What an incredibly sad and pathetic irony that the only way this got done was that Boehner was able to work with Pelosi since he's already stepping down. Perhaps the term limit for speaker should be a year.
4
Good for Democrats in Congress and thanks to leaders Pelosi and Reid. What a rational political party looks like.
4
A corrected version: Social programs have been cut more or less steadily for the past several decades. Now it has become a habit for the Republicans. They managed to achieve that even during Democratic presidents. These cuts are absolutely unnecessary. It should actually be raised substantially in this age of growing inequality.
Taxes ought to be raised on the affluent, and cut for the middle class & poor. If the payroll tax were cut to 1% on the first $10K & to 2% on the second $10K, it would be extremely beneficial to the have-nots. The cap on it ought to be raised, rather eliminated, but >$500K it should be cut to 2% & >$1M, cut to 1%. This will ensure social security solvency, while not bleeding the affluent.
Carried interest should be treated as ordinary income. And two additional higher rates in marginal taxes should be added: 50% on >$5M, or on the top 0.1% in incomes & 70% on >$25M, or on the top 0.01% in incomes, whichever are lower. The affluent would hardly feel any pinch. They would still be as affluent as before, but would feel they are helping the unlucky, the inherently disadvantaged; A sizeable minority, not a majority wouldn’t like that.
These higher rates are far less than what existed before 1981 when the tax-cutting binge took hold.
Taxes ought to be raised on the affluent, and cut for the middle class & poor. If the payroll tax were cut to 1% on the first $10K & to 2% on the second $10K, it would be extremely beneficial to the have-nots. The cap on it ought to be raised, rather eliminated, but >$500K it should be cut to 2% & >$1M, cut to 1%. This will ensure social security solvency, while not bleeding the affluent.
Carried interest should be treated as ordinary income. And two additional higher rates in marginal taxes should be added: 50% on >$5M, or on the top 0.1% in incomes & 70% on >$25M, or on the top 0.01% in incomes, whichever are lower. The affluent would hardly feel any pinch. They would still be as affluent as before, but would feel they are helping the unlucky, the inherently disadvantaged; A sizeable minority, not a majority wouldn’t like that.
These higher rates are far less than what existed before 1981 when the tax-cutting binge took hold.
16
Oh whoopee, they did something. It wasn't even a fair deal for our neediest citizens. Guess they'll give themselves another raise.
8
I notice that people who collect Social Security disability are not an important voting block. We can all thank 60 Minutes' Steve Kroft for his slanted reporting on disability recipients.
5
This budget deal is a major win for President Obama and the 47% of the American people that Mitt Romney and many Republicans describe as "takers," and dependent on Federal government because they received benefits from the Federal government (such as Medicare benefits, social security disability payments, health insurance subsidies etc.)
The budget deal is beneficial for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries as well as those receiving Social Security disability benefits. As a matter of fact a key piece of the budget deal repeals a 52 percent premium hike that would have hit 8 million Medicare Part B enrollees next year. That fix, which is the result of a glitch in federal benefits law, is estimated to cost nearly $8 billion. The deal would also prevent a 20 percent across-the-board cut in Social Security disability benefits for 11 million people next year, which was the result of a quickly drying-up trust fund. Cuts to Medicare are essentially long over due changes to the physician, hospital, and drug payment systems to rationalize the way Medicare and Medicaid reimburse providers.
The budget deal is beneficial for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries as well as those receiving Social Security disability benefits. As a matter of fact a key piece of the budget deal repeals a 52 percent premium hike that would have hit 8 million Medicare Part B enrollees next year. That fix, which is the result of a glitch in federal benefits law, is estimated to cost nearly $8 billion. The deal would also prevent a 20 percent across-the-board cut in Social Security disability benefits for 11 million people next year, which was the result of a quickly drying-up trust fund. Cuts to Medicare are essentially long over due changes to the physician, hospital, and drug payment systems to rationalize the way Medicare and Medicaid reimburse providers.
2
Are these the same Republicans who claim to be Christian? Didn't Jesus say "Blessed are the peacemakers." and "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." ? Why are these self-described "Christian Republicans" increasing the military budget? Didn't Jesus Christ say "What you do to the least of these who are members of my family, you do to me."(NRSV)? Why are the Republicans cutting aid to the elderly and disabled? Have these so called "Christian Republicans" read the Gospel of Saint Matthew?
9
Are you a Christian? Aren't Obama and the Democrats right in there with them? Remind us...what did Jesus say about casting the first stone. They are all cut from the same cloth. They are all liars and thieves and to think otherwise is childish.
2
Tightening Social Security Disability Insurance program saves the Government 5 billion dollars - 5 billion dollars!! How many billions are being spent in the war in the Middle East? How many billion dollars are we giving as aid to Israel ( a rich country! ) and Egypt with a dictator? And cuts in Medicare - savings coming from cuts in payments to doctors and other health care providers. Did they ever pause to note what % of health care costs go to professionals who actually provide care? Priorities are so messed up! No money for infrastructure, health care, schools, conservation of Nature or any of the real important needs. But you can spend a billion $ to get a fighter jet killing machine. What is wrong with our so called Leaders?
22
So, it is possible to marginalize the Tea Party extremists.
Just imagine what Mr. Boehner might have accomplished over the last countless many years.
Now, how about marginalizing them further, beginning with the current crop of crazies running for President, and take back the GOP by choosing a candidate who doesn't argue that guns trump bullet-ridden bodies (Carson), that women will get pregnant to make money off aborted fetal parts (Rubio), that all 11 million 'illegal' immigrants will be deported with no explanation as to logistics let alone morality (Trump), that "gun control means hitting what you aim at" (Cruz), that failed corporate leadership translates into Presidential competency (Fiorina), that "we don't need to be spending" millions of dollars on women's health care (Jeb!), and that "women should submit to their husbands" (Huckabee).
mlouisemarkle
State College
Just imagine what Mr. Boehner might have accomplished over the last countless many years.
Now, how about marginalizing them further, beginning with the current crop of crazies running for President, and take back the GOP by choosing a candidate who doesn't argue that guns trump bullet-ridden bodies (Carson), that women will get pregnant to make money off aborted fetal parts (Rubio), that all 11 million 'illegal' immigrants will be deported with no explanation as to logistics let alone morality (Trump), that "gun control means hitting what you aim at" (Cruz), that failed corporate leadership translates into Presidential competency (Fiorina), that "we don't need to be spending" millions of dollars on women's health care (Jeb!), and that "women should submit to their husbands" (Huckabee).
mlouisemarkle
State College
12
Well regardless of who gets cut or underfunded, at least our principal industry is kept a little better fed.EMERGENCY WAR FUND, a 32 billion increase, likely for our "ally" to sleep securely in their occupied condos that we paid for as well. Such a great bunch of law makers we have, representing all their best clients, those in Vegas and the military industrial complex.
9
Lots of smoke....let's see if our citizens get a fair price when our air waves go up for sale...unlike in the past....which i'm sure was part of this budget negotiation.
3
After watching a very incompetent Obama fail to deliver a sensible budget on time over his last several years, it's obvious that he cannot be trusted on any budget negotiations because he has refused to negotiate on past budgets, and he keeps on spending, and continued ignoring his responsibilities as laid out in the Constitution. He's just a bad, irresponsible president.
yeah, sure. bring us back to the economic shangra-la of W's policies.
we'll just pop anpther 2 trillion on our credit card.
we'll just pop anpther 2 trillion on our credit card.
5
As Scrooge asked, " Are there no prisons? And the union workhouses - are they still in operation? Oh, from what the Congress and Obama agreed to I was afraid that something had happened to stop them in their useful course. I'm very glad to hear it. I wish to be left alone. Since you ask me what I wish sir, that is my answer. I help to support the establishments I have named; those who are badly off must go there."
Second Collector: And some would rather die.
Scrooge: "Then let them."
Second Collector: And some would rather die.
Scrooge: "Then let them."
2
This is why Boehner is out of a job. This is why Trump and Carson lead the race for the Republican Presidential nomination. We've had enough of do-nothing Republicans. I can deal with getting stabbed in the heart by the Democrats, but I'm sick and tired of getting stabbed in the back by the Republicans.
4
Less than 1/3 of the $112 B goes to domestic spending. More than 2/3 of the spending increase goes to "defense" & over 40% of that goes to an "emergency war fund". Price is no object for "conservative" shock & awe proponents who advocate cuts to health care & education.
8
It's beyond belief that Republicans on this thread are painting the deal as a Boehner compromise to Obama. That's the opposite of reality.
The reality is, the Republicans put a gun to the head of the U.S. and global economy and threatened to shoot if Obama didn't give up on some social spending and increase the bloated defense budget. Obama did both, and now Republicans have agreed to pull the gun away for a year and a half until they next threaten default.
This was a necessary deal, but done under outrageous circumstances engineered by the GOP. Obama did the responsible thing and got practically nothing for it, except the promise that the GOP wouldn't blow up the economy. Is this the way our country should be governed, I ask you?
The reality is, the Republicans put a gun to the head of the U.S. and global economy and threatened to shoot if Obama didn't give up on some social spending and increase the bloated defense budget. Obama did both, and now Republicans have agreed to pull the gun away for a year and a half until they next threaten default.
This was a necessary deal, but done under outrageous circumstances engineered by the GOP. Obama did the responsible thing and got practically nothing for it, except the promise that the GOP wouldn't blow up the economy. Is this the way our country should be governed, I ask you?
8
No, this is not the way the country should be governed. You can lay this at the public's feet but certainly not Obama's. Just 2 years after Republicans brought down the national and global economies, the American public rewarded them but giving them the House, then two years later, the Senate. This is mass psychosis or perhaps something the Koch brothers put in the water.
1
Obama is a remarkable man and the most underrated President since Truman. Read his extraordinary, wonderful conversation with the brilliant novelist Marilynne Robinson in the Oct.-Nov. New York of Books and you'll see what a smart, thoughtful, and broad-gauged president we have. He thinks deeply and he works to solve the biggest problems: the budget deal; medicine (Obamacare); noble efforts to leash the dogs of war and violent hatreds loosed by the Islamic fanatics & the USA neo-cons fanatics, and all the tribal, Likud and Christian evangelical ideologues the Middle East. Peace and prosperity, not victory, self-righteousness or bearing witness through rant and arrogance are the proper goals of those who govern. Irrationality hates reason, hates compromise and always leads to public disaster. Lucky for us, it's hard to imagine a president with more wisdom, more understanding of the necessity to compromise in order to lead well and responsibly than Obama--as we're now starting to realize.
11
Buy high, sell low. Bye bye oil reserves needed for our conflict with China, or whatever national emergency comes.
2
So after 7 years of the GOP opposing any deal the President would support, including their own proposals, they have decided to "compromise." As if this is going to make them look reasonable for the 2016 election cycle. This should not be hailed as a change of heart, it should be viewed as business as usual. Imagine how much better off the American people would be if normal congressional business would have been carried on for the last 7 years. The GOP has got to go.
11
If someone votes for a government who will raid their farm and make off with their crops and farm animals, or best yet vote to let the Wolf into their Shepard yard because they liked what the sheep did to their neighbours that they didn't like, should any of us feel sorry for them. The republican wolf, who most white elderly voters voted for have basically ravaged social service program for the poor and needy. Now they are ready to feed on the elders crop so to speak. Why would anyone feel sorry for the affected elder?
1
We will see if this flies. And the Ex-Im Bank. I'm not holding my breath although I think the Dems ins the House will guarantee passage in that House but Cruz, Lee and that bunch will have a fight with McConnell. Lots of fun in this "so-called" democracy that has been a joke wrapped in a farce at Barnum and Bailey. What a way to run a country. What a "role model" for the world that we are so won't to brag about. "Shining city upon the hill?" Where is that. Not in the U.S.A. Rather tarnished I would say.
1
There are three key words that we don't see as part of this compromise, words that Tea Partiers insisted would be necessary to arrive at any deal: "defunding Planned Parenthood." While the issue will come up again the failure to achieve any traction on it this time is a major setback for Jim Jordan and the Freedom Caucus.
We have now seen how the Tea Party can be frozen out by reasonable lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. Let them scream and pout all they want - they are in their (inevitable) decline.
We have now seen how the Tea Party can be frozen out by reasonable lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. Let them scream and pout all they want - they are in their (inevitable) decline.
7
As odious as this deal sounds, a default or lowering of the US's debt rating would ultimately have a greater real impact on the elderly and disabled, and would lead to a situation where the nation's financial fortunes are out of our control. Congress can vote back in cuts to SSD. It can't vote back a loss to our international standing.
Cutting Medicare payments to doctor is hardly a reflection of our Values. As it is doctors do not want Medicare payments and this will only make it harder for the elderly to find a doctor to treat them.
This is not a good deal. I would rather we kept sequestration in place, and heavily cut military spending. We have so much waste and fraud in military spending but yet we never cut a single program and we get Sec. of Defense who want more, like Ash Carter.
It is time we cut the military budget - heavily and devoted more to the wrecks of roads and other things that make our country look like holdover from the 1950's.
This deal does not reflect our values - they reflect no values, but rather what each side bargained for. The American People are never at the table for these crooked deals which merely reflect the negotiators.
This is not a good deal. I would rather we kept sequestration in place, and heavily cut military spending. We have so much waste and fraud in military spending but yet we never cut a single program and we get Sec. of Defense who want more, like Ash Carter.
It is time we cut the military budget - heavily and devoted more to the wrecks of roads and other things that make our country look like holdover from the 1950's.
This deal does not reflect our values - they reflect no values, but rather what each side bargained for. The American People are never at the table for these crooked deals which merely reflect the negotiators.
5
The saddest part about this entire Budget Affair is the American people get the government that they deserve...this is the outcome of 1) voters consciously not voting, 2) non-critical thinking voters voting against their own best interests, 3) voter suppression. Our democracy appears to be on a parallel collision course along with our environment/climate and the paralyzing dynamics of human indifference and selfishness is the captain of the ship. What will have to happen to capture everyone's attention? How many lives will have to be ruined before the need to adjust our national course will be realized and acted upon?
5
"not including a $32 billion increase in an emergency war fund."
We continue to wage war "off the books," hiding the cost of these adventures from the American people. But spending to improve the lives, health and general welfare of Americans has to undergo stringent affordability testing.
We continue to wage war "off the books," hiding the cost of these adventures from the American people. But spending to improve the lives, health and general welfare of Americans has to undergo stringent affordability testing.
6
I don't have a problem with the eligibility criteria for Social Security Disability Insurance being standardized across all of our United States.
I had no idea SSDI rules were different from state to state.
I sure would like to know how that ever came about.
The Medicare cuts - as the story plainly states - are cuts to what medical providers are paid. They may be so small across the program, per medical code, that not a single doctor or other provider decides to stop seeing Medicare patients because of it.
Many extreme Republican like incoming Speaker Paul Ryan want to end Medicare.
HE'S the one who people need to start working to stop.
I had no idea SSDI rules were different from state to state.
I sure would like to know how that ever came about.
The Medicare cuts - as the story plainly states - are cuts to what medical providers are paid. They may be so small across the program, per medical code, that not a single doctor or other provider decides to stop seeing Medicare patients because of it.
Many extreme Republican like incoming Speaker Paul Ryan want to end Medicare.
HE'S the one who people need to start working to stop.
4
And if you are wrong, and doctors do stop seeing Medicare patients?
A companion article says, "The group Heritage Action for America labeled Mr. Boehner a “rogue agent” working for special interests in his final hours." They mean OTHER special interests like 99% of us. Cuts to SS, Medicare and other social programs always ring a "bad news" bell but let's wait and see the particulars. Democrats and Independents who disagree with portions of the bill need to let US know - by e-mail, tweet and social media - what their destructive house/senate members are doing to help their wealthy buddies and undermine the lives of the rest of us so WE can take action BEFORE bad deals are passed. Senators Elizabeth and Bernie Sanders always let us know what "conservatives" are up to and WE need clear calls to action. We're ready!
15
I love it when both sides negotiate and settle on a bill both can stomach and that nobody completely likes. This is Democracy working. Government shutdowns due to inability to compromise are examples of government not working.
15
"The deal “reflects our values,” the official added, and “is paid for in a balanced way by ensuring that hedge funds and private equity firms pay the taxes they owe and by cutting billions in wasteful spending." Hmm..I wonder if this means they snuck in the fix to "carried interest" income that allows hedge fund mgrs like Romney to pay captial gains rate on his income...would be a major step forward if that was in there..
11
The "tentative" (key word) budget (surrender) deal reached between Barack Obama and Speaker Boehner reveals every reason the GOP caucus is forcing Boehner out of town.
Without even picking up the phone or emailing ANY of the GOP leadership, Boehner decided to "clear the barn" by surrendering to Obama once again. The Obama WH presented Boehner with a budget Obama would sign. The Obama "compromise" contained the middle class squeezing provisions the Obama WH offered, and since nobody in the GOP leadership outside of Boehner's inner circle had a say, NOTHING the majority in the GOP wanted is in the budget deal.
I've been in Washington DC since graduating from law school and moving here to start my career about a month before Obama showed up. Obama uses the same tricks from the same playbook. This is the Obama sequester play, part two, where Obama imposes draconian measures and the GOP gets blamed when Boehner surrenders.
The exact same trick.
Without even picking up the phone or emailing ANY of the GOP leadership, Boehner decided to "clear the barn" by surrendering to Obama once again. The Obama WH presented Boehner with a budget Obama would sign. The Obama "compromise" contained the middle class squeezing provisions the Obama WH offered, and since nobody in the GOP leadership outside of Boehner's inner circle had a say, NOTHING the majority in the GOP wanted is in the budget deal.
I've been in Washington DC since graduating from law school and moving here to start my career about a month before Obama showed up. Obama uses the same tricks from the same playbook. This is the Obama sequester play, part two, where Obama imposes draconian measures and the GOP gets blamed when Boehner surrenders.
