Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate

[BigBadBrian]

Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate
← return to Inside Politics
By Stephen DinanMay 16, 2012, 04:27PM
LINK (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/may/16/obama-budget-defeated-99-0-senate/)

Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate

President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it.

Coupled with the House's rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama's budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year.

Republicans forced the vote by offering the president's plan on the Senate floor.

Democrats disputed that it was actually the president's plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn't actually match Mr. Obama's budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president's numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, even challenged Democrats to point out any errors in the numbers and he would correct them — a challenge no Democrats took up.

"A stunning development for the president of the United States in his fourth year in office," Mr. Sessions said of the unanimous opposition.

The White House has held its proposal out as a "balanced approach" to beginning to rein in deficits. It calls for tax increases to begin to offset higher spending, and would begin to level off debt as a percentage of the economy by 2022. It would produce $6.4 trillion in new deficits over that time.

By contrast the chief Republican alternative from the House GOP would notch just $3.1 trillion in deficits, and three Senate Republican alternatives would all come in below $2 trillion.

The Senate is holding votes Wednesday on Mr. Obama's budget, the House GOP's budget and the three Senate Republican alternatives. None was expected to gain the 50 votes needed to pass the chamber.

[BigBadBrian]

LINK (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/auto-workers-union-opposes-obamas-budget_645069.html)

The United Auto Workers union is sending out a letter from its legislative director, Josh Nassar, urging senators to vote against several budgets pending in the Senate. One of the budgets UAW apparently opposes is President Obama's own budget.

"On behalf of the UAW’s more than one million active and retired members, I write to strongly urge you to vote against S. Con. Res 41 (Sessions budget plan), H. Con. Res. 112 (Ryan budget proposal), S. Con. Res. 37 (Toomey budget plan), S. Con. Res 42 (Paul budget proposal) and S. Con. Res. 44 (Lee budget plan), when they are considered on the Senate floor," Nassar writes. "These proposals are another attack on the middle class and our most vulnerable citizens. They would force middle class Americans to make more sacrifices while giving larger tax breaks to corporations and wealthy individuals."

While the other budgets are proposals from Republicans, S. Con. Res 41 is the president's own budget, which Senator Sessions put on the legislative calendar. As the legislative website Thomas.gov notes, the official title of the bill as introduced is, "A concurrent resolution setting forth the President's budget request for the United States Government for fiscal year 2013, and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2014 through 2022."

This opposition is a bit odd, considering the union's closeness with Obama. The president even spoke to the union earlier this year in Washington. And Obama gave the union a majority stake in Chrysler as part of the auto bailout.

But nevertheless, either UAW meant to attack a Republican and accidentally went after the president's budget, or they are being serious in their opposition.

[BITEYOASS]

How can it be the president's budget when Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) was the only one sponsoring it? More than likely that scumbag Senator was modifying the shit out of it and putting the word "President" in order to pull off another teabag stung. AND HOW ABOUT SOME FUCKING LINKS THAT AREN'T RIGHT-WING HACKS?

I have them right here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/senate-budget-jeff-sessions_n_1522643.html?ref=mostpopular

Oh, and here is the actual bill:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:41:./list/bss/d112SC.lst::

[Satan]

Looks like more deceptive propaganda from the Moonie Times and the PNAC Weak Standard. Not even the Repukes were dumb enough to vote for it. Why was it 99-0 though? Shouldn't it have been 99 to 1, or did that fucking Klansman Sessions not even vote for his own scam? :biggrin:

[LoungeMachine]

:lmao:

Not even The Moonie Times.....but a BLOG on the Moonie Times.....

Hey, Brie.....here is the link to ALL Senate votes.....

http://www.senate.gov/

Please point out the 99-0 budget vote for the class.

:gulp:

Idiot.

[LoungeMachine]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:SC00041:@@@R

They voted not to proceed on a vote......

No budget was defeated, Idiot....do your own research

:gulp:

No wonder FAUX KNEWS viewers are such sheep...

[LoungeMachine]

How can it be the president's budget when Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) was the only one sponsoring it? [/url]

It wasn't.

:gulp:

Brie is an idiot/troll

[Seshmeister]

It used to be that you would usually only see blatant lies printed and propaganda against a leader in times of war by the other side.

Now it's just a constant barrage from within...

[LoungeMachine]

Republicans forced the vote by offering the president's plan on the Senate floor.

Democrats disputed that it was actually the president's plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn't actually match Mr. Obama's budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president's numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan..


DO YOU EVEN READ YOUR OWN CUT-N-PASTE????????

:gulp:

[knuckleboner]

here's a fun fact: presidental budgets are NEVER intended to be fully implemented. in fact, there is NEVER an opportunity to do so.

president's propose budgetary actions: specific appropriations (none of which are in a budget resolution - the kind of thing referenced in this article), and specific revenue measures (none of which are in a budget resolution.

in order to actually vote on the president's budget, you'd need an onimbus appropriations bill that includes tax policy changes.

even had this vote taken place, and it DID take place in the house, it was NOT on any specific expenditures nor tax policies. it was simply top-line numbers. the only one of which matters at all being the ones solely for the upcoming fiscal year.

[knuckleboner]

..........................

[jhale667]

:gulp:
Brie is an idiot/troll

Exactly.

[Nitro Express]

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a balanced budget amendment. Thomas Jefferson said the one big mistake they made in the constitution was allowing congress to borrow money. Now the Federal Reserve prints it and loans it to the government. Since they can create as much money as they want the government will continue to raise huge debt numbers if the trend continues. I mean it's all quite the scam.

[Seshmeister]

What was his favorite technique when raping slaves?

[BigBadBrian]

AND HOW ABOUT SOME FUCKING LINKS THAT AREN'T RIGHT-WING HACKS?

I have them right here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/senate-budget-jeff-sessions_n_1522643.html?ref=mostpopular


So you put up a link from a Left-Wing Hack site....BRILLIANT! :lmao:

[BigBadBrian]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:SC00041:@@@R

They voted not to proceed on a vote......

No budget was defeated, Idiot....do your own research

:gulp:

No wonder FAUX KNEWS viewers are such sheep...

Status: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 0 - 99 :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah:

There you go DoucheMachine...idiot! :biggrin:

[BigBadBrian]

here's a fun fact: presidental budgets are NEVER intended to be fully implemented. in fact, there is NEVER an opportunity to do so.

president's propose budgetary actions: specific appropriations (none of which are in a budget resolution - the kind of thing referenced in this article), and specific revenue measures (none of which are in a budget resolution.

in order to actually vote on the president's budget, you'd need an onimbus appropriations bill that includes tax policy changes.

even had this vote taken place (Yes, it actually did), and it DID take place in the house, it was NOT on any specific expenditures nor tax policies. it was simply top-line numbers. the only one of which matters at all being the ones solely for the upcoming fiscal year.

Good post, kb. The vote did take place, however. DoucheMachine cannot be believed and has no credibility. :gulp: :)

[Satan]

So you put up a link from a Left-Wing Hack site....BRILLIANT! :lmao:

How is a site founded by a "moderate" Republican, and now owned by AOL considered "left wing"??

[LoungeMachine]

Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate
.

Um, no it wasn't, dumbshit.

:lmao:

No OBAMA BUDGET was defeated

:gulp:

[Hardrock69]

Yet another demonstration of Standard Republico-Christian Foam-At-The-Mouth Idiocy by BigBadBrucie.....

He "thanked" post number 10.....which was the opposite of what he thought it meant.

Knuckleboner gave a good, brief description of the Congressional procedure for dealing with Budgetary legislation. He did NOT claim that Obama's "budget" got defeated.


in order to actually vote on the president's budget, you'd need an onimbus appropriations bill that includes tax policy changes.

even had this vote taken place, and it DID take place in the house, it was NOT on any specific expenditures nor tax policies. it was simply top-line numbers. the only one of which matters at all being the ones solely for the upcoming fiscal year.


The above explains how BigBadBrucie got it wrong, and Brucie was glad someone was explaining to him he was wrong in language he could not easily understand.
Usually he wants to argue when someone says he is wrong (which is about all the time :hee: ).

:lmao: