama has never been willing to propose anything that might solve the federal budget disaster, while Ryan has at least made an attempt.
Contrasting Paul Ryan with Barack Obama.
The next month, both [budget] plans came to a vote in the Senate. Ryan’s budget lost on a party-line vote; Obama’s lost 0-97. Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff to Bill Clinton, and Obama’s own appointee to the deficit-control panel whose recommendations Obama completely ignored in that budget proposal, told a University of North Carolina audience in September 2011 that Ryan had proposed “a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion.” In contrast, Bowles told the audience, “I don’t think anyone took [Obama’s] budget very seriously.”
In February 2012, Obama proposed yet another unserious budget that ignored all of the realities of our short- and long-term fiscal shortfalls, with yet another trillion-dollar deficit. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to tell Ryan and the House Budget Committee that Obama’s budget proposal would “stabilize” the deficits. This time, Ryan only needed four minutes to dismantle that argument, showing that Obama’s long-term budget only “stabilized” deficits for a decade, after which they escalated out of control — unlike Ryan’s long-term budget reforms, which solved the problem of escalating costs. “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem,” Geithner finally exclaimed. “What we do know is we don’t like yours.”
Bluntly put, Obama has never been willing to propose anything that might solve the federal budget disaster, while Ryan has at least made an attempt.
“I’ll just tell you the truth.”
A rarity today among Democrats: “I’ll just tell you the truth.”
And what is that truth? Democrat Erskine Bowles reveals the reason why the recommendations of his deficit commission went nowhere.
A rarity today among Democrats: “I’ll just tell you the truth.”
And what is that truth? Democrat Erskine Bowles reveals the reason why the recommendations of his deficit commission went nowhere.
Politicians who don’t want to do their job
The Houston Chronicle today has an editorial entitled “Let’s bring logic to NASA’s budget process” which describes and supports a bill introduced by two Republican Congressmen which would
model NASA’s budget process after that used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Doing so would make the agency less political and more professional. It calls for the president to appoint the NASA director to a 10-year term and would make the budget cycle multiyear rather than annual.
The editorial also quotes sponsor Congressman Frank Wolf (R-Virginia) as explaining the goal of the bill is ” to take the politics out of NASA … and create continuity in the space agency.”
Bah. The last thing I want is to take the politics out of NASA’s operations.
» Read more
Tomorrow will mark 1200 days since the Senate, led by the Democrats, passed a budget.
Time to party! Tomorrow will mark 1200 days since the Senate, led by the Democrats, passed their last budget.
Time to party! Tomorrow will mark 1200 days since the Senate, led by the Democrats, passed their last budget.
The actual debt of the U.S. federal government has now grown to $222 trillion.
The day of reckoning looms: The actual debt of the U.S. federal government has now grown to $222 trillion.
This is the actual difference between what the federal government will collect in the future and the actual amount of future fiscal liabilities the government is responsible for. It is not the mere $16 trillion or so of immediate debt.
The day of reckoning looms: The actual debt of the U.S. federal government has now grown to $222 trillion.
This is the actual difference between what the federal government will collect in the future and the actual amount of future fiscal liabilities the government is responsible for. It is not the mere $16 trillion or so of immediate debt.
Democratic Congressman Peter Stark (D-California) reportedly threatened the family of another California politician after learning that politician was endorsing Stark’s primary opponent.
Leftwing civility: Democratic Congressman Peter Stark (D-California) reportedly threatened the family and livelihood of another California politician after learning that politician was endorsing Stark’s primary opponent.
But the conversation quickly got ugly, as the Congressman launched into a bitter and angry diatribe. “(Stark) called me a turncoat and said, ‘Are you sick?’” Torrico recalled. “He was yelling and yelling….he kept going and going. He asked me if I was mentally well.” The furious [Stark] then added, “Maybe I should send a social worker to your house. Your kids need to be safe. You’re not well,” a horrified Torrico recalled.
Read the whole article. It is appalling if true, which is likely because it is consistent with Stark’s past behavior.
Leftwing civility: Democratic Congressman Peter Stark (D-California) reportedly threatened the family and livelihood of another California politician after learning that politician was endorsing Stark’s primary opponent.
But the conversation quickly got ugly, as the Congressman launched into a bitter and angry diatribe. “(Stark) called me a turncoat and said, ‘Are you sick?’” Torrico recalled. “He was yelling and yelling….he kept going and going. He asked me if I was mentally well.” The furious [Stark] then added, “Maybe I should send a social worker to your house. Your kids need to be safe. You’re not well,” a horrified Torrico recalled.
Read the whole article. It is appalling if true, which is likely because it is consistent with Stark’s past behavior.
The scramble in Congress to head the House committee on Space, Science, and Technology after November’s election has begun.
The scramble in Congress to head the House committee on space after November’s election has begun.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) have begun to quietly campaign to replace Rep. Ralph Hall as chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology next year, according to Stu Witt, General Manager and CEO of the Mojave Air and Space Port.
If Rohrabacher gets the chairmanship it will be very be good news for commercial space, and bad news for the NASA-built and very expensive Space Launch System (SLS). He has been a strong supporter of private space, and will likely want to funnel money to it from SLS.
I’m not sure giving private space more cash is necessarily a good thing, as that will encourage these new companies to be less efficient, more expensive, and more dependent on the government. However, getting SLS shut down will certainly help the federal budget deficit.
The scramble in Congress to head the House committee on space after November’s election has begun.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) have begun to quietly campaign to replace Rep. Ralph Hall as chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology next year, according to Stu Witt, General Manager and CEO of the Mojave Air and Space Port.
If Rohrabacher gets the chairmanship it will be very be good news for commercial space, and bad news for the NASA-built and very expensive Space Launch System (SLS). He has been a strong supporter of private space, and will likely want to funnel money to it from SLS.
I’m not sure giving private space more cash is necessarily a good thing, as that will encourage these new companies to be less efficient, more expensive, and more dependent on the government. However, getting SLS shut down will certainly help the federal budget deficit.
The Democrats in the Senate have passed their tax plan.
The Democrats in the Senate have passed their tax plan, extending the Bush tax rates for families making under $250,000 for one year while allowing the rates for families earning above $250,000 to expire.
The big Democratic claim has been that in order to balance the budget richer people have to pay more of their fair share. Okay, so now they’ve made their point by law. If I were the Republicans I’d accept it, since we all know that this tax increase on higher income taxpayers will do nothing to lower the deficit. We could raise the tax rate for anyone earning more than $250K to 100 percent and we would still have a gigantic yearly deficit.
What will the Democrats next claim when this tax increase fails? It won’t matter. The problem is spending, and the failure of this tax plan will further demonstrate that point. The federal government has to learn to live within its means.
The Democrats in the Senate have passed their tax plan, extending the Bush tax rates for families making under $250,000 for one year while allowing the rates for families earning above $250,000 to expire.
The big Democratic claim has been that in order to balance the budget richer people have to pay more of their fair share. Okay, so now they’ve made their point by law. If I were the Republicans I’d accept it, since we all know that this tax increase on higher income taxpayers will do nothing to lower the deficit. We could raise the tax rate for anyone earning more than $250K to 100 percent and we would still have a gigantic yearly deficit.
What will the Democrats next claim when this tax increase fails? It won’t matter. The problem is spending, and the failure of this tax plan will further demonstrate that point. The federal government has to learn to live within its means.