The exact same trick.
2
"The Obama "compromise" contained the middle class squeezing provisions the Obama WH offered, and since nobody in the GOP leadership outside of Boehner's inner circle had a say, NOTHING the majority in the GOP wanted is in the budget deal."
Wait, what alternative Orwellian universe do you inhabit? Are you really under the impression that whatever it is the Koched-up GOP wants, it does NOT involve squeezing the middle class?
Wait, what alternative Orwellian universe do you inhabit? Are you really under the impression that whatever it is the Koched-up GOP wants, it does NOT involve squeezing the middle class?
20
Every one of you postings is the same trick: "Obama is an idiot and I am the coolest Black Dude in Washington."
3
Boehner didn't pick up the phone or email ANY of the GOP leaders outside his inner circle. Paul Ryan didn't know what Boehner was negotiating, NONE of the GOP majority (the so-called Freedom Caucus) were consulted.
NONE.
This was Boehner's last defiant act of surrender.
NONE.
This was Boehner's last defiant act of surrender.
1
Heck, with the current crop of inmates. it may be the last meaningful budget Congress passes in this decade.
7
Pelosi endorsed this package deal??
1
So, let's see: the Tea Party will return to voters again in 2016 saying (A) our uncompromising adherence to our principles caused us (again) to not be able to deliver any of our promises to you, the voters but (B) vote for us (again) so that we can obstruct everything in the Congress for another term.
At what point do the Tea Party voters realize they're being played for suckers rather than having real leaders explain patiently to them how the government does -- and does not -- work (and thereby what's achievable politically as a minority).
At what point do the Tea Party voters realize they're being played for suckers rather than having real leaders explain patiently to them how the government does -- and does not -- work (and thereby what's achievable politically as a minority).
10
Wait until the tea party is a majority. Maybe then we will stop selling your kids down the river.
Amazing how well government can function when the Freedom Caucus types are taken out of the equation. This was an amazing natural experiment to show us how well we could live if we did not have 20% of the electorate who have decided that they want to grind this country to a halt in the name of some idyllic past that actually never existed.
12
Anything with 141 pages takes a lot of reading to check for loop-holes and lulus, but a cursory reading tells me that Boehner and Obama and a bi-partisan majority of congress just gave the Freedom Caucus the mickey.
They howled, they raged, they played the 3-year old having a tantrum, and the grown-ups in the room made a decision ... and those throwing the tantrum now get to look at ... what happened.
All their leverage is gone until long after the 2016 election. And despite whining on the left, Obama got basically everything he wanted, and perhaps a bit more. The cuts to Medicare Disability programs are an issue to those of us on the left, but one cannot ignore the astounding abuse of disability these days as what now amounts to long-term unemployment benefits -- this must be cut back.
Moderate Republicans also got what they wanted -- increased defense budgets, and both parties solved problems that would have come to haunt them, and the adults in the room knew it.
As is the case with most deals -- when the whining on both sides is about even, the deal is probably about the fairest deal that could be had.
Now the Freedom caucus can go pound sand, and reflect on what they did and what that accomplished. Perhaps they will learn something ... or perhaps the voters who put them in office will.
They howled, they raged, they played the 3-year old having a tantrum, and the grown-ups in the room made a decision ... and those throwing the tantrum now get to look at ... what happened.
All their leverage is gone until long after the 2016 election. And despite whining on the left, Obama got basically everything he wanted, and perhaps a bit more. The cuts to Medicare Disability programs are an issue to those of us on the left, but one cannot ignore the astounding abuse of disability these days as what now amounts to long-term unemployment benefits -- this must be cut back.
Moderate Republicans also got what they wanted -- increased defense budgets, and both parties solved problems that would have come to haunt them, and the adults in the room knew it.
As is the case with most deals -- when the whining on both sides is about even, the deal is probably about the fairest deal that could be had.
Now the Freedom caucus can go pound sand, and reflect on what they did and what that accomplished. Perhaps they will learn something ... or perhaps the voters who put them in office will.
9
The "astounding abuse of disability" these days would likely not be an issue if there were jobs to go around and real protection against discrimination of all kinds, particularly age discrimination. We have an unforgiving lack of a safety net in this country with a workforce pared down so far that employers can pick and choose who they want. That usually doesn't include people over 50, "overqualified" workers, those with gaps in their work histories, people who are overweight or have any chronic health or family problems that might require accommodation. I think so many people just give up after losing hold of the employment ladder. I see real hardship and possibly even starvation and early death for vulnerable people in this compromise.
And yet the charmingly naive and jejeune readers of the Times continue to largely see politics as an either or between well meaning Democrats and evil Republicans. As if there is any real difference. Just spin and business as usual for the establishment whose greatest bulwark has become conformist, compliant and emotional liberals. How ironic.
Sorry...back to the sage discussion here on how many angels can dance on the pages of an illusory back room budget "deal."
Sorry...back to the sage discussion here on how many angels can dance on the pages of an illusory back room budget "deal."
4
GOP Government Opposed to Parity. Their motto "until it happens to me!"
2
“The Medicare savings would come from cuts in payments to doctors and other health care providers.”
Let’s be clear here. These savings do not impact Medicare recipients’ health care. They will still have the same access to health care services as before. The change is that doctors and other providers will be paid less for these services.
Let’s be clear here. These savings do not impact Medicare recipients’ health care. They will still have the same access to health care services as before. The change is that doctors and other providers will be paid less for these services.
3
Doctors and providers who are paid less may opt out of serving Medicare patients, resulting in delays in care and longer distances to travel. Just paying someone less and expecting the same product or service does not necessarily work. Try it with your local grocery.
3
...and then just try and find doctors that will take "less"....they have been eating it for years
Mmmm, one thing does not necessarily follow the other. What if my mother's doctor decides he is tired of losing money on her and declines to accept Medicare anymore? She'll have to start over again with a new provider, which at 90+ is not a trivial matter. Or, he'll continue to treat her but will raise his rates on his non-Medicare patients.
By the way, "impact" is NOT a transitive verb. You meant "have an effect upon" or "affect."
By the way, "impact" is NOT a transitive verb. You meant "have an effect upon" or "affect."
When the terminology was changed from "premiums" and "benefits" to “taxes” and “entitlements” that was the start down the slippery slope.
7
Times readers:
Good afternoon from Capitol Hill!
I live in Washington DC, and work on The Hill. Just so you know, the crumbs in spending cuts that will hurt the poor and elderly, were OFFERED by the Obama WH. Boehner consulted with approximately ZERO members of the Freedom Caucus, and nobody outside of Boehner's inner circle was involved in negotiating this deal. Even Paul Ryan, the presumptive replacement was not consulted, and he's the Ways and Means Chair.
So stop your slings and arrows at the GOP for hurting the poor. Like the sequester Obama proposed and tried to blame the GOP for, this is an Obama end around, aided by a news media that has never published a sentence holding Obama accountable for anything.
Good afternoon from Capitol Hill!
I live in Washington DC, and work on The Hill. Just so you know, the crumbs in spending cuts that will hurt the poor and elderly, were OFFERED by the Obama WH. Boehner consulted with approximately ZERO members of the Freedom Caucus, and nobody outside of Boehner's inner circle was involved in negotiating this deal. Even Paul Ryan, the presumptive replacement was not consulted, and he's the Ways and Means Chair.
So stop your slings and arrows at the GOP for hurting the poor. Like the sequester Obama proposed and tried to blame the GOP for, this is an Obama end around, aided by a news media that has never published a sentence holding Obama accountable for anything.
5
DCBarrister,
Both Houses of Congress get to vote on this, so everyone gets their say. Freedom Caucus was just reminded of the limits of their influence... welcome to politics.
And whether you know it or not, this move preserves the electoral viability of the GOP party that your precious Freedom Caucus inhabits like pod people.
They are 10% of the Republican House, how much representation do you think is appropriate? Even at this level, they already enjoy disproportionate influence.
Both Houses of Congress get to vote on this, so everyone gets their say. Freedom Caucus was just reminded of the limits of their influence... welcome to politics.
And whether you know it or not, this move preserves the electoral viability of the GOP party that your precious Freedom Caucus inhabits like pod people.
They are 10% of the Republican House, how much representation do you think is appropriate? Even at this level, they already enjoy disproportionate influence.
Absolutist rhetoric undermines the credibility of any argument, unless it's true.
". . . a news media that has never published a sentence holding Obama accountable for anything." Not true.
If Obama really had his way, there'd be no cuts, much higher spending, and a significant tax hike on the wealthy. But for the pressure applied by groups like the Freedom Caucus, he never would have made this offer to Boehner. So don't feel so helpless.
". . . a news media that has never published a sentence holding Obama accountable for anything." Not true.
If Obama really had his way, there'd be no cuts, much higher spending, and a significant tax hike on the wealthy. But for the pressure applied by groups like the Freedom Caucus, he never would have made this offer to Boehner. So don't feel so helpless.
Maybe the republicans should refuse his offers to hurt the poor, just to show in what better places their own hearts are. Maybe they should defend social security and refuse cuts to Medicare--or expand the programs. Since it's Obama and not republicans who want to cut the poor, elders, and sick. I can hardly wait to see what good deeds the republicans plan to do for the needy. Do keep us advised.
1
Emergency War fund? What exactly is that and why does it need ANOTHER $30B and counting? When you count all the hidden "funds" of the military we are spending over $600B A YEAR. This figure doesn't even count the CIA, NSA and all the alphabet named agencies. We cut the funds disabled elderly and veterans receive so we can spend even more on wars we end up losing. Whatever happened to us? Where is our moral compass?
14
Come next year when our senior citizens find that their doctor will no longer participate in Medicare they only have one person to blame - themselves.
Because, far too many of our seniors choose to vote GOP - plain and simple.
Because, far too many of our seniors choose to vote GOP - plain and simple.
15
But yet we do have to make steps to slowing the rise in health care costs. Many doctors are overcharging medicare. It does seem to bring down costs; I notice without fail that my doctors reduce their price and accept the Medicare payment when I receive bills.
But...but the Democrats agreed to it and to increasing military spending and discretionary spending. How can that be?
This is why people don't bother voting. Our representatives do not represent the people - only the special interest groups and the War Department, which restructured itself after WWII and changed its name to the Department of Defense in 1949. They spend so much money killing people. Imagine how life would be if they spent the money on improving the lives of American citizens?
7
I completely agree with the idea that spending on people trumps spending on war.
That said, this compromise is exactly why we vote. Compromise is essential to our democracy because no one party represents the interests of the whole, as much as we like to make it so. And, though the balance has been skewed by the Tea Party,
this compromise has indeed marginalized them by showing the American people that work can get done without the extremists.
While I don't like the complete package, I like that the economy won't suffer the brunt of yet another Republican shutdown.
Let 2017 be the year we marginalize the Tea Party, which is entirely possible in the Senate, if not yet the House.
mlouisemarkle
State College
That said, this compromise is exactly why we vote. Compromise is essential to our democracy because no one party represents the interests of the whole, as much as we like to make it so. And, though the balance has been skewed by the Tea Party,
this compromise has indeed marginalized them by showing the American people that work can get done without the extremists.
While I don't like the complete package, I like that the economy won't suffer the brunt of yet another Republican shutdown.
Let 2017 be the year we marginalize the Tea Party, which is entirely possible in the Senate, if not yet the House.
mlouisemarkle
State College
So once again Boehner and McConnell roll Obama,
not only stealing his lunch money, wallet, and watch,
but his totally cool presidential Members Only jacket,
and his MJ Nike kicks.
Great job O.......
not only stealing his lunch money, wallet, and watch,
but his totally cool presidential Members Only jacket,
and his MJ Nike kicks.
Great job O.......
1
Er, the opposite has occurred. Obama got $40B for domestic programs, and some of the defense $ he had requested to fight ISIS and other terrorists groups. He also gets finally a budget and no default crisis on the table, which should really help the economy and stock market, by removing uncertainty for businesses and investors. He had Boehner etc over a barrel. Boehner wanted a legacy. The economy should improve even more now, which means more taxes, which means it is possible the budget might be balanced (ala Clinton) before Obama leaves office.
Let the voters decide if they want to cut Social Security and Medicare to fund wars in the Middle East. This is sick.
12
Excellent, now it is up to Congress to approve and pass the bill and show that they are serious and true Americans. No single chairman or member should have the power to hold up the consideration and voting of a bill, as is the case of the Import/Export Bank. This institution has not cost the taxpayers any money, but has protected thousands of jobs. Also, let us continue on having multiple year budgets to prevent the constant fights and anxieties. Again, let us hope this is the beginning of a better understanding between the parties.
5
What is sad about this "Budget Agreement" is not only the fact that it was not a "Grand Bargain," but that it represents the kind of undirected fiscal policy that addresses nothing adequately. No doubt, defense spending creates or saves jobs, and puts money in the pockets of the biggest corporations. So much for the mumbo jumbo that government does not create jobs and that corporations are the job creators, but there are many more areas of our life where money could be directed and could not only create jobs, but we could improve our standard of living for EVERYONE in the process. We need an energy program, for example, and it should be green, but instead we focus on more bombs. Hmmm! When the Republicans hold all the cards that's what you get. The people got a budget that keeps open the government but at a cost to our present and our future. This is a clash of ideas going no where. On the one hand, there is a set of ideas that are totally ungrounded, were never true, and have been disproven over and over, and most recently at a huge cost to our nation. On the other hand, we have places to go and things to do. We need to rebuild our country. Create a life for the next generation, not just the heirs of tremendous good fortune. On the 3rd hand, even more sadly, we have a group of people that will protest violently about there being a budget agreement at all.
3
Paul Ryan is publicly furious with John Boehner for negotiating this deal, but I'm sure he is in fact privately relieved.
The budgetary agenda of the House "Freedom" Caucus is now clear with Ryan's public attempt to appease its members and secure the position of Speaker: No increases in government spending ever for all eternity except towards further fattening up the Pentagon. Given that the USA will not even confront the most dangerous country out there (Saudi Arabia--inspiration for ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and the Taliban) it's hard to understand why trillions more ought to be spent on national defense except as a way to keep defense contractors fat and happy.
Increasingly, it looks to me that the coming downfall of the USA can be traced to the first Persian Gulf War of 1991. Remember why that war was really fought--not to "liberate" Kuwait (a preposterous term for an autocratic emirate where women and foreign laborers are treated like dirt) but to protect Saudi Arabia from Iraq. Yes, protect a country governed according to the most crazed, fanatical, intolerant strain of Islam the world has ever known (Wahhabism) and opposed within that country by people who are even MORE crazed and fanatical. This was the top foreign policy priority of Jeb Bush's father.
Never thought I'd end up thinking this, but would it have been such a bad thing had Iraq under Saddam Hussein been free to keep Kuwait and then waged a war of territorial expansion against Saudi Arabia?
The budgetary agenda of the House "Freedom" Caucus is now clear with Ryan's public attempt to appease its members and secure the position of Speaker: No increases in government spending ever for all eternity except towards further fattening up the Pentagon. Given that the USA will not even confront the most dangerous country out there (Saudi Arabia--inspiration for ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and the Taliban) it's hard to understand why trillions more ought to be spent on national defense except as a way to keep defense contractors fat and happy.
Increasingly, it looks to me that the coming downfall of the USA can be traced to the first Persian Gulf War of 1991. Remember why that war was really fought--not to "liberate" Kuwait (a preposterous term for an autocratic emirate where women and foreign laborers are treated like dirt) but to protect Saudi Arabia from Iraq. Yes, protect a country governed according to the most crazed, fanatical, intolerant strain of Islam the world has ever known (Wahhabism) and opposed within that country by people who are even MORE crazed and fanatical. This was the top foreign policy priority of Jeb Bush's father.
Never thought I'd end up thinking this, but would it have been such a bad thing had Iraq under Saddam Hussein been free to keep Kuwait and then waged a war of territorial expansion against Saudi Arabia?
7
This "deal" made between the GOP and a GOP lite president is the first step in attaining the GOP goal of ending Social Security and Medicare. This GOP lite president gave these yahoos exactly what they wanted and pushed the debt limit and budget debates out beyond the election so they can't be beaten over the head about it. A big win for the anti-worker party with a huge assist from their ally in the White House.
11
Obama is actually to the right of Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and he CLEARLY hates seniors.
2
Of course Obama does not hate seniors. No benefits were cut...just payments to doctors (many of whom are very overpaid)...we HAVE to start tightening our belts on health care spending. The disability program was out of control, with a huge rise in the last decade of people going onto the program. You think Obama is conservative? Vote for a GOPer for President and watch what you get. The END of SS and Medicare and Affordable Care Act.
So, both parties agree that the poor, disabled and elderly must starve so that billionaires can continue to enjoy the lowest tax rates ever?
A pox on both their houses!
Bernie Sanders is looking better every day.
A pox on both their houses!
Bernie Sanders is looking better every day.
24
Reality check no deal is good deal if we are indebting next generation with our excesses . Affordanble health care has cost trillions with little no benfit to those who need insurance only made insurance company rich an wall street richer. Stop madness an borrowing to feed wall street,better to spend on mass transit system for country that isn't burning fossel fuels . Congress is out of control an people know it . Spending to give self appointed raises is huge problem when people on social security level live below poverty level .
2
The American Revolution was paid for by deficit spending.
The American Revolution was financed by burdening future generations with the Founding Dads' debt.
The American Revolution was financed by burdening future generations with the Founding Dads' debt.
5
Jerry,
Maybe you don't take time to look at the facts about the deficit, but as a percentage of the economy (the most valid way to measure the deficit's impact), the deficit has fallen to about 2.5% now vs. 9% early in Obama's first term. It is not an issue.
Maybe you don't take time to look at the facts about the deficit, but as a percentage of the economy (the most valid way to measure the deficit's impact), the deficit has fallen to about 2.5% now vs. 9% early in Obama's first term. It is not an issue.
“It’s another ‘govern by crisis’ deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the House but rather the will of the speaker.” Let's see now . . . 246 yay, 177 nay. Sounds like a House majority - a bipartisan one at that - to me.
Amash probably meant to say “It’s a bipartisan deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the minority reactionary Freedom Caucus, but rather the will of the people - and we HATE that.”
Amash probably meant to say “It’s a bipartisan deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the minority reactionary Freedom Caucus, but rather the will of the people - and we HATE that.”
9
I think most of us are happy that our retirement savings won't be put at risk (at least until 2017) by the kamikaze Freedom Caucus.
Cutting social programs in order to get more money for defense. President Obama is truly the most left of center president we had in a long time.
4
Me thinks you meant right of center?
2
Do the majority of the people voting on cutting Medicare even understand that it's been years and years since doctors have gotten raises in their Medicare payments? Do they realize that doctors are not REQUIRED to participate in Medicare and more and more doctors are OPTING OUT of participating in Medicare. Hopefully retires continue to vote and will express their anger when they can no longer find a doctor who takes Medicare payments.
13
Yes the Republic party understands starving programs to death
2
Republicans have made no secret of their desire to privatize and/or to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits or reduce them to useless "vouchers", and repeal the ACA. So it is understandable that a quick, "secret" funding agreement might alarm many citizens. The so-called Freedom Caucus as well as the conservative "think tank" Heritage Foundation, are both already sniping about this agreement. When you eat with the devil, use a long fork.
8
This will prevent, almost, the Anarchists from blackmailing us for the next year and a half leading up to the election
It should indicate to all, Republicans want war and unfunded spending, in return for cutting basic government services. Social Security is paid via payroll deductions as is part of Medicaid. Are we getting those funds back, via a tax on Republicans?
I will wait for your answer
It should indicate to all, Republicans want war and unfunded spending, in return for cutting basic government services. Social Security is paid via payroll deductions as is part of Medicaid. Are we getting those funds back, via a tax on Republicans?
I will wait for your answer
9
Read Gina Kolata's "Costs for Dementia Care Far Exceeding Other Diseases, Study Finds" in today's Times and tell me we have adequate health care. Why should people spend every dime they managed to accumulate in a long life of hard work to cover basic care in their last days?
We need to expand Medicare for all and cover dental care and long-term care. As the new budget shows, we are a very rich nation.
We need to expand Medicare for all and cover dental care and long-term care. As the new budget shows, we are a very rich nation.
12
And WE lose. Again.
10
It seems that the Medicare beneficiaries facing a big Part B premium hike have a reprieve, but what does this budget agreement do for the 52% increase in the Part B deductible every beneficiary will face?
6
This is a disgrace! It's pure insanity that President Obama and the Democrats would support such a budget. I know one presidential candidate who is not supporting this budget proposal and will not vote for its implementation and he's not on the Republican side.
5
Go Bernie!
1
The one thing both sides agreed on is their joint need to defer government shutdowns to past the next election.
"While the four Congressional leaders and Mr. Obama never met face-to-face in this round, aides said that there were frequent phone calls among the individual leaders as talks developed. "
So, one wonders. Pelosi thinks this is a great deal for "working class families" How? by raising the taxes and other costs that will inevitably come due? dysfunctional government--BUT IT IS ELECTION YEAR and they have all come together with the hopes that the informed [sic] voter will actually consider that they have done something wonderful and vote some moron in.
The caps in spending were there for a reason but no, we have more military spending --wait to see where the "equal part goes" and then decide whether this isn't just politics or not.
It's the sale (of the nation) of the century. Thanks folks.
So, one wonders. Pelosi thinks this is a great deal for "working class families" How? by raising the taxes and other costs that will inevitably come due? dysfunctional government--BUT IT IS ELECTION YEAR and they have all come together with the hopes that the informed [sic] voter will actually consider that they have done something wonderful and vote some moron in.
The caps in spending were there for a reason but no, we have more military spending --wait to see where the "equal part goes" and then decide whether this isn't just politics or not.
It's the sale (of the nation) of the century. Thanks folks.
3
Okay now I am worried for my country.
Obama supporters are all over the comment board hailing this as compromise, when in fact it's John Boehner surrendering another budget showdown to the Obama WH.
Surrender isn't compromise.
There were FIVE people in that room "negotiating" this deal. One was a Boehner aide, the other four?
Obama supporters are all over the comment board hailing this as compromise, when in fact it's John Boehner surrendering another budget showdown to the Obama WH.
Surrender isn't compromise.
There were FIVE people in that room "negotiating" this deal. One was a Boehner aide, the other four?
Umm, politics means compromise. No compromise means what? Anarchy? Fight (literally)? Perpetual gridlock? This is a good deal, i.e., a compromise, for both "sides."
Maybe being a trial lawyer has left me a bit cynical about words and what they mean, but "do whatever Obama wants and like it or Obama will veto anything you suggest" isn't compromise.
It's only compromise to the guy holding the gun. The poor fella on the other end isn't in a position to bargain.
It's only compromise to the guy holding the gun. The poor fella on the other end isn't in a position to bargain.
What exactly did Obama get out of this? Cuts to social programs, increased defense spending - neither are things he wanted. He had to compromise to Republicans to get them because the other choice was to let Republicans force us to default, which would have destroyed the economy.
Some compromise. Obama gives up everything to save the economy, and Republicans get to cut benefits for poor people and spend more on weapons we don't need. How can you not see this?
Some compromise. Obama gives up everything to save the economy, and Republicans get to cut benefits for poor people and spend more on weapons we don't need. How can you not see this?
1
In my opinion, the only reason the GOP made this deal was to keep the election year free of their usual dysfunction.
Perhaps now they can convince the American electorate that they are able to govern, despite the fact that they have no health care policy, immigration policy, education policy, energy policy, climate change policy, or any kind of policy that has an outlook of more than a year or two.
Perhaps now they can convince the American electorate that they are able to govern, despite the fact that they have no health care policy, immigration policy, education policy, energy policy, climate change policy, or any kind of policy that has an outlook of more than a year or two.
12
"Reflects our values". Really? Whose values? Of what 'value' are the Medicare and diability cuts to those who already cannot afford them?
But all is well, no billionaires were harmed in the making of this budget.
But all is well, no billionaires were harmed in the making of this budget.
11
This budget deal is exactly what the press has been saying the American people want to see, which is the executive and legislative branches calmly working together and reaching a compromise that satisfies both sides. For years I have read complaints about Republican "obstructionism" in Congress, which I wrote off as being from people who simply didn't understand the very nature of politics. Well, for those, here you go, this is what you said you wanted. Instead, I read almost nothing but complaints about how does the President dare make a deal with those evil Republicans. Perhaps in the future, when referring to obstructionists, the complainers should first go look in the mirror.
16
The people complaining on the left aren't the people in power, that's the difference between republican obstructionists, and lefty whiners. Republican lawmakers can't overcome their more extreme ideologues, democrats can.
Mr. Godinez,
Your commentary is so far off base, but let me try to explain what "obstructionism" really is in Congress.
It is not the Democratic Party or the president that created these budget impasses, it is your GOP party.
The same party that will not trim military spending and will not even consider placing a fair tax on the one percent. Instead, the GOP sees the rest of us as "leeches" that need to be trimmed from the federal budget the form of cutting Medicare, Social Security, food stamps, money for a properly functioning IRS, money for science and research, just to name a few.
And what "wall" has the Democratic Party put up - none to speak of!
The Democratic party has caved in on Medicare, SSI and all of the above just so the one-percenters and military-industrial complex can go on with business as usual.
So, don't hand us this balderdash that the GOP has been negotiating in good faith with their Democratic Party opposition - because clearly they have not because they have allowed their party to be hijacked by extremists that see compromise as something the other guys do.
Your commentary is so far off base, but let me try to explain what "obstructionism" really is in Congress.
It is not the Democratic Party or the president that created these budget impasses, it is your GOP party.
The same party that will not trim military spending and will not even consider placing a fair tax on the one percent. Instead, the GOP sees the rest of us as "leeches" that need to be trimmed from the federal budget the form of cutting Medicare, Social Security, food stamps, money for a properly functioning IRS, money for science and research, just to name a few.
And what "wall" has the Democratic Party put up - none to speak of!
The Democratic party has caved in on Medicare, SSI and all of the above just so the one-percenters and military-industrial complex can go on with business as usual.
So, don't hand us this balderdash that the GOP has been negotiating in good faith with their Democratic Party opposition - because clearly they have not because they have allowed their party to be hijacked by extremists that see compromise as something the other guys do.
1
Neither side is “satisfied” but it does diffuse another “crisis” manufactured by the drama queens on the foaming right. It would behoove the Adults in the Republican Party to participate in their own primaries and vote out the rabid among them.
"The emerging deal would also reallocate funds among Social Security program trust funds to ensure solvency of the disability insurance program."
I am so tired of these myths! If the SS fund should become "insolvent" and they send out the checks anyway, would they bounce? Of course not. The government presses a button and checks go out and people's bank accounts are credited. There is no such thing as "insolvency" as it pertains to the federal government. If you are reading this and plan to respond using the word "Greece" you are only showing your ignorance.
I am so tired of these myths! If the SS fund should become "insolvent" and they send out the checks anyway, would they bounce? Of course not. The government presses a button and checks go out and people's bank accounts are credited. There is no such thing as "insolvency" as it pertains to the federal government. If you are reading this and plan to respond using the word "Greece" you are only showing your ignorance.
10
I hope that the reduction in Medicare Doctor payments is constructed in such a way that reimbursements are not actually cut. That is, the Medicare 'Authorized' charges can remain the same while the percentage reimbursements are cut below the current 80%. Then, supplemental insurance would pick up the differences, perhaps resulting in slight premium adjustments. That approach would not penalize providers and should satisfy conservatives who want to reduce Medicare costs without having to increase Federal borrowing. We'll see.
3
The country is going to miss Boehner. Let's hope Ryan can assume Boehner's role as the Republican "adult in the room."
4
House Freedom Caucus down in flames.
9
I hope you are right, but I think that is one stubborn bunch of Representatives representing a very backward set of voters.
2
The changes in disability and Social Security programs should be applied to members of Congress. If the members believe that these changes are so important and positive, they should be willing to apply these to themselves. This is a trivial change, since members are given a generous pension after 10 years of service and have a generous health insurance plan.
A much more radical approach would be to request members to spend 2 months on Medicaid and live on food stamp programs. After all, if the members are of the opinion that these programs are too generous, the members should try these themselves. And, no seeking handouts/free dinners from lobbyists in the 2 months!
A much more radical approach would be to request members to spend 2 months on Medicaid and live on food stamp programs. After all, if the members are of the opinion that these programs are too generous, the members should try these themselves. And, no seeking handouts/free dinners from lobbyists in the 2 months!
18
This is way government is supposed to work. If you're unhappy with the result, show up and let your voice be heard at the voting booth. We have a representative government, however it's only represents those who vote. Remember that!
14
"however it..only represents those who vote"
Nope. it [the government] only represents those who foot the campaign bills. Actually, the voter doesn't count much anymore because the electoral college is the real decider of the game. One can win the popular vote but still LOSE the election.
The real government is the 1%---and don't forget that when you vote.
Nope. it [the government] only represents those who foot the campaign bills. Actually, the voter doesn't count much anymore because the electoral college is the real decider of the game. One can win the popular vote but still LOSE the election.
The real government is the 1%---and don't forget that when you vote.
5
The 1% only control the vote if American voters vote based on all the advertising they are subjected to. If Americans will use their brains and start voting on what is good for them, the billionaires will not be able to control the vote.
As for the ones who stay - that is okay with me. I don't want people who don't know who rehome because they don't understand what is happening -presents whom voting. But I do wish we had more voters who pay attention to the candidates and what they stand for.
We must educate ourselves and vote!
As for the ones who stay - that is okay with me. I don't want people who don't know who rehome because they don't understand what is happening -presents whom voting. But I do wish we had more voters who pay attention to the candidates and what they stand for.
We must educate ourselves and vote!
All the Electoral College usually does is to magnify a win, as it did in the case of Pres. Obama's two victories and/or ensure that every president wins a majority of something, like former Pres. Clinton's two victories when he won big majorities in the EC, but only 43% and 49% of the popular vote. Check out the statistics which bear me out at the Federal Register website among many others. Yes, we all remember the 2000 election when the final tally was 5-4 for George W. Bush, despite the win by a nose in the popular vote by Al Gore. But none of us remember the last time before that when the winner in the EC was loser of the popular vote, 1888. At that rate, we can expect the next such anomaly in 2112, when I will be 161 years old and voting in my 36th presidential election. I can hardly wait.
Well ,Well, Well, after all the shouting and video clips and talk shows Obama wins again!! He is getting things done and the children all behave when the final time comes. The food fights and shouting play well with their base but when the adults (Obama, Pelosi, Reid) take over they all get in line.
Its interesting how reasonable Bohner has become now that hes quitting the Washington gang fights.
Its interesting how reasonable Bohner has become now that hes quitting the Washington gang fights.
14
The snarling Freedom Caucus was finally muzzled as gov't default was practically upon the Congress. These people are unique in their ability to come up with dangerous bad ideas. Speaker Boehner gets to escape the lunatic fringe of his party.
16
Your celebration is based on a very faulty analysis of what happened in this budget deal.
The Freedom Caucus and radical GOP got their win, or do you think the rest of us "won" when military spending has not been trimmed one red cent, tax rates for the one-percenters stay the same, but programs that the rest of us use need to be trimmed to pay for the above.
Yep, all of that shows the Freedom Caucus has been "muzzled," right?
The Freedom Caucus and radical GOP got their win, or do you think the rest of us "won" when military spending has not been trimmed one red cent, tax rates for the one-percenters stay the same, but programs that the rest of us use need to be trimmed to pay for the above.
Yep, all of that shows the Freedom Caucus has been "muzzled," right?
1
I read that Ryan is now angry at Boehner for hammering out a budget deal prior to his leaving. Is he complaining that he won't be able to hijack the budget process for another 2 years? I really can't believe what I'm hearing from these guys. He is angry that he isn't able to perpetuate dysfunction for another two years? Jeez, I've been to two world fairs and a sheep-shearing contest, but I've seen nothing to rival this in terms of weirdness.
16
Thank goodness sane Democratic fiscal responsibility and policies pulled us back from the Second Great Republican Depression and kept the Bush disaster economy only at the level of the Great Recession. Under Obama, the debt as a percentage of the GDP has gone from 9.8 percent at the end of the Bush train wreck economy to 2.2 percent today, which is why the economy is healthy and creating jobs again. As a result, unemployment is down from 12.5 percent under Bush to 5.6 percent today. If you want to double or triple the debt and unemployment at the same time, elect a republican president. If you want to balance the budget and keep unemployment below 6 percent, elect a Democrat.
10
" If you want to balance the budget and keep unemployment below 6 percent, elect a Democrat."
balance the budget by SPENDING 80 billion dollars more? and unemployment below 6% ? Only is your dreams. The untouchable government oil reserve is giving up 56 million barrels of oil----that should strike a note or terror in your heart. Maybe if oil were $100 a barrel but at $25 or so, who really wins on that deal. It is a government program called buy high, sell low. Hurray for the taxpayer.
balance the budget by SPENDING 80 billion dollars more? and unemployment below 6% ? Only is your dreams. The untouchable government oil reserve is giving up 56 million barrels of oil----that should strike a note or terror in your heart. Maybe if oil were $100 a barrel but at $25 or so, who really wins on that deal. It is a government program called buy high, sell low. Hurray for the taxpayer.
My fellow Americans, let us rise up from our sofas and get ourselves to the polls in 2016. Let's see if Social Security is in fact the third rail of politics.
Millions of ordinary people, decent hardworking people of modest means, are being shafted by the wealthy and powerful who write the rules and cut the deals. But, there is strength in numbers. They may wield billions of dollars but we represent millions of votes.
They are trying to repeal the twentieth century.
Please use your power. Vote...while you still can.
Millions of ordinary people, decent hardworking people of modest means, are being shafted by the wealthy and powerful who write the rules and cut the deals. But, there is strength in numbers. They may wield billions of dollars but we represent millions of votes.
They are trying to repeal the twentieth century.
Please use your power. Vote...while you still can.
15
A 32 Billion dollar increase in the catch-all-slush-fund called Emergency War Fund and cuts in Medicaid and Social Security... Sounds like Bizness as usual on Capital [CAPITOL] Hill.
15
Donna, you are about the only person commenting here who see things as they really are and through a set of wishful thinking rose-color glasses.
1
Every clown who follows an elephant thinks his job stinks. The trick is not to get any on your shoes before the parade starts.
5
Funding war by cutting resources to the elderly and the sick ranks right up there with school massacres as chilling reminders of how inhumane and immoral this supposedly god-fearing country is.
20
This deal sacrifices the people who can least afford it: those on Social Security and Medicare. It was done in the middle of the night when "grave robbers" like to work.
17
This is a deal between the Congressional leadership and the White House, not between Congress and the White House. I wonder what concessions Boehner will have to offer the House Republicans behind closed doors in order to get them to support this deal. Be careful what you wish for.
2
What a surprise.
The democrats caved and gave away cuts in the programs that everyone loves, while the republicans get to go back to doing nothing and voting 'No' on everything until finally democrats again get so fed up that they cave and give a bunch more unpopular concessions to the republicans.
Not only that, republicans get to get away with not looking like the bad guys here. They get to point the finger at the evil socialist communist liberal democrat President Obama as the man getting ready to make the cuts to all those programs that you love and live off of. Yay, bipartisanship!
Like ol' smilin' Joe Biden said: Republicans are not the enemy.
Of course not, Joe. They're not the enemy. They just want to ruin our lives.
The democrats caved and gave away cuts in the programs that everyone loves, while the republicans get to go back to doing nothing and voting 'No' on everything until finally democrats again get so fed up that they cave and give a bunch more unpopular concessions to the republicans.
Not only that, republicans get to get away with not looking like the bad guys here. They get to point the finger at the evil socialist communist liberal democrat President Obama as the man getting ready to make the cuts to all those programs that you love and live off of. Yay, bipartisanship!
Like ol' smilin' Joe Biden said: Republicans are not the enemy.
Of course not, Joe. They're not the enemy. They just want to ruin our lives.
9
I was disappointed that the article said nothing more about the democrat statement: "The deal “reflects our values,” the official added, and “is paid for in a balanced way by ensuring that hedge funds and private equity firms pay the taxes " - I looked up the bill and this section is all about the way large partnerships are structured. I didn't know hedge funds were structured as partnerships - more information about how this bill affects these partnership taxation terms would be enlightening and informative. How much money is this change expected to bring in? It appears to me that this still allows hedge fund managers to call payment "carried interest" even though the recipients had nothing invested until they received the payment; so it appears this gap still remains. Also don't forget the important renaming of the now called freedom foyer.
6
Like I said in other posts - the Freedom Caucus GOP Party did their job in this budget, they made the rest of us pay for protecting the interests of the one-perecenters and the military-industrial complex.
Wow, great "compromise," right?
Wow, great "compromise," right?
See how easy it is to reach a deal when the two key players are at the end of their political careers?
This is why we should have a one term limit on all elected offices.
This is why we should have a one term limit on all elected offices.
9
Sometimes I worry that the Democrats have grabbed the hands of the Republicans once again and pulled them away from the cliff they are determined to jump off of. I do want the Democrats to learn from the Canadians to stop pushing a austerity light doctrine and say what they really want, fixing the county's foundation, no matter the cost. It is also time to stop the deduction scams for businesses and the rich so they pay like the middle and poor classes all ready do. Sales tax on stocks and bonds purchases and sales, check, FICA tax on all income along with cap off SS, check. Say it, believe it, do it.....
3
Years ago, the CEO of Harley Davidson provided a cautionary observation about what was then the "employee empowerment" movement in business: that "empowering idiots only gives you bad decisions faster." I hope that the President will NOT "empower idiots" and "make a deal" with the least responsible and most destructive elements of the Congress of the United States. He has an oath and a commitment NOT to do that.
2
I am curious. Obama has raised the debt ceiling several times. But why? On July 3, 2008 didn't he mock Bush for breaking out his credit card and going to the bank of China in the name of our children? Why is it that Democrats will eviscerate Bush any chance they can but fail to point out the inconsistencies by Obama. And don't forget, Senator Obama stated that it was unconstitutional and a sign of failed leadership to raise the debt limit. We had a term in prison for people like Obama. They talk out of both sides of their neck. He mocked Bush for raising the debt limit and then he doubled it and no one says a word. Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat
I do have one last comment. Democrats are about talking points and lack substance. They care more about pouring billions into people who broke the law to get here than to fund after school programs for at risk kids; California spends 24.3 billion dollars on illegal immigrants 14 billion on education alone. We could equip computer labs, hire more teachers, create after school programs for at risk kids, hire art teachers, music teachers. But no. Apparently our students education should suffer so Democrats can increase their base and win back the House and Senate. If illegal immigrants voted overwhelmingly for Republicans do you think you would see this effort? I don't think so.
I do have one last comment. Democrats are about talking points and lack substance. They care more about pouring billions into people who broke the law to get here than to fund after school programs for at risk kids; California spends 24.3 billion dollars on illegal immigrants 14 billion on education alone. We could equip computer labs, hire more teachers, create after school programs for at risk kids, hire art teachers, music teachers. But no. Apparently our students education should suffer so Democrats can increase their base and win back the House and Senate. If illegal immigrants voted overwhelmingly for Republicans do you think you would see this effort? I don't think so.
1
The defict has gone from 9% to 2% under Obama.
5
You know that immigrants, who are not citizens, do not vote. Right?
1
Sounds like a pretty good deal to me, a win for the Democrats and good government.
If SSDI recipients have to take a medical exam in 30 states, requiring it in the remaining 20 is fair. It addresses conservative concern about SSDI fraud while putting everyone on equal footing. If this saves $5B, then mustn't we have non-disabled people slipping through in those 20 states? I'm not sure why 2 identical individuals in different states should be treated differently for SSDI purposes. By the way, $5B is a rounding error (about a 20th of 1% of the federal budget), so while R's can tell their constituents they are stamping out fraud, D's can tell their constituents that benefits haven't been cut for anyone who is actually disabled. Win-win.
As for Medicare reimbursement cuts; the health care industry needs the patients age 65+. They'll have to take what is on offer. Covered health care isn't being cut; just the reimbursement rates. Again, R's can say they saved money, while D's can say coverage wasn't cut. Again, win-win.
The sequester is being lifted, a little. And government spending, even on military, is needed fiscal surplus in these low-demand times of unemployment.
If SSDI recipients have to take a medical exam in 30 states, requiring it in the remaining 20 is fair. It addresses conservative concern about SSDI fraud while putting everyone on equal footing. If this saves $5B, then mustn't we have non-disabled people slipping through in those 20 states? I'm not sure why 2 identical individuals in different states should be treated differently for SSDI purposes. By the way, $5B is a rounding error (about a 20th of 1% of the federal budget), so while R's can tell their constituents they are stamping out fraud, D's can tell their constituents that benefits haven't been cut for anyone who is actually disabled. Win-win.
As for Medicare reimbursement cuts; the health care industry needs the patients age 65+. They'll have to take what is on offer. Covered health care isn't being cut; just the reimbursement rates. Again, R's can say they saved money, while D's can say coverage wasn't cut. Again, win-win.
The sequester is being lifted, a little. And government spending, even on military, is needed fiscal surplus in these low-demand times of unemployment.
2
I guess you've never run into a doctor who refuses to accept Medicare and there are plenty of them. If this drives more doctors to stop accepting Medicare patients that's a terrible result and if you don't think doctors are willing to do that, think again. Ten years ago my family practitioner became fed up dealing with insurers so he decided he would no longer accept patients who couldn't pay at the time of service. It reduced his practice to lose the many patients he had who used insurance to pay for their visits but he also told me that it saved him from having to hire two more clerical people to handle the paperwork generated by dealing with the insurance issues. He'd been a doctor for many years and he was just sick of dealing with the paper end of the business. I didn't use my insurance for visits, I'd always paid by check so it didn't affect me. He was not a gouger -- he charged a reasonable amount for an office visit because it wasn't inflated by the "game" being played today in which the doctor charges one fee, the insurer pays X amount, and if the doctor wants more, he then can bill the patient for the rest -- all of which takes months to run through the paper mill. Instead, I saw him at an appointment, paid his clerical person at the end of the visit and that was it. He literally went back to practicing medicine the way it was practiced for eons -- patient paid at point of service -- no middle man.
Insanity. Raising spending in the face of a record $18 trillion federal debt is insanity. The debt is up a whopping 60% since Obama took office. It was $11 trillion in 2009. He has accumulated more federal debt than all previous presidents combined. When will these people control their runaway spending? Entitlements and their costs are feeding the welfare state. Stop now. We are already broke. Extending the debt limit just postpones facing reality.
2
With the majority of the increase coming from commitments made by previous administrations. The deficit has been lowered by $1 trillion annually by Obama and the Congress.
8
Many doctors do not accept Medicare reimbursements and drop out of the system. Cutting reimbursements further will only aggravate this trend, further weakening the system. To Medicare and the people it serves this provision to the budget deal amounts to a death by a thousand cuts, for a program so important to all of us.
11
the government used to be for the people.but since the 60s organized crime bought judges politicians and has now taken over the government ,without reguards for the people at all..they dont need guns to rob you.they use laws..laws for us but not them..
4
The do nothing conservative Republican Congressional majority managed to get out of the way of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, drone war, military war withdrawal and deficit reduction by malevolent maladroit governing mismanagement. Just saying no is not action.
The Republicans are not Sanitary Engineers. The Republicans are Garbage Men and Women. The Republicans are Manure Managers. And the Democrats are in the same professions in and out of government.
At the bottom of the heap are we the American people who elect and select our representatives without the ability to blame either divine royal sanction or armed dictator power for our choices.
The Republicans are not Sanitary Engineers. The Republicans are Garbage Men and Women. The Republicans are Manure Managers. And the Democrats are in the same professions in and out of government.
At the bottom of the heap are we the American people who elect and select our representatives without the ability to blame either divine royal sanction or armed dictator power for our choices.
1
Mamba,
You left out President Obama, that sold out Senior Citizens by buckling
to Republican Pressure, & agreed to cut payments to Doctors who are leaving Medicare in droves & have been since Obama took office.Lets try to be objective.
You left out President Obama, that sold out Senior Citizens by buckling
to Republican Pressure, & agreed to cut payments to Doctors who are leaving Medicare in droves & have been since Obama took office.Lets try to be objective.
1
Absurd that the extremists in the GOP don't know who the "rogue agents" really are.
In this case, it's clearly not Mr. Boehner.
In this case, it's clearly not Mr. Boehner.
2
Why should they cut Medicare and Social Security. They should first cut government employee benefits by having them pay their own co-pays instead of the American citizenry. Then cut "all benefits" to illegal immigrants. That will cover any in creases to the debt borrowing limits.
2
Don't know what you are talking about. Federal employees pay co-pays.
Amazing what can happen when the Speaker of the House does what's best for the majority of his caucus (not to mention the country) instead of placating the 10% of lunatics who hold such outsized sway. I never thought I'd say this, but is there any chance we could get Johnny to stick around?
4
Remember for all those who comment on a 'dysfunctional Congress'. Congress is not dysfunctional. Republican congressmen are dysfunctional.
11
A deal of sacrifice for all but defense contractors.
8
Not "defense" contractors, war contractors.
A budget deal like this one is the unsurprising consequence of Democrats not bothering to vote in the 2014 midterm elections. Barack Obama is a center-right Democrat. Anybody paying attention has known this about him since 2008, when he felt the need to distinguish himself from Dennis Kucinich.
Obama seems like a good person and he is not the major problem here. It is now clear that the budgetary priorities of the USA are completely out of whack and it's now worth asking whether this country will even exist when the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence comes around in 2026, just 11 years from now.
Here's why: Military spending keeps increasing, but the one country the USA really must confront directly (Saudi Arabia) is apparently protected from up on high by the Prince of Darkness and off limits. So instead the military thrashes and flails about with interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and its neocon backers push for fighting China, Iran, and even the harmless leftist South American governments in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador. This state of affairs cannot continue and will lead to disaster for the USA.
And the corporatist faction of American society is relentless, pushing the idea that social welfare provisions are obsolete and were just stopgap measures put in place during the Cold War to co-opt the masses and prevent them from defecting to communism. This view is incorrect, but many have bought into this nonsense.
Obama seems like a good person and he is not the major problem here. It is now clear that the budgetary priorities of the USA are completely out of whack and it's now worth asking whether this country will even exist when the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence comes around in 2026, just 11 years from now.
Here's why: Military spending keeps increasing, but the one country the USA really must confront directly (Saudi Arabia) is apparently protected from up on high by the Prince of Darkness and off limits. So instead the military thrashes and flails about with interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and its neocon backers push for fighting China, Iran, and even the harmless leftist South American governments in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador. This state of affairs cannot continue and will lead to disaster for the USA.
And the corporatist faction of American society is relentless, pushing the idea that social welfare provisions are obsolete and were just stopgap measures put in place during the Cold War to co-opt the masses and prevent them from defecting to communism. This view is incorrect, but many have bought into this nonsense.
10
Low Democratic turnout in census year 2010 opened the door to the state level gerrymandering that has locked in obstructionists.
$32 billion for an emergency war fund, and those war expenditures will be offset by cuts to Medicare and Social Security benefits. I think that Martin Luther King, Jr. had it right when he said that a nation that spends more on war that on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual decline (a paraphrase from his NYC April 1967 speech). Talk about being prescient! Talk about people, and especially vulnerable people, not counting!
16
They'll need to add more to the VA budget for all the wounded and maimed soldiers who would have just died in previous wars.
I will gladly let your grandkids pay for my hamburger today.
3
Liberal Logic:
$4 mill one time cost for Benghazi hearings to determine the truth = waste of money
$$$$$$ Billions paid annually for interest on national debt to make fat bankers richer = what problem?
$4 mill one time cost for Benghazi hearings to determine the truth = waste of money
$$$$$$ Billions paid annually for interest on national debt to make fat bankers richer = what problem?
3
reply to Warrantone: wrong: Liberal and Conservative logic: when it comes to spending YOUR tax dollars (and mine), there is no difference in the color of the strip on the skunk's back.
I really don't see compromise in this event. The Republicans pretty much got what they wanted--higher war spending and cuts to my retirement "benefits" which I paid for, in advance, and which advance payments congress used for other purposes. Never look back, never apologize, eh? I hope I can find doctors who will be willing to care for me, virtually for free.
17
"..raise spending by $80 billion over two years, not including a $32 billion increase included in an emergency war fund, ...offset by cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits, as well ...revenue from ... selling oil from the nation’s strategic petroleum reserves." Reinforces the rhetoric of Bernie Sanders' campaign: government is sold out to special interests - Big Military and Big Oil- at the expense of the poorest and neediest of Americans (who need medicaid, social security and disability. The Dems Reps are total shills for Corporate America. I'm all in for Bernie Sanders- he's the only one talking about the big Elephant in the room- the corporate oligarchy raiding our tax base of it's own interests.
9
Let me get this straight: this arrangement will be in part paid for with "cuts in payments to doctors and other health care providers". Yet, aren't these the same cuts that are quite often, if not always, rescinded at the eleventh hour when those same cuts loom large and providers stop servicing Medicare patients? Congressional mathematics at its best: nothing ever adds up at any time.
7
Could anything be more tragic than seeing so many of the people most affected by the cuts in Medicare, Social Security, and disability benefits coming out in support of the GOP time and time again? It seems that as long as their elected representatives support the NRA and quote the Bible enough in their speeches they are "shoe ins" at election time. It's so easy and so cynical for Congress to vote for these cuts when its members have such generous pay and benefits themselves. It would appear that the only empathy left in our dysfunctional Congress is for the military and the 1%.
11
Since all bad things are Obama's fault maybe it's best to just realize that Americans are the stupidest people on the planet.
3
I agree with some of the other commenters. Why are we taking it as good or even acceptable that there is a multi-billion dollar cut to Medicare and Social Security here? I would also like to see better reporting on this point. Is the media just buying the line "it's a cut to doctor's payments"?
13
Military spending is a giant ocean, it will never be reined in. On September 10th, 2001 Rumsfeld came to the podium and announced that 2 trillion dollars was un-accounted for in military spending. The next day, the thought was lost. In 2010, the dems came in and created a tax on cigarettes to fund a no unhealthy child left behind program, 28 billion, my congressman's name is on it, he was at least huge in that legislation. And we all say, "Cigarettes...who cares..." but if you look at the people pacing next to me outside the behavioral clinic, we are all smoking cigarettes because we must. It works to calm the voices and thorazine is worse but even at 9 bucks a pack, we shall never quit smoking plant material. Never. But being disenfranchised and disabled brings pennies to the coffers, so the proposal to take a few hundred bucks a month from the pacing cigarette smoker next to me, when trillions are lost in the vast drainage system of military funding, is just another easy thing for legislators of no courage to do. No, I do not come from Idaho. Imagine what those people think.
4
I am glad that we apparently have averted more government shutdowns and risks of default for another 18 months.
The events of the last four years foisted upon us by the minority Tea Party are a dangerous subversion of the majority will. A small group of 30-40 members in the House (less than 10%) think that they speak for the country as a whole. They do not.
What is even worse is that they are manufacturing crises to foist ultra-conservative views on the rest of us. The problems we face are in no way insurmountable or particularly difficult to solve. They are purely political and the "drags" on our economy and progress are, in fact, from the "Freedom caucus" itself. As Paul Ryan said, "We are the problem."
We had a balanced budget at the end of Clinton's term, a robust economy, and were on our way to reducing long-term debt. Then came Bush - who cut taxes for the rich and many others, and vastly and needlessly (as we now know) increased defense spending. Taxation and expenditures under Clinton were in balance and obviously allowing robust economic growth. Bush's moves sent the yearly deficits into an unsustainable upward spiral, made even worse by the great recession. The yearly deficit for the 2008-2009 fiscal year (Bush's last budgetary year) was about a trillion dollars.
The only response now is to vote the Tea Party members out of office. The Republican establishment can't or won't control them and let the majorities of both parties work together to find compromise.
The events of the last four years foisted upon us by the minority Tea Party are a dangerous subversion of the majority will. A small group of 30-40 members in the House (less than 10%) think that they speak for the country as a whole. They do not.
What is even worse is that they are manufacturing crises to foist ultra-conservative views on the rest of us. The problems we face are in no way insurmountable or particularly difficult to solve. They are purely political and the "drags" on our economy and progress are, in fact, from the "Freedom caucus" itself. As Paul Ryan said, "We are the problem."
We had a balanced budget at the end of Clinton's term, a robust economy, and were on our way to reducing long-term debt. Then came Bush - who cut taxes for the rich and many others, and vastly and needlessly (as we now know) increased defense spending. Taxation and expenditures under Clinton were in balance and obviously allowing robust economic growth. Bush's moves sent the yearly deficits into an unsustainable upward spiral, made even worse by the great recession. The yearly deficit for the 2008-2009 fiscal year (Bush's last budgetary year) was about a trillion dollars.
The only response now is to vote the Tea Party members out of office. The Republican establishment can't or won't control them and let the majorities of both parties work together to find compromise.
11
The sequester was a better solution. Cut everything. There isn't an organization that can't sustain a 2.5% cut.
4
I find it appalling that cuts to SS and Medicare are being used to fund the military. These things are not entitlements, I paid into them for 40 years. SS tax should be paid on all income and a cap should be placed on earned income after 65 the same as after 62. This would stop double dipping and give young people a chance at jobs.
21
All this does is continue to grow government. No deal. Keep sequester, forever. That is the only way to starve the 'beast'.
2
The only "beast" in this country that needs to be starved is the corporate class, and yes, and that does include government largesse given away to the CEO mob through tax breaks and outright subsidies.
1
It is more than shameful how the ruling class (Democrats and Republicans) are spending our nation away. And this paper writes of how it will "avert a potentially cataclysmic default". That is a lie. That lie is designed to scare the public into believing that magically somehow this "deal" saves us. Our economic irresponsibility needs to be addressed, forcefully and with clarity.
2
The Republicans caved. Thank God.
5
Or did Obama?
1
Correction: John Boehner caved. God help us all.
Since the nasty 40 are so intent on cutting OUR social security, medicare, disability and other programs that sustain many people they had better CUT MONEY FOR COMMITTEES out of the house budget with NO money for special, select, permanent, inquiry, witch hunt "committees". We are watching, boys and girls and November 8 2016 cannot come soon enough when we will send you all packing.
38
Applications for SS disability benefits nearly doubled between 2000 and 2014. Did the population of the United States double in this period, or was something else happening?
And I thought liberals were all about "sustainablity."
And I thought liberals were all about "sustainablity."
And then two years after that in the midterms, democrats won't get out and vote, while republicans will get out in droves and vote for the most vile unintelligent harmful candidates possible just because they have R's after their names...
It's the same old story. I've heard it before, and it never gets old.
It's the same old story. I've heard it before, and it never gets old.
The population is aging and the job market has been deteriorating for some time. Poor labor market conditions caused those who were marginally disabled to apply for benefits.
After negotiating this deal I do not see why President Obama should not be granted a third term.
17
I agree. But after 8 years of dealing with bitter and hateful Republicans, I think Obama would rather stick needles in his eye.
3
Because it's illegal
1
Yes, great deal for Republicans; 1% increase in spending but offset by Medicare cuts.
1
Well, if the luck of the Republicans keeps working for them, and they are able to keep the lies going, it should be enough to have the American public turn on them in the next election. It took five years to come up with this? Wow, I am impressed. And now we can look forward to Paul Ryan as speaker of the house? Wow, I am impressed. He can do a lot of damage before, hopefully, he is voted out of office in 2016. God help us! Looks like congress and the military's main target for destruction are right here at home, yep, on US soil.
16
Dreamer
For our very pro war president to sell out on Medicare and Social Security disability just shows he has been subsumed completely by his GOP brethren. I am so disappointed in this president for his willingness to take money from the elderly and disabled to buy more bombs to destroy more Middle Eastern countries for sport. Did anyone see what kind of budget we have for bombing more civilian hospitals? I am sure he made certain he has enough bombs for that. For this president to have won the nomination in 2008 based on his anti-war stance is the joke of the century because he has become the mad bomber and great slasher of domestic budgets.
17
Quick question... were there any wars going on before Obama was elected?
Now that Speaker Boehner has freed himself from dealing with the Tea Party Freedom Caucus Fringe faction of his Party, it appears that compromise on the Budget is now an option. Too bad it took Boehner leaving to do so. It just goes to show how truly dysfunctional Congress has become.
If that is so then this truce will be short-lived. Expect incoming Speaker Ryan, who will have to deal with the take no prisoners Fringe, to face once again the obstructionism we have all become too accustomed to of late.
John Boehner must indeed be a contented man.
Zip-Ah-Dee-Doo-Dah.
DD
Manhattan
If that is so then this truce will be short-lived. Expect incoming Speaker Ryan, who will have to deal with the take no prisoners Fringe, to face once again the obstructionism we have all become too accustomed to of late.
John Boehner must indeed be a contented man.
Zip-Ah-Dee-Doo-Dah.
DD
Manhattan
9
As an 84yr.old senior living in a scary world like ours is not easy. I'd like to
see the details of these cuts to medicare and disability - how disgusting that
we , as a people, lack the decency to show concern for the elderly and the
disabled. I think, personally,, that v.p. Biden is wrong about Republicans - they
are the enemy as far as I can see. Perhaps they'd like to imitate Eskimo culture
and send the elderly out on ice floes to be rid of them. If we cut from medicare
doctor fees, and they are a dying breed, what do we do then? Where will we find
doctors to take our medicare costs? What is wrong with this society- it gets more and more inhumane as I grow older.
see the details of these cuts to medicare and disability - how disgusting that
we , as a people, lack the decency to show concern for the elderly and the
disabled. I think, personally,, that v.p. Biden is wrong about Republicans - they
are the enemy as far as I can see. Perhaps they'd like to imitate Eskimo culture
and send the elderly out on ice floes to be rid of them. If we cut from medicare
doctor fees, and they are a dying breed, what do we do then? Where will we find
doctors to take our medicare costs? What is wrong with this society- it gets more and more inhumane as I grow older.
33
So only the poor, young employed folks should suffer from effectively decreased wages - higher healthcare costs, higher deductibles, and flat wages. The elderly unemployed should always receive increases in income to match higher healthcare costs - and never suffer any net decrease in effective income. At least in communism all suffered hardship equally. This is Orwellian - some are more equal than others.
Actually, when you read the fine print on healthcare reform, the Eskimo culture you reference is right there. You may be lucky not to live long enough to have to experience the elimination of advanced elder care, but it's coming. Good news though, I hear the view from the ice flows is magnificent.
You can thank your democrat leadership. It is what you wanted.
You can thank your democrat leadership. It is what you wanted.
drm: In my working years I also felt the sting of FICA and health
costs coming out of my salary. Each generation goes through some
of this. Your resentment of the elderly (me) is out of order - what
I am facing is an economy far different from what I knew. Cost
of living now is out of sight - you really don't know what you're
talking about - we still pay for medicare costs, and plan B AARP
and Drug costs at my age. Do you have a grandmother? Try caring
a little more - you'll feel better.
costs coming out of my salary. Each generation goes through some
of this. Your resentment of the elderly (me) is out of order - what
I am facing is an economy far different from what I knew. Cost
of living now is out of sight - you really don't know what you're
talking about - we still pay for medicare costs, and plan B AARP
and Drug costs at my age. Do you have a grandmother? Try caring
a little more - you'll feel better.
A $32 billion plumper for the secret war fighting slush fund. Because it has worked so well for the last decade?
11
At least one or two more C-130s with pallet-loads of Benjamins..
As a Medicare Part B beneficiary I'm relived to read the budgets cuts in Medicare cuts in payments to doctors won't result in additional out of pocket costs to us beneficiaries.Does this mean doctors and other health care providers won't be permitted to pass the reduced payments on to us ?
Apparently the reason why there will be no cost of living increase is the lower price of gasoline,even though and many other senior citizens no longer drive.Which makes about as much sense in Medicare not covering such preventive health care services as dental care.
Apparently the reason why there will be no cost of living increase is the lower price of gasoline,even though and many other senior citizens no longer drive.Which makes about as much sense in Medicare not covering such preventive health care services as dental care.
13
Not an issue unless your doctor refuses to see you give the paltry reimbursement from Medicare.
Wow America is a truly an oligarchy. Obama is going to agree to cuts in social programs but yet give more money to the MIC. Americans need to wake up this is no longer a free nation anymore.
15
Good governance is all about compromise which means that both sides agree to things they don't like to get those that they deem more important. The good things are a long-term federal budget that eliminates the conservative threat of a default on the debt and a government shutdown while also setting the precedent of breaking the austerity Procrustean bed of sequestration. The bad, in my progressive Democratic view, is the precedent in breaching the protective wall in my (I'm on both Medicare and Social Security) social safety net and the President reneging on his promise not to negotiate over raising the debt ceiling. I'm willing to accept this as John Boehner's farewell gift to the principle of good governance and trust (with my fingers crossed) that Mr. Obama will stand firm against the coming onslaught of Speaker-designate Paul Ryan's attempt to dismantle Medicare and Social Security. The bottom-line for me and many other seniors is: my health and economic well-being depend on him doing so.
11
I would condemn this horror except that the radical Republicans were bound and determined to default on the debt just to see what happens. More government by crises and threat. Yet there is a brief opening of sanity with the GOP and while Mr. Boehner is still in Congress we must take it because the radicals will lose their big stick until after the election and in 2017 the voters may have solved the problem that President Clinton or Cruz will have to deal with.
4
"The Medicare savings would come from cuts in payments to doctors and other health care providers."
I fear more doctors saying "We don't take Medicare."
I fear more doctors saying "We don't take Medicare."
29
If they are going to sell this they will have to be more specific about cchanges to social security disability. "Social security cuts" elicits a negative reflex from millions of people. That is not what this is. Requiring medical screening for disability benefits seems like a very reasonable thing to do...weed out the folks who don't qualify. My biggest problem with this plan is the sale of strategic petroleum reserves. This is a sort of "rainy day" asset and it looks like we are betting it isn't ever going to rain again. Such an assumption usually proves faulty.
5
Didn't we fill the reserve with oil purchased at over $100/barrel? Why are they selling at the bottom of the oil market?
Raise the tax on gas and heating oil while it continues to be at a low cost instead of humping SS and Medicare.
9
Heating oil? Really? How about stopping the GOP bogus Hearings which are costing the American tax payer millions!?
Yeah, sure. But in the meantime lets tax gas and maybe folks will not only conserve energy maybe inspire considering alternative energy sources? Put on a sweater.
The fact that an ostensible "socialist" like Obama is willing to sacrifice the poorest and most vulnerable for the sake of the most economically (and thus politically) powerful is the clearest sign that we need a real Democratic Socialist to transform this nation from an oligarchy to a democracy. Vote Bernie. The system works for those at the very top by sacrificing any and all below the top. Stop continuing the fake divide between establishment Democrats and establishment Republicans.
11
We can yell and scream all we want, but we get what we pay/elect for. The military and corporations win, the people who need it the most are thrown under the bus. The United Oligarchy/Corporatocracy of America.
9
"Millions for defense, and a lot less pennies for our elderly and disabled."
Wow, I sure hope the Defense Department spends another $500 million to train 5 more Syrian soldiers with this generous increase. Even better, lets go to war with Russia. Meanwhile millions of Americans see their benefits cut. That sounds about right to me.
Finally a Congress that works. It only took the will of Republican crazies combined with a President who cares more about his legacy than the people, to get us there. That is exactly the kind of Change I voted for.
Wow, I sure hope the Defense Department spends another $500 million to train 5 more Syrian soldiers with this generous increase. Even better, lets go to war with Russia. Meanwhile millions of Americans see their benefits cut. That sounds about right to me.
Finally a Congress that works. It only took the will of Republican crazies combined with a President who cares more about his legacy than the people, to get us there. That is exactly the kind of Change I voted for.
4
Another bad deal for those of us that depend heavily on Social Security & Medicare.The fact that the cuts in payment s to Doctors seriously affect us as well, as more & more Doctors are refusing to take Medicare payments that have been eroding under the Obama Administration, as an example my Cardiologist just eliminated stress tests & other procedures., which will now be done in Hospitals, He is on the verge of eliminating Medicare, & will only accept cash.
The article is not clear how Social Security will be affected.Senior Citizens lives matter Too.The Republicans won & Obama sold us out.
The article is not clear how Social Security will be affected.Senior Citizens lives matter Too.The Republicans won & Obama sold us out.
11
Cuts to Social Security and Medicare were guaranteed the second Obama was re-elected. Obama made the Grand Bargain with Boehner years ago, which cut Social Security and Medicare.
Obama (not Republicans) proposed Chained CPI changes to Social Security.
Obama (not Republicans) put cuts to SS and Medicare in HIS budget.
Obama *hand picked* the Bowles-Simpson Commission who recommended... wait for it... cuts to SS and Medicare.
The only thing that has stopped the cuts thus far has been, ironically, the Tea Party fanatics who refuse to work with Obama (or Boehner) on anything.
But even after Obama was prevented (by the Tea Party) from cutting Social Security he said, and I quote:
"The proposals that I put forward during the fiscal cliff negotiations in discussions with Speaker Boehner and others are still very much on the table. I just want to repeat: The deals that I put forward, the balanced approach of spending cuts and entitlement reform and tax reform that I put forward are still on the table.
"I’ve offered sensible reforms to Medicare and other entitlements, and my health care proposals achieve the same amount of savings by the beginning of the next decade as the reforms that have been proposed by the bipartisan Bowles-Simpson fiscal commission."
Now that Boehner is leaving he can ignore the Crazies in his Party and do what he wants... which is raise War Funding and Cut Services to the Poor. With Obama's help.
Think about that as you vote for Hillary.
Obama (not Republicans) proposed Chained CPI changes to Social Security.
Obama (not Republicans) put cuts to SS and Medicare in HIS budget.
Obama *hand picked* the Bowles-Simpson Commission who recommended... wait for it... cuts to SS and Medicare.
The only thing that has stopped the cuts thus far has been, ironically, the Tea Party fanatics who refuse to work with Obama (or Boehner) on anything.
But even after Obama was prevented (by the Tea Party) from cutting Social Security he said, and I quote:
"The proposals that I put forward during the fiscal cliff negotiations in discussions with Speaker Boehner and others are still very much on the table. I just want to repeat: The deals that I put forward, the balanced approach of spending cuts and entitlement reform and tax reform that I put forward are still on the table.
"I’ve offered sensible reforms to Medicare and other entitlements, and my health care proposals achieve the same amount of savings by the beginning of the next decade as the reforms that have been proposed by the bipartisan Bowles-Simpson fiscal commission."
Now that Boehner is leaving he can ignore the Crazies in his Party and do what he wants... which is raise War Funding and Cut Services to the Poor. With Obama's help.
Think about that as you vote for Hillary.
3
My understanding is that this agreement makes Disability one step more difficult to access. Not clear that the agreement cuts SS retirement benefits, however you are correct that Obama has wanted to do just that all along. And, actually, he has cut SS benefits, because there have been NO SS CPLAs for 4 years during Obamas reign. Since the purpose of the COLA is simply to maintain the level of the SS benefit, the absence of a COLA is really a benefit cut. And this has happened 4 times during the Obama administration. This amounts to a significant cut to the benefits that seniors paid for all their lives, and US SS benefits were already among the lowest in the world, when measured as a percentage of the recipients working income. Americans should start paying attention to what leaders actually do, not how the wish to portray themselves. The irony is that SS COLAs began during the administration of Gerald Ford, never known as a hipster or wild eyed leftie, but are being terminated by supposedly hip, cool, and fair to the poor Obama. Time to get a little more real, America.
I'm tired of reading about how President Obama, D - Golf Course, is trying to "secure his legacy." It's been secure for awhile.
1
Representatives of the CONservative Failure Caucus were said to have opposed the deal because it would not allow them to posture,grandstand and impose failure on the nation until 2017
3
Another secret deal brokered in back rooms among and for the political establishment. A deal that only benefits them, their political ambitions and greed. More lies, more unfunded spending, cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, increasing debt and a half trillion dollar deficit that economists know is about to explode. Business as usual in other words at a time of year after year of record tax extortions...uh, tax collections from the American people. Gee, the media can't figure out why insurgent candidates are doing well. They are too busy touting the establushment's talking points and the miracle of Paul Ryan. We think too much.
Be honest. Why continue pretending that we live in any sort of representative democracy or that we are a free people?
Be honest. Why continue pretending that we live in any sort of representative democracy or that we are a free people?
7
Amish has it so grossly wrong. It is not the will of the people" what the Tea Party caucus wants. Maybe their districts back these insane people, that is obviously how they got elected, but the will of the people nationally does not agree with their agenda by a long shot.
3
The article characterizes Paul Ryan's ideas on taxes and the budget as "bold." When most economists (as well as voters in 2012) instead saw them as discredited and regressive, it would help the body politic if he NYT reporting on celebrity politicians would be a little more incisive.
7
This may be the beginning of the long-goodby to Medicare. Payments to practitioners are already astonishingly low. When I see my statements, I can hardly believe they are participating the program. The paperwork is so onnerous that many practitioners who did take it have dropped out and those currently navigating the system will not be long behind them. The slightest mistake is cause for what can be a months-long delay.
I would really love to see these politicians sharing some of the pain. I don't see any move toward moving salaries more in line with the people they supposedly represent. I don't see any sign that they are calling for review of their massively generous health and retirement benefits. And I certainly don't see any sign of giving up free towel service at the taxpayer-subsidized gym.
Having watched hours of a disgraceful, money-wasting political theatre last week, I am even further convinced that we have elected a bunch of people with no connection with their consitituencies (and I don't call powerful lobbies, who, by the way, contribute to a 1% lifestyle constituencies), a bunch of people who not only have no connection, but don't care, a bunch of people dedicated to the proposition that "I've got mine" and it's up to you to scratch out "You've got yours."
So let's see Ted Cruz, a Marco Rubio, or a Tom Ryan at least pretend to have a bond with the vast majority of Americans living from one (increasingly) meagre paycheck to another.
I would really love to see these politicians sharing some of the pain. I don't see any move toward moving salaries more in line with the people they supposedly represent. I don't see any sign that they are calling for review of their massively generous health and retirement benefits. And I certainly don't see any sign of giving up free towel service at the taxpayer-subsidized gym.
Having watched hours of a disgraceful, money-wasting political theatre last week, I am even further convinced that we have elected a bunch of people with no connection with their consitituencies (and I don't call powerful lobbies, who, by the way, contribute to a 1% lifestyle constituencies), a bunch of people who not only have no connection, but don't care, a bunch of people dedicated to the proposition that "I've got mine" and it's up to you to scratch out "You've got yours."
So let's see Ted Cruz, a Marco Rubio, or a Tom Ryan at least pretend to have a bond with the vast majority of Americans living from one (increasingly) meagre paycheck to another.
4
We are selling oil as part of this deal? Oil is near the cheapest it has been in almost decade. And interest rates are zero. Not "near zero", but as in the Treasury can literally raise short-term money at 0.00%, and long-term money at 2%.
Why would we sell a valuable strategic asset at a profoundly depressed price when we could instead take advantage of conditions likely never to be repeated and borrow money for nothing? You don't even have to be an economist to see the folly in this - anyone who has taken an 8th grade home ec class would tell you that now is obviously the time to shut up about the stupid debt limit, hold on to our oil, and borrow what we need to maintain benefits to the elderly and disabled - who are just going to turn around and put it right back into the economy anyway!
How do these people get elected?
Why would we sell a valuable strategic asset at a profoundly depressed price when we could instead take advantage of conditions likely never to be repeated and borrow money for nothing? You don't even have to be an economist to see the folly in this - anyone who has taken an 8th grade home ec class would tell you that now is obviously the time to shut up about the stupid debt limit, hold on to our oil, and borrow what we need to maintain benefits to the elderly and disabled - who are just going to turn around and put it right back into the economy anyway!
How do these people get elected?
4
This is a perfect example of why so many voters are ready to through out professional politicians and consider total outsiders for president. The only why one side can get the spending increases it wants is by agreeing to even more spending for the other sides favorites. Neither side will fight for the spending cuts they believe in. And the size and cost of government only goes up. I'm not a big fan of the tea party but this part they have right. There will be no meaningful reduction in spending in Washington until we change the way they do business.
2
You are presuming there is a universal agreement that the current size of government is too large. There is a substantial group of people who are suspicious that our government is either right-sized but badly prioritized, or undersized, to serve the needs of a first world population of this size.
Maybe the problem is that we're simply not raising the funds required to operate the government we want.
If you're going to claim government is too large, back it up with some historical context.
Here is a table from the nonpartisan Office of Personnel Management, showing that in absolute terms, the US Government is making do with fewer people today, than it did in 1962, when there were 100 million fewer people in the country.
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/fe...
Maybe the problem is that we're simply not raising the funds required to operate the government we want.
If you're going to claim government is too large, back it up with some historical context.
Here is a table from the nonpartisan Office of Personnel Management, showing that in absolute terms, the US Government is making do with fewer people today, than it did in 1962, when there were 100 million fewer people in the country.
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/fe...
Pnut, the government actually has far more employees if you don't count the 1962 era cold war sized military. Also advances in technology which allows GM to make a car in with a quarter the labor it used in 1962 should at least in theory make the government more efficient. Computers which were huge and rare in 1962 are now on everyone's desk.
1
Finally a defeat for the Freedom Caucus. Seven years of gridlock. It took Boehner's resignation, McCarthy's withdrawal, and the ascension of Ryan to the Speakership before this could take place. Perhaps this recalcitrant group is seeing their demise. They held our government captive for long enough. Rhinos rising.
2
This is not a win-win deal. It's lose-lose-lose-lose. The American people lost. The hard right lost and Mr. Obama and the Democrats lost.
This deal was only a cover by the Republicans and the hard right to deal, not with the President or the Democrats, but to deal with the Republican party. The message to be sent to hard liners is that we tried and if you re-elect us next term we'll be successful. Its a ruse. Mr. Ryan who may well be the next speaker of the house will still find that he cannot manage the hard liners. For the hard liners Ryan is barely acceptable but better than Mr. Boehner.
This game of brinksmanship will only end if the next general election brings major change to the House and Senate. And that's not likely. Certainly none of the Republican candidates that are running for the Presidency are capable of delivering such a majority. Additionally state legislatures throughout the country are undergoing change and Republicans will lose ground there.
The hardliners have won nothing. Mr. Obama has won nothing. The American people have won nothing except a temporary reprieve as the election draws closer.
As for Mr. Ryan's bold ideas on tax and budget policy if Mr. Ryan begins his dismantling of Medicare, Social Security, SNAP, Medicaid and other entitlement and social safety net programs he will find that the national uproar is greater than the hard liners. Seventy eight million aging and retiring baby boomers will not sit idly by. We still face the abyss.
This deal was only a cover by the Republicans and the hard right to deal, not with the President or the Democrats, but to deal with the Republican party. The message to be sent to hard liners is that we tried and if you re-elect us next term we'll be successful. Its a ruse. Mr. Ryan who may well be the next speaker of the house will still find that he cannot manage the hard liners. For the hard liners Ryan is barely acceptable but better than Mr. Boehner.
This game of brinksmanship will only end if the next general election brings major change to the House and Senate. And that's not likely. Certainly none of the Republican candidates that are running for the Presidency are capable of delivering such a majority. Additionally state legislatures throughout the country are undergoing change and Republicans will lose ground there.
The hardliners have won nothing. Mr. Obama has won nothing. The American people have won nothing except a temporary reprieve as the election draws closer.
As for Mr. Ryan's bold ideas on tax and budget policy if Mr. Ryan begins his dismantling of Medicare, Social Security, SNAP, Medicaid and other entitlement and social safety net programs he will find that the national uproar is greater than the hard liners. Seventy eight million aging and retiring baby boomers will not sit idly by. We still face the abyss.
3
1. We need money to conduct commerce.
2. As the economy grows it needs more and more money.
3. Money comes from the federal government via the FED,
4. The way money gets from the federal government to us is by federal spending.
5. The deficit measure the net flow of money from the federal government to people, businesses, and state & local governments.
6. The debt is the net accumulation of this money over time.
7. Too high debt or deficits have never hurt our economy while surpluses for a while have always done so.
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years in just six periods since 1776, during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
8. As a percentage of GDP our public debt was about 50% higher in 1946. The period 1946 - 1973 was a period sometimes called the Great Prosperity during which real median household income surged 74%. In fact we INCREASED the debt in dollars by 75% during this period. What happened was as the economy grew, the debt became insignificant.
After WWI, we DECREASED the debt by 38% by 1929. Then what happened?
9. Ideas that may be appropriate for your personal finances do not apply to the finances of a huge country that lasts a long time, that can print as much money as it needs, and whose debt is in it's own currency.
2. As the economy grows it needs more and more money.
3. Money comes from the federal government via the FED,
4. The way money gets from the federal government to us is by federal spending.
5. The deficit measure the net flow of money from the federal government to people, businesses, and state & local governments.
6. The debt is the net accumulation of this money over time.
7. Too high debt or deficits have never hurt our economy while surpluses for a while have always done so.
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years in just six periods since 1776, during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
8. As a percentage of GDP our public debt was about 50% higher in 1946. The period 1946 - 1973 was a period sometimes called the Great Prosperity during which real median household income surged 74%. In fact we INCREASED the debt in dollars by 75% during this period. What happened was as the economy grew, the debt became insignificant.
After WWI, we DECREASED the debt by 38% by 1929. Then what happened?
9. Ideas that may be appropriate for your personal finances do not apply to the finances of a huge country that lasts a long time, that can print as much money as it needs, and whose debt is in it's own currency.
2
All those who are complaining about the cuts to SS disability and medicare payments are correct, but the only way to fix the situation is for the Democrats to take back the House and Senate in 2016 and make sure that a Republican isn't elected President. If Republicans get the Presidency and Congress, those cuts will be nothing compared to what will happen.
5
Why does NYT call Pelosi a "representative" and call Harry Reid the Democratic leader in the Senate? Both are leaders in a minority position and most normal reporters call the Minority Leader in the House the Minority Leader, btw. I bet it is the same misogyny we see smeared all over the political reporting from the hacks at NYT. Maybe they need an editor in that department because the amount of misogyny oozing out of these slimes only gets deeper. I am shocked they didn't describe Nancy's outfit to us like they did Hillary's. Grow up boys.
2
The headline should have read " War Profiteers Continue Feast While Poor Sacrifice"
6
Good governance is all about compromise which means that both sides agree to things they don't like to get those that they deem more important. The good things are a long-term federal budget that eliminates the conservative threat of a default on the debt and a government shutdown while also setting the precedent of breaking the austerity Procrustean bed of sequestration. The bad, in my progressive Democratic view, is the precedent in breaching the protective wall in my (I'm on both Medicare and Social Security) social safety net and the President reneging on his promise not to negotiate over raising the debt ceiling. I'm willing to accept this as John Boehner's farewell gift to the principle of good governance and trust (with my fingers crossed) that Mr. Obama will stand firm against the coming onslaught of Speaker-designate Paul Ryan's attempt to dismantle Medicare and Social Security. The bottom-line for me and many other seniors is: my health and economic well-being depend on him doing so.
1
Sadly both sides of the aisle are so full of war mongers that they were able to get a deal. I would prefer sequester.
5
Always protect the military contractors on the backs of seniors?
6
As if the cuts are really going to happen. Has one penny of real Federal spending been cut in decades? The answer is no. All of the "cuts" have been illusory, amounting to little more then a shaving of the rate of increased spending. In Kansas we call that reality.
It's not cataclysmic for the legislators, only for the people (like those on disability and those who will die as a result of increased military spending) who are deeply affected, so what the hell, they must think.
4
excuse me, but did you read the article? disability ss has been preserved from cuts.
No reductions in rich people's subsidies? Again? Campaign finance reform is needed. Now.
6
This bill cuts Medicare payments to Doctors.Do these Washington "geniuses" have any idea how difficult it is to find a doctor who will take new Medicare patients?Once again our political leaders fiddle with nonsensical ideas while the average citizen struggles to make ends meet every day.It's long overdue to give Washington a political/voter "enema" and flush all elected officials down the "toilet".
6
Tentative budget deal will become a done deal only to give both parties what they want and not appear contentious. The devil is in the detail and cuts in social programs may mean some of our neediest fellow citizens will get the shaft and our sky high cumulative debt will continue to pile. Business as usual. Wonder who will benefit from the modest increase defense spending.Seems like a good swan song for speaker Boehner and a welcome aboard gift for Mr. Ryan.
1
No matter how they slice and dice the supports for Seniors, they never slice and dice the billions they funnel to the military industrial complex. The sickest side of our Federal Funneling Campaign is that going to the WAR MACHINE. We're propping up unwarranted killing, drones, spying on our own people, a total lack of oversight of our Military Commanders, and their staffs and their budgetary spending, plus that same problem with private contractors hired by the Military. No one is watching, so no one out here cares.
Seniors, and the disabled should never be on the mark, targeted for cuts. Period. The Republican Power Brokers inside this Congress, working with the weak minded, empty soul blue dog Democrats who have no back bone, don't deserve their seats in Congress.
Seniors, and the disabled should never be on the mark, targeted for cuts. Period. The Republican Power Brokers inside this Congress, working with the weak minded, empty soul blue dog Democrats who have no back bone, don't deserve their seats in Congress.
5
1. Times: Please outline the cuts in Social Security - Disability ehhen you right such a story
2. The fact is that both Obama and the Republicans have wanted to cut these entitlement programs in order to lower their cost. There is no way to cut payments to health care professionals without cutting the services they provide. This will mean fewer minutes spent with patients, longer lines, more crowded offices and fewer participating professionals. And it slips by without an explanation as if it were a great accomplishment
2. The fact is that both Obama and the Republicans have wanted to cut these entitlement programs in order to lower their cost. There is no way to cut payments to health care professionals without cutting the services they provide. This will mean fewer minutes spent with patients, longer lines, more crowded offices and fewer participating professionals. And it slips by without an explanation as if it were a great accomplishment
6
Seems like they're always on the verge of a shutdown, or threatening one; when I was working at the US Embassy in Yangon (Rangoon) 2013-2014, I remember well the negative effect that the shutdown at the time had on all the staff, DC-hired and local. Actually, the local (Burmese) seemed less concerned because they could always fall back on their local support network - but everyone else was just dangling. Some mechanism needs to be implanted into the Constitution to address and prevent this ongoing syndrome once and for all.
1
Am I hearing that oil will be sold from the Strategic Reserve? Why would we sell when the price is so low? I thought the smart man's mantra was "Buy low, sell high?"
So who is the smart man who is buying LOW? This smacks of that same harebrained scheme that recently popped-up in the Senate, to sell the oil to finance the never-ending war. Just what is going on here?
So who is the smart man who is buying LOW? This smacks of that same harebrained scheme that recently popped-up in the Senate, to sell the oil to finance the never-ending war. Just what is going on here?
1
Shame on the legacy of President Obama to allow cuts to Social Security disability and Medicare (whose premiums are rising). The goal of the GOP has to eviscerate these safety nets since their inception. That a democratic president would not hold the line on these and insist on a couple of carriers be eliminated instead is heartbreaking. Some elderly are choosing between eating and medication and the president of "hope" has let them down. I am ashamed to be an American.
6
Ashamed to be a Democrat.
1
I'd like to say I'm shocked, but I'm not.
Bohener's last 'gift' to the GOP and it's new golden boy, Ryan is to avoid having Ryan's fingerprints on this deal, in a laughable attempt at 'plausible deniability with the militant Right Wing Caucus.
Bohener's last 'gift' to the GOP and it's new golden boy, Ryan is to avoid having Ryan's fingerprints on this deal, in a laughable attempt at 'plausible deniability with the militant Right Wing Caucus.
3
"The Medicare savings would come from cuts in payments to doctors and other health care providers."
So does this nullify the "doc-fix" bill? It seems that Congress is transforming Medicare into Medicaid. Extremely low reimbursement rates will harm, perhaps grievously, the program.
So does this nullify the "doc-fix" bill? It seems that Congress is transforming Medicare into Medicaid. Extremely low reimbursement rates will harm, perhaps grievously, the program.
5
How about some details on our deficit and trend with this new budget deal? I don't care whether we save or spend $80B and the Navy gets a new carrier. I do care whether we are going to balance the budget now that we are out of the recession. That is how Keynesian economics work - deficit spending when in recession, balance the budget when economy recovers. Unfortunately, the Dems and Reps are always spending like its a recession, on domestic (D) and military (R) programs!
Those who don't depend on domestic programs are always the first to criticize them, as usual. Congress is full of rich guys who will never have to worry about these domestic cuts. Not one of them is truly representative of the older population, nor the disabled, yet always willing to take our money ("for nothing and 'kicks' for free.")
1
Whether you approach this from the left or right isn't this just business as usual? Isn't this just another establishment, back room deal for the exclusive benefit of politicians supposedly funded by cuts in Medicare and Medicaid that will never occur? One thing we should all be able to agree on is that neither the far left nor the far right made the mess the nation finds itself in. The mess was made by establishment politicians of both parties making "deals", "reaching across the aisle", "doing the people's business", blah, blah.... Aren't they the ones who spent the 19 trillion and who are running a half trillion dollar deficit at a time of record high tax collections? Aren't they the ones who have been in charge as the nation has rotted from the inside out?
I am amused, saddened and frightened by the number of people posting here who continue to buy the establishment line or view our current mess through the childish filters of Democrat or Republican.
I am amused, saddened and frightened by the number of people posting here who continue to buy the establishment line or view our current mess through the childish filters of Democrat or Republican.
4
My doctor already charges patients going on Medicare $500 just to stay on his patient list.
6
Steve--I've never heard of such a thing, but I won't be surprised to see much more of this, as time goes on. We need a march on Washington, and a march on election polls.
Regardless of how we feel about this agreement, we would still be in gridlock if Speaker Boehner was staying in office. Term limits may be the best way to avoid gridlock in congress.
1
Newbies are the epicenter of obstruction in Congress. Elections are the only term limits we need.
1
That's how the sausage gets made.
How are we expected to get doctors to take Medicare patients if the payments to doctors are being cut? Already it is very difficult to find a general practice doctor who is willing to take on a new patient and this may cause some doctors to stop taking current patients. Could the NYT provide more information on these cuts?
3
Adults win, Tea Party loses, sequester bites the dust, national interest is well served. But in victory, be gracious. Above all, don't gloat.
47
The only winners were the military defense contractors.
Amash, the MI Tea Party rep, said “It’s another ‘govern by crisis’ deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the House but rather the will of the speaker.” Amash is the member who doesn't have the courage to vote yes or no on bills. I think he has the most "present" votes over the last several years of any representative.
Exactly the opposite is happening here of course. This compromise is apparently the best move possible now away from governing by crisis, the raison d'etre of the minority hard right Republicans.
Exactly the opposite is happening here of course. This compromise is apparently the best move possible now away from governing by crisis, the raison d'etre of the minority hard right Republicans.
2
A deal has been "tentatively" reached. Democrats can claim success for lifting spending caps, while republicans can claim it for offsetting spending increases with savings.
Now if partisans could just not kill it.
Now if partisans could just not kill it.
for once we agree - good comment.
This is the way congress is supposed to work. None of us gets everything we want, but when everyone can work together to pass the budget, we all win. Our government at work!!!
In Obama's final year +, he finally agrees to a budget passed by Congress and is escalating our presence in Syria and fight against Islamic terrorism - interesting.
Unfortunately it only takes a few little 'good news' events for the electorate to 'forget' all the times and ways they have been thrown under the bus by the majority party. This is one of those little events...
3
Social programs have been cut more or less steadily for the past several decades. And it is now seen as habitual, unavoidable. Republicans managed to achieve that even during Democratic presidents. These cuts are absolutely unnecessary. It should actually be raised substantially in this age of growing inequality.
Taxes ought to be raised on the affluent, and cut for the middle class & poor. If payroll tax is cut to 1% on the first $10K & to 2% on the second $10K, it would be extremely beneficial to the have-nots. The cap on it ought to be raised, rather eliminated, but >$500K it should be cut to 2% & >$1M, cut to 1%. This will ensure social security solvency, while not taking too much out of the affluent.
Carried interest should be treated as ordinary income. Two higher rates in marginal taxes should be added: 50% on >$5M, or on the top 0.1% in incomes & 70% on >$25M, or on the top 0.01% in incomes. The affluent would hardly feel any pinch. They would still be as affluent as before, but would feel they are paying their fair share in taxes to help the unlucky, the inherently disadvantaged. These higher rates are far less than what existed before 1981 when the tax-cutting binge took hold.
Taxes ought to be raised on the affluent, and cut for the middle class & poor. If payroll tax is cut to 1% on the first $10K & to 2% on the second $10K, it would be extremely beneficial to the have-nots. The cap on it ought to be raised, rather eliminated, but >$500K it should be cut to 2% & >$1M, cut to 1%. This will ensure social security solvency, while not taking too much out of the affluent.
Carried interest should be treated as ordinary income. Two higher rates in marginal taxes should be added: 50% on >$5M, or on the top 0.1% in incomes & 70% on >$25M, or on the top 0.01% in incomes. The affluent would hardly feel any pinch. They would still be as affluent as before, but would feel they are paying their fair share in taxes to help the unlucky, the inherently disadvantaged. These higher rates are far less than what existed before 1981 when the tax-cutting binge took hold.
3
Oil prices are relatively low because of excess supply in the system. So we are to sell oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Why? So we can replace the oil after prices rise?
5
"Buy high, sell low!"
President George W. Bush purchased petroleum for the strategic oil reserve when oil prices were high. Now our government will be selling some of it when prices are near the bottom. Selling petroleum at a loss is not a good way to fund our government.
8
I'm really happy that some of the SS dosh drained from my paycheck is going to bomb brown people instead of helping disabled old folks. Turns out "Death panels" are real!
5
Just terrific! Cuts to Medicare and Social Security. And no tax increase on the wealthy. Shameful. So the middle class gets to suck it up again, the elderly get to suffer through old age infirmities with less medical support and the disabled will be yet more financially strapped and encumbered.
More and more it seems a 'final exit' is our government's answer to us in our needs: Self deliverance, one way or the other. Canada: Better bar your doors from the southern hordes!
More and more it seems a 'final exit' is our government's answer to us in our needs: Self deliverance, one way or the other. Canada: Better bar your doors from the southern hordes!
4
Another victory for the 1%. Obama sold out the people again, but the has assured himself many $250, 000 like good old Bill.
2
Any Democrat who votes for cuts in Medicare and cuts in Social Security Disability, will ot get my vote in the next election. I will be calling my representative and my senator today to express my displeasure.
5
Democrats are claiming the sky is falling down and Republicans are responsible. I have a question. Even if they were to pass cuts would the Senate filibuster to prevent the bill to be voted on? Can you prove to me the Republicans would have enough votes for a Cloture vote to override it? And if they do override what will happen when it reaches Obama's desk? Cuts cannot take place unless he signs the bill correct? And he is going to sign it? And can factually prove to me that Republicans have the votes to override a veto? Are you telling me they are going to get at least 5 Democratic Senators to switch their vote?
What's interesting is if you look at the shutdowns under Carter they occurred while Democrats had both chambers. House didn't want to use Medicaid to fund abortion. Did you get that Democrats? Your Democratic House was against a woman's right to choose and have control over their reproductive rights. And you talk about us? LOL
Defense cuts. In 2011 the defense budget represented 4.7% of gross domestic product; in 2014 the percentage was 2.7% In real dollars defense spending dropped from $705.6 billion in 2011 to $494 billion in 2014. That is a 30% cut Where do Democrats get their information, besides Mother Jones, Huffington Post and MSNBC? The facts don't back up your ridiculous claims. For Democrats, making sure the cradle to the grave entitlement programs are far more important than protecting us from ISIS, cyber attacks from Russia and China, et.
What's interesting is if you look at the shutdowns under Carter they occurred while Democrats had both chambers. House didn't want to use Medicaid to fund abortion. Did you get that Democrats? Your Democratic House was against a woman's right to choose and have control over their reproductive rights. And you talk about us? LOL
Defense cuts. In 2011 the defense budget represented 4.7% of gross domestic product; in 2014 the percentage was 2.7% In real dollars defense spending dropped from $705.6 billion in 2011 to $494 billion in 2014. That is a 30% cut Where do Democrats get their information, besides Mother Jones, Huffington Post and MSNBC? The facts don't back up your ridiculous claims. For Democrats, making sure the cradle to the grave entitlement programs are far more important than protecting us from ISIS, cyber attacks from Russia and China, et.
Bankrupt money printing empire
1
No doubt, the devil will be in the details. But just once in Obama's presidency I would like him to tell the Republicans that if they want to reduce the deficit, then they must (1) raise the income tax rate of the rich, or at least close some of the loopholes used by the rich; and (2) reduce the defense budget.
This deal stinks. It sounds like increases in defense spending and cuts to Medicare. Who will not suffer from cuts to Medicare? You guessed it - the rich.
This deal stinks. It sounds like increases in defense spending and cuts to Medicare. Who will not suffer from cuts to Medicare? You guessed it - the rich.
2
Referring to incoming Speaker Ryan, the Times editorializes in a supposedly objective news story" "... to pursue some of the bold ideas he has put forward previously on tax and budget policy."
Bold according to whom? Are we being set up for a rah-rah campaign in support of Ryan's notorious foggy math?
What's with the overt editorializing?
Bold according to whom? Are we being set up for a rah-rah campaign in support of Ryan's notorious foggy math?
What's with the overt editorializing?
4
What troubles me is the increase in defense spending. How can SS recipients not get a COLA increase, (the Feds say inflation was at 0), Disability gets cut, yet the Defense Dept gets tens of billions in increases. There was no inflation last year according to the gov't, surely it must also "Trickle" down to the War machine industry. Stop this madness. Guns over bread and butter. That motto sounds like what the pro-gun nuts were protesting about last month in Oregon.. Guns first; everything else doesn't matter.
3
I read through the draft text.
I see no cuts to SSDI Benefits in the text. So either the Times again blew the write-up, or it is in code-mode and in hidden text.
I see no cuts to SSDI Benefits in the text. So either the Times again blew the write-up, or it is in code-mode and in hidden text.
1
why is the will of the house now more important than the will of the PEOPLE? when did this change in priorities occur? when will it return to normal?
6
A budget deal was needed - otherwise there would be another government shutdown - just vote for a more balanced government in the next election!
3
OK, do you have a plan that would give us a balanced government that could be put on the ballot for the citizenry to vote on. No politician wants to have their hands tied when it comes to spending money they have done nothing to earn.
People opposing this Bill on the left are as bad as tea party hooligans . Nothing in Bill reduces eligibility or amount of benefits for Social Security disability except for persons committing fraud. False applications for nondisabled persons are rampant under current laws. Phony medical records attesting to a disability are accepted without challenge. People on disability continue to work on a cash basis bankrupting available funds. The Bill creates much more severe penalties for anyone assisting with SS Disability fraud. It also expands and mandates that all states have fraud investigation units.What is wrong with that?
4
How much does this bill add to costs at the state level? Does it really save anything when its full effects are taken into account?
As a liberal, I resent the implication that I am for SS disablity fraud. I would lock up the fraudsters and the lackadaisical judges who let them commit fraud if it were up to me.
What is wrong with that? Not a thing. But they are hampered in their investigations due to manpower shortages. If they would set up a reward for whistle blowers to assist them in disclosing folks wrongfully collecting disability benefits more would be uncovered. It's not uncommon for folks collecting disability to work side jobs for cash under the table. Usually jobs that they reported they were unable to perform thus causing them to lose income.
How many of you howling commentators crying shame voted twice for Obama and are lining up with your hearts going pitter-patter for Hillary? I don't blame the Republicans for the decline of our country over the last decades (they are getting the country they want), I blame you.
Well, you got your "Peace For Our Time" deal from your modern Chamberlain. Let's hope there is a Churchill lurking in the wings somewhere.
Well, you got your "Peace For Our Time" deal from your modern Chamberlain. Let's hope there is a Churchill lurking in the wings somewhere.
Republicans are always disloyal when in opposition.
Seniors getting thrown under the bus again. Cuts to Medicare providers. Really? Why is our government punishing seniors ?How about getting rid of the FICA cap? Think of the billions$$$ the government could collect from the 1%? Enough to keep social security afloat for decades!!!
5
Our politics is poison right now...Boehner wanted to leave with minimum villification...Obama wanted to get this done....however, is this really a slam dunk...we have entered the Twilight Zone...let's see if the House does not screw it up one more time.
1
Dear Residents of the Freedom Caucus Reps' Districts,
Would you please think twice about voting for these guys in 2016? Collectively, they've done enormous damage to our political system by refusing to enact legislation and by obstructing those who would, and truth be told, they haven't done anything to help you, the people who sent them to Congress. What happened last night....republicans and democrats agreed to a budget, averted a government shutdown, and raised the debt ceiling...and wow, the sky didn't fall...proves we can work together. The guys in the Freedom Caucus are nothing but freeloaders--make them get a real job.
Would you please think twice about voting for these guys in 2016? Collectively, they've done enormous damage to our political system by refusing to enact legislation and by obstructing those who would, and truth be told, they haven't done anything to help you, the people who sent them to Congress. What happened last night....republicans and democrats agreed to a budget, averted a government shutdown, and raised the debt ceiling...and wow, the sky didn't fall...proves we can work together. The guys in the Freedom Caucus are nothing but freeloaders--make them get a real job.
6
Looking on the bright side, at least there's nothing in this deal about defunding Planned Parenthood! (The Tea Partiers must be seething...)
50
Representative Justin Amash, Republican of Michigan, who is a member of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus, had posted his annoyance earlier in the day, saying, “It’s another ‘govern by crisis’ deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the House but rather the will of the speaker.”
Let's see - the Freedom Caucus created the crisis by refusing to compromise. The Freedom Caucus is barely 10% of the House. But if I stamp my foot and hold my breath I'm sure you will agree with me.
What world do these guys live in??? !!! ??? I'm a Democrat but I understand that 188 Democrats mean they are a minority. And 246 Republicans mean they are a majority.
I really don't understand why 40 Republican Freedom Caucus members believe they represent "the will of the House".
Let's see - the Freedom Caucus created the crisis by refusing to compromise. The Freedom Caucus is barely 10% of the House. But if I stamp my foot and hold my breath I'm sure you will agree with me.
What world do these guys live in??? !!! ??? I'm a Democrat but I understand that 188 Democrats mean they are a minority. And 246 Republicans mean they are a majority.
I really don't understand why 40 Republican Freedom Caucus members believe they represent "the will of the House".
10
Boehner is determined to really stick it to the Tea Party folks! How dare he propose a COMPROMISE!! In the TP world that is not acceptable.
1
I'm a Republican voter and shame on House Freedom caucus member Justin Amash, Republican of Michigan, who made the comment “It’s another ‘govern by crisis’ deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the House but rather the will of the speaker.” This is a outright lie. The House did vote in favor of the compromise. It chose to govern and in this case the Tea Party wasn't able to hijack the process.
8
Buying our oil reserves high and then selling it low ... then we'll buy it high again when it's dire ! Corruption, corruption, corruption ... is thy name Congress ! Between the big oil companies and the " too big to fail banks " social security and medicare was just too easy for the corrupt politicians to go after. Now, do you really believe they actually care about you and our country ... this should wake anyone up who still felt their government really worked for the american people ! Vote Bernie Sanders, he's been on to these bought politicians for a long time and like the American voter he has had enough ! Bernie 2016 !
6
Selling oil at this time from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve seems the poorest decision, both strategically, and economically. Oil is at its lowest price in years. We have been adding to this reserve at prices as high as $140 a barrel. Selling from it during an oil glut will further destabilize oil prices, hurting the economy in our nation's oil patch.
If anything, we should be adding at this time to the Strategic Reserve, when prices are low and the market could use a little more demand to prop it up.
Makes about as much sense as selling off our reserve of butter, cheese and wheat during a collapse of farm prices.
If anything, we should be adding at this time to the Strategic Reserve, when prices are low and the market could use a little more demand to prop it up.
Makes about as much sense as selling off our reserve of butter, cheese and wheat during a collapse of farm prices.
59
It just another way to deny that there is any need to phase out fossil fuel and return capital to investors without a calamitous global war.
Why on God's green earth should we do anything to prop up the oil market? So our enemies can make more money?
The oil would not be sold tomorrow, but over six years beginning in fiscal year 2018 (i.e. October 1, 2017).
Cutting the War budget by about 20% for 20 years would save the gov't way more than cutting Disability and SS programs. As usual, the War machine corporations lobby hard for no cuts and encourage more spending for their death machines.. something is seriously wrong here, especially if the White House goes along with it.
89
As others above have said, balancing the budget on the backs of the poorest Americans is immoral and shortsighted.
I hope to see a government shutdown averted, of course - but fattening the military budget by harming old and disabled people, sick people - in a time where there aren't really enough jobs for young, healthy people - and people complain they're working 24/7, 80 hour + weeks - Paul Ryan of course wants more time with his kids!
Well who doesn't. Meanwhile, the cost of living - just the basic costs of food, housing, and health care are just soaring - yet, there are no increases in SS benefits - and no work for anybody but the youngest and fittest - this makes no sense.
Republicans and other mean-spirited individuals love to claim fraud. It's the same with "voter fraud." The real fraud, of course, lies in the efforts to keep people from the polls.
Same thing here. The fraud is that vacuum sound you hear, siphoning money from poor people to rich people. Only in America!
Bernie Sanders is right. Social welfare spending should be expanded not decreased. That money goes right back into the economy and it allows people, most of whom have worked a lifetime, others who suffer from various disabilities, to live with some kind of dignity.
For many, it's the only income they have.
This is really a shame, especially when you see money just vanishing into thin air, like the F-35 boondoggle and the endless welfare for rich people and corporations.
I hope to see a government shutdown averted, of course - but fattening the military budget by harming old and disabled people, sick people - in a time where there aren't really enough jobs for young, healthy people - and people complain they're working 24/7, 80 hour + weeks - Paul Ryan of course wants more time with his kids!
Well who doesn't. Meanwhile, the cost of living - just the basic costs of food, housing, and health care are just soaring - yet, there are no increases in SS benefits - and no work for anybody but the youngest and fittest - this makes no sense.
Republicans and other mean-spirited individuals love to claim fraud. It's the same with "voter fraud." The real fraud, of course, lies in the efforts to keep people from the polls.
Same thing here. The fraud is that vacuum sound you hear, siphoning money from poor people to rich people. Only in America!
Bernie Sanders is right. Social welfare spending should be expanded not decreased. That money goes right back into the economy and it allows people, most of whom have worked a lifetime, others who suffer from various disabilities, to live with some kind of dignity.
For many, it's the only income they have.
This is really a shame, especially when you see money just vanishing into thin air, like the F-35 boondoggle and the endless welfare for rich people and corporations.
5
The budget deal removes the distraction of the familiar showdown over raising the debt ceiling and the threats of government shutdown, although that also removes a compelling political argument for the Democrats about irresponsible Republicans for use in the 2016 election.
The best thing to emerge from the proposed deal is revival of the charter for the Export-Import Bank. While it is true that the Bank is a type of corporate welfare, it is a needed tool to help small companies which cannot meet requirements of traditional lenders.
It is ironic that the charter of the Export-Import Bank has been held hostage by Jeb Hensarling, who represents several very conservative semi-rural counties outside Dallas and who has not seemed troubled by real corporate welfare in the past.
The best thing to emerge from the proposed deal is revival of the charter for the Export-Import Bank. While it is true that the Bank is a type of corporate welfare, it is a needed tool to help small companies which cannot meet requirements of traditional lenders.
It is ironic that the charter of the Export-Import Bank has been held hostage by Jeb Hensarling, who represents several very conservative semi-rural counties outside Dallas and who has not seemed troubled by real corporate welfare in the past.
1
DO NOT DO THIS DEAL. Do not let the Republicans off the hook. Let Ryan take over, and let the Republican Party self-destruct. For 7 years the Republicans have acted like human hemorrhoids, obstructing Obama at every turn and now is not the time cut them any slack. The Republican Party is about to implode and, for the good of the country, the Democrats should not prolong the process.
7
Well, those damn Republicans! They, according to the liberal left, obstruct everything! Well guess what. They passed TPP, they passed a 2 year budget deal so I guess for the duration of the Obama presidency that will be one mantra that we won't have to hear about.
But I am curious, does anyone remember this?
"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last 8 years is to take out a credit card from the bank of China in the name of our children, driving up the debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents --#43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome so now that we have over $9 trillion in debt that we are going to have to pay back--$30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic!"
Question to the liberals. What banks did Obama out his credit cards in the name of our children, driving up the from $9 trillion--for the first 43 presidents----Obama added $9.5 trillion by his lonesome. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic!
Senator Obama said that it was unconstitutional to raise the debt limit and a sign of failed leadership. I guess Senator Obama's words ring hollow don't they. And once again Obama wants to raise the debt limit so he can pay for his cradle to the grave entitlement society. Or maybe there are some more Solyndra's, Fiskers, Sun Power on the drawing board. Spending money they don't have is a skill Democrats have mastered. Gotta raise funds for all those illegals they need to increase their base.
But I am curious, does anyone remember this?
"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last 8 years is to take out a credit card from the bank of China in the name of our children, driving up the debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents --#43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome so now that we have over $9 trillion in debt that we are going to have to pay back--$30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic!"
Question to the liberals. What banks did Obama out his credit cards in the name of our children, driving up the from $9 trillion--for the first 43 presidents----Obama added $9.5 trillion by his lonesome. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic!
Senator Obama said that it was unconstitutional to raise the debt limit and a sign of failed leadership. I guess Senator Obama's words ring hollow don't they. And once again Obama wants to raise the debt limit so he can pay for his cradle to the grave entitlement society. Or maybe there are some more Solyndra's, Fiskers, Sun Power on the drawing board. Spending money they don't have is a skill Democrats have mastered. Gotta raise funds for all those illegals they need to increase their base.
I don't see reduction in Congress member pay, health benefits or any other perks in the bill. The bill should include countries paying the full cost of U.S. support instead of us taxpayer footing the bill by increasing military budget again and having an emergency fund. Social security disability is paid into by every W-2 employee. Yet the Republicans have cut benefits. Their hate toward the American people has no limit.
2
We'd be better of defaulting than bringing in Paul Ryan. He is the worst person in America. Hypocrite, charlatan, liar, fraud, manipulator.
3
Thanks to Speaker John Boehner's parting gift, with such a cosmetic deal between the Congress and the White House the nation is at least spared of the unsavoury annual event of the government shutdown.
2
DaKine; A deal such as dis, should betta be done afta da general election.
Kind of think Obama is playing you all, south of the Mason/Dixon.
Kind of think Obama is playing you all, south of the Mason/Dixon.
Another topic for a balanced budget, Bush cut taxes his first year because the economy was doing well.
He cut taxes a couple of years later because we were in recession.
And in the end, the economy created 3 million jobs during Bush's 8 years.
Under Bush, the deficit went from $0, a balanced budget to a whopping $1.4 Trillion.
Six years of Obama with the "job killing" Obama-care and the repeal of the upper bracket tax cuts for the "job creators" and the economy created 12 million jobs.
We haven't seen these kind of job numbers since Clinton.
Under 6 years of Obama, the deficit has been reduced to $500 Billion.
Similar results under Clinton, raised taxes, terrific jobs creation and balanced the budget.
He cut taxes a couple of years later because we were in recession.
And in the end, the economy created 3 million jobs during Bush's 8 years.
Under Bush, the deficit went from $0, a balanced budget to a whopping $1.4 Trillion.
Six years of Obama with the "job killing" Obama-care and the repeal of the upper bracket tax cuts for the "job creators" and the economy created 12 million jobs.
We haven't seen these kind of job numbers since Clinton.
Under 6 years of Obama, the deficit has been reduced to $500 Billion.
Similar results under Clinton, raised taxes, terrific jobs creation and balanced the budget.
3
How many cuts would be necessary to key social programs that are now on the chopping block if Obama had had the temerity at a time when he had a majority and the nation in his pocket, to let the Bush tax cuts expire. We bailed out big banks, but let them keep their risky gambling habits, but when it comes to cutting programs for the elderly and the middle class.. "well, we had no choice..." Disappointing in every way.
2
It seems our dysfunctional addicted leadership have found lies on which they can agree.
The sham rolls on, bathed in nicotine.
We have increased the debt at a pace and to a size that terrifies reasonable men and women - and seems to please the slick president and his buffoon of a vice president.
With more lies, Benghazi was hidden so they might defeat Romney...
Obama the great promiser, the nicotine addicted neophyte from the streets of Hyde Park, my second home, promised and never intended to keep his word, and made it far, far worse.
GOP led by a weepy sunlamp tanned nicotine addict have done pretty much the same.
A republic if you can keep it, said Ben Franklin... and
We have lost it.
The Emperor has no clothes, but smokes off stage...
In hiding, in denial, addicted...
With a free press that is unable to reveal what matters... about itself or others...
And is not free at all...
From addictions of its own...
And sits at the back of the cave, in decline.
The sham rolls on, bathed in nicotine.
We have increased the debt at a pace and to a size that terrifies reasonable men and women - and seems to please the slick president and his buffoon of a vice president.
With more lies, Benghazi was hidden so they might defeat Romney...
Obama the great promiser, the nicotine addicted neophyte from the streets of Hyde Park, my second home, promised and never intended to keep his word, and made it far, far worse.
GOP led by a weepy sunlamp tanned nicotine addict have done pretty much the same.
A republic if you can keep it, said Ben Franklin... and
We have lost it.
The Emperor has no clothes, but smokes off stage...
In hiding, in denial, addicted...
With a free press that is unable to reveal what matters... about itself or others...
And is not free at all...
From addictions of its own...
And sits at the back of the cave, in decline.
Wow...you are seriously against tobacco.
A question for S.B. Lewis: Who would be the best new president to set things right? Is there any hope?
I've read this article twice looking for the actual cuts to SS disability and Medicare. If me eyes arent deceiving me, its a "fraud and abuse" clause for SS disability benefits and some shifting of Medicare funds around the various trust funds. Appears there will actually be savings FOR seniors on Medicare Part B costs but no mention of how.
We have to be careful when huge deals like this are still in talking in talking stage. A lot can happen. It's not over till its over. Let's stop with the rants about Medicare and SS "cuts" till experts have read the final bill.
We have to be careful when huge deals like this are still in talking in talking stage. A lot can happen. It's not over till its over. Let's stop with the rants about Medicare and SS "cuts" till experts have read the final bill.
2
Christine - Totally agree with you. Have you noticed that people seem to enjoy "ranting" rather than "thinking"?
1
Well, well, well. So, after seven years the Republicans have actually learned to compromise. Too bad Republican brinksmanship held out for so long.
2
The article states, "...the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion."
The only way that can make sense is if there is $5 billion dollars worth of fraud in the twenty states not requiring an examination. If that is so clear and the amount so large, then why is there no Justice Department investigation of the fraud?
As to the agreement itself, the devil is in the details which, I hope, the Times will spell out and analyze by credible people (Gretchen Morgenson, perhaps).
The only way that can make sense is if there is $5 billion dollars worth of fraud in the twenty states not requiring an examination. If that is so clear and the amount so large, then why is there no Justice Department investigation of the fraud?
As to the agreement itself, the devil is in the details which, I hope, the Times will spell out and analyze by credible people (Gretchen Morgenson, perhaps).
1
The Times misreported this part on several counts. It's not a requirement for an in person examination, but for a doctor to review the disability file that the disability examiner assembled, waiving the ability of an examiner to rule on their own. (This is Section 832/of the proposed GOP budget). Big misstatement number 2 is that the states allowing this award more disability benefits. Ten of them, those who use the newer version of this model, spend significantly less. The other 10 spend more, but the biggest factor is that they waive the intermediate level of appeals, sending them straight to appeals judges who award at high rates. None of this is fraud, just a tendency of some adjudicators to view applications more favorably than others, occasionally to extreme degrees.
Regarding the selling of strategic oil reserves..........stupid on it's face, but even worse, the government bought high and now they will sell low. I would never hire a Republican to run a business.
8
All this Obama bashing is wildly unfair. House Republicans have their biggest majority since 1928. They have 54 out of 100 senators.
Elections have consequences. The Republicans control Congress. As horrible as that is, we have to live with it for now.
I've been voting since 1968 - always vote and always for Democrats. It's a gross overstatement, but there is some is some truth in it -you get the government you deserve.
The turnout of voters who want what we want ( I consider myself somewhat to the left of Sanders ) is deplorable - especially in the midterms.
Blaming the President for accepting reality seems to appeal to the self-righteous here. You can all pat yourself on the back for being so caring and correct but Obama actually got a pretty good deal.
Elections have consequences. The Republicans control Congress. As horrible as that is, we have to live with it for now.
I've been voting since 1968 - always vote and always for Democrats. It's a gross overstatement, but there is some is some truth in it -you get the government you deserve.
The turnout of voters who want what we want ( I consider myself somewhat to the left of Sanders ) is deplorable - especially in the midterms.
Blaming the President for accepting reality seems to appeal to the self-righteous here. You can all pat yourself on the back for being so caring and correct but Obama actually got a pretty good deal.
93
No, there is much bloating in the Pentagon that could be tapped before this agreement O is a weak negotiator.
Ah, if we would only make voting MANDATORY in our country, things might be different. Wishful thinking on my part, I know, but it's nice to dream.
People who don't bother to vote are as unpatriotic as they come. People in other countries would die for the chance to vote.
People who don't bother to vote are as unpatriotic as they come. People in other countries would die for the chance to vote.
1
Why do they have their biggest majority since 1928?
Wave elections in 2010 and 2014.
Whose responsibility was that?
Wave elections in 2010 and 2014.
Whose responsibility was that?
Selling off our oil reserves when the price is down, seems like a gift to the oil companies, since we will eventually buy back when the prices will probably be up. Cutting Medicare is a mistake and I hope candidates come out opposed to it during the Presidential debates. We do not need to spend more on the military.
5
Selling our oil reserves at a time when the price is low just illustrates just how corrupt our legislative system has become and then they have the audacity to pat themselves on the back going after the most vulnerable ... the elderly and disabled !
According to Obama, the Republicans, and the author of this article, the Social Security Trust Fund isn't a Trust Fund at all, it's actually an "Entitlement Program." Their definition means that it's for "a member of a specific group seeking Privileges or Special Treatment." It's a lie meant to reframe the debate to justify raiding Social Security. It means that a person is seeking a handout even if they started working at age 15, paid Social Security Tax out of every single paycheck for 40 years, but now have Multiple Sclerosis and can't work. (As a child of European immigrants who came to America penniless, I started at 10). If you follow the reasoning of Obama, the Republicans, and this reporter, stealing money from this person and giving it to Wall Street and the Military is not only fine, it's actually just. Make no mistake, this is a Heritage Foundation plan. Their goal is to steal from everyone who invested in Social Security and cap reimbursements at a maximum of 125% of the poverty level; roughly $1,200 a month. Once that's done it will be classified as a poverty level entitlement, reimbursement will be frozen indefinitely, the excess will be given to their rich buddies, and Social Security will wither and die. Obamacare is nothing but a Heritage Foundation plan, so why shouldn't Obama and the Republicans use the Heritage Foundation plan intended to destroy Social Security? It's what is being done here because after all Social Security is just an Entitlement, right?
6
What does it say about a country that it goes after its least powerful members, making the disabled and the aged pay for its wars?
15
80 billion for America 32 billion for Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. What's wrong with this picture? Maybe trying to rule the Middle East is too expensive?
Why do we accept our efforts to rule the world as non negotiable while we have a hard enough time maintaining order on our own streets? While I'm at it: Who would want to be ruled by folks that do such a poor job of ruling themselves?
Why do we accept our efforts to rule the world as non negotiable while we have a hard enough time maintaining order on our own streets? While I'm at it: Who would want to be ruled by folks that do such a poor job of ruling themselves?
12
80 billion is just the increase on our 4 trillion dollar annual budget. 4 trillion is a lot more than 32 billion.
and we are screwed again....but of course, we are used to it.
1
I do not know enough about this deal, to know if I approve of it. But, what I do know, is that this country can't continue to run on CR's, last minute crisis intervention & least of all, Shutting down the government!!
I for one, am sick of a group of congress members, that will not take a proactive stance on addressing the issues both to reduce the deficit, debt & to address very needed job growth.
They should start the very day after the budget is passed, working on joint party proposals!!!! Ex: Tax reform, gov organization reforms, job creation, etc, etc, etc,!!!! They have two yrs to stop fighting & get this done.
We need statesmen--- not whiners, dinners & do nothing but obstruct!
Lets vote out those who do not know how to play well & get on with rebuilding the greatest country in the world!
I for one, am sick of a group of congress members, that will not take a proactive stance on addressing the issues both to reduce the deficit, debt & to address very needed job growth.
They should start the very day after the budget is passed, working on joint party proposals!!!! Ex: Tax reform, gov organization reforms, job creation, etc, etc, etc,!!!! They have two yrs to stop fighting & get this done.
We need statesmen--- not whiners, dinners & do nothing but obstruct!
Lets vote out those who do not know how to play well & get on with rebuilding the greatest country in the world!
They are bought, it's no longer in the best interest of the good people of the United States ... It's all about what's in the interests of the special interests ... You know billionaires.
Gee, politicians cutting my Social Security and my Medicare. I notice that their retirement and their health insurance are untouched. Even more reason that politicians should have to depend on Social Security and Medicare, just like the rest of us.
13
I think it would be in the best interest of both parties if they tried to work together for the benefits of the people in this nation. We should be working with each other and not against each other.
1
This Budget Bill is a compromise. Reduction of costs of social security disability and Medicare reduction of pay for doctors are Republican ideas. As is the money for defense department. Money for federal agencies and no votes to raising debt for the next two years are Democrats ideas. This compromise is an example of how Congress should work.
27
Based on the comments here, the reporters seem a bit tone-deaf on the issue most important to readers: cuts in SS and Medicare. More in-depth reporting on these cuts would be welcome.
13
It's Halloween and the Republican Tea Party is trick or treating. No one is getting their SSA check cut. No current disability recipient is affected. But just say "boo!" -- in this case the word "cut" -- and democrats get spooked and go on auto-snarl as viciously as redneck birthers about Obama. GOP strategists know their hot buttons and lemmings on the left are over the cliff every time. Mugged again by Republicans and the battle cry here is "Mug the Democrats. And mug Obama while we're at it because we don't like how the Constitution says he can't act like the sinister tyrant the GOP says he is.
1
When you cut money to the poorest and the needy before you add a dime's worth of taxation to the richest amongst us you are proclaiming your party and your nation as uncharitable, un-Christian, immoral, unethical and just plain disgustingly nasty and cheap! Totally nauseating. Anyone who votes for such a "deal" deserves to get his or her butt kicked, especially if they are from those holier-than-thou gerrymandered Midwest and southern districts. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven!
9
Necessary, perhaps, but abject stupidity.
Want to solve this nation's dilemma -- its fiscal, economic, physical (infrastructure), educational and health problems (full funding of every higher education and every person's health care?) Then put the top marginal tax rate where it belongs -- at 70 percent. The top 2 percent can afford it -- yet live like emperors -- the pity of it being they never learn it is the one way they can purchase insurance from a revolution they so fear yet so beg for in and by their blinded, blinding greed.
If the rich and the richer do not want Bolsheviks in the streets -- let them pay a right, fair price to keep them away and at bay.
There has never a stupider force in the entire history of the United States of America than this Republican Party today, but especially its congressional contingent.Still they are not to blame for this stupidity.
The American people, in their ignorance, unawareness and almost willful incomprehension of knowledge, history and simple, plain common sense are mostly to blame for the tyranny of ignorance they sentence themselves to under these Republicans.
We get what we deserve and so, it seems, we deserve the harm we cause ourselves.
The President has no choice and no recourse but to make kind of deal to save us from jumping lemming-like off the cliff to political, fiscal and economic suicide.
I, for one, am sick to death of the suicidal Republican Party, its monumental stupidity and unfathomable ignorance.
Want to solve this nation's dilemma -- its fiscal, economic, physical (infrastructure), educational and health problems (full funding of every higher education and every person's health care?) Then put the top marginal tax rate where it belongs -- at 70 percent. The top 2 percent can afford it -- yet live like emperors -- the pity of it being they never learn it is the one way they can purchase insurance from a revolution they so fear yet so beg for in and by their blinded, blinding greed.
If the rich and the richer do not want Bolsheviks in the streets -- let them pay a right, fair price to keep them away and at bay.
There has never a stupider force in the entire history of the United States of America than this Republican Party today, but especially its congressional contingent.Still they are not to blame for this stupidity.
The American people, in their ignorance, unawareness and almost willful incomprehension of knowledge, history and simple, plain common sense are mostly to blame for the tyranny of ignorance they sentence themselves to under these Republicans.
We get what we deserve and so, it seems, we deserve the harm we cause ourselves.
The President has no choice and no recourse but to make kind of deal to save us from jumping lemming-like off the cliff to political, fiscal and economic suicide.
I, for one, am sick to death of the suicidal Republican Party, its monumental stupidity and unfathomable ignorance.
10
The most important part of this deal is that it disempowers the House Freedom Caucus, Ted Cruz, and all the other right-wingers that want to destroy the Government. They can't create a budget or fiscal crisis, they can't throw the markets into disarray or ruin business confidence in the stability of the Government or its sanity. Hopefully, this deal will empower and enable the grown-ups in the Republican Party to put these right-wingers in their place.
4
These deals demonstrate to the majority of Republicans that they do not have to let a small band of extremist ideologues control the agenda of the national government through intimidation. If John Boehner had had the guts to face down the ineptly named "Freedom Caucus" several years ago he would have been able to do his job and make life better for the American people.
It is to be hoped that his successor learns from this demonstration of bipartisan government in the face of absolutist demands from a ridiculously small minority.
It is to be hoped that his successor learns from this demonstration of bipartisan government in the face of absolutist demands from a ridiculously small minority.
1
This deal is a win for everyone except the Freedom Caucus. It makes them LOSERS. Will they take their anger out on Ryan on Thursday? Probably not.
1
The Emergency War Fund is a pacifier to the Military Industrial Complex and communities that make their living building war technologies at the expense of health care, education, infrastructure, and sane wildlife management, among other necessities. I'm so glad the government wasn't shut down down at the expense of GI Joes and GI Janes on the front lines, but show me an American who isn't completely revolted by the self-serving political machinations of Washington this year, and I'll show you an animal.
4
Take Congress out of their privileged situation and make them pay into social security instead of the separate retirement fund they are in. That would solve many problems and stick their noses in the mess they make by cutting benefits.
The low information voters who keep voting for the Tea Party aka Freedom Caucus aka Republican party are those people who love to be outraged when they think anyone is getting a "perk" they shouldn't. They love to complain 60% of the country is on entitlements. Whoaa, got that from fake fox news no doubt. These same people will be angry at Obama when they see their social security check stagnate. Who they gonna blame? Themselves for not getting the facts? No The GOP and Tea Party fruit loops. No. They will blame the federal government because, in truth, these people don't know what any of this means. It means by voting GOP they have screwed themselves, their neighbors, and every disabled person in the country. It's the Tea Party that has all the entitlements of controlling congress and the media and their obsession with changing the the politics of this country since 1963,
The low information voters who