Skip to main content

View Diary: Harry Reid rips John Boehner for skipping town as tax hikes loom (117 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Gutted education system (0+ / 0-)

    I too am sometimes blown away by ignorance of commenters. You and Cinzano, e.g., have apparently not heard about the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 which, among other things, requires an annual budgetary resolution from both chambers of Congress. Here's one description.
    http://www.pgpf.org/...

    If only things worked like they told you in high school, you'd be golden. Maybe next time you won't race to hit the ridicule button before you know who the joke is on. Feel free to post an apology any time.

    •  The peterson foundation as a cite ??? (0+ / 0-)

      The "annual budget resolution" from the chambers and executive budgets submitted to OMB are simply hints and wishlists to see how much concurrence there is in place.

      The House still officially originates the budget and spending bills. The input from the senate and executive branch gives them the opportunity to know in advance what might fly. They can ignore this info if they desire.

      "requiring an annual budget resolution" has no force of law that can change the fact that it's the house responsibility to start the process. It's a red herring to blame the obstructionism on the Senate.

      The house proposed and passed a bill months ago. Knowing it would not pass the senate. So it was not a good faith proposal, it was constructed as an obstructionist poison pill and strictly for political cover.

      Maybe reading the Peterson (Peter G. Peterson) Foundation website is not the best source of constitutional information. The article cited was very clever, though. Misleading, but clever.

      Without geometry, life is pointless. And blues harmonica players suck.

      by blindcynic on Thu Dec 27, 2012 at 02:00:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Lame waffling (0+ / 0-)

        The Peterson was merely a reasonably clear explanation of the issue. Feel free to point out some actual particular about it that was misleading. For instance, does the 1974 act say something about "hints and wishlists" and then declare that compliance is voluntary?

        Meantime, let me make it simple for you:

        Is it, or is it not the case that the 1974 law requires both houses to pass a budget resolution? Yes, or no?

        Is it, or is it not the case that the Senate, having done this for years and years, has failed to do so for a handful of years now? Yes, or no?

        That ought to be simple enough for you. But thanks for your high school civics lesson. I haven't had to teach constitutional law for a few years, so I might have forgotten where spending bills originate. Good work—you'll get a gold star yet.

        •  your insulting arrogant tone insures you will not (0+ / 0-)

          engage many people on this site or elsewhere.

          you have NO idea of the depth of knowledge of others, but it is good to know that you have all the right answers.  good night.

          •  Good morning (0+ / 0-)

            If insulting arrogance bothers you, maybe you shouldn't have jumped in with your comment suggesting  my supposed ignorance based on a faulty education. I gave back only the puffed-up arrogance you chose to lead with.

            BTW: an apology would still be appropriate—not that I hold my breath in anticipation.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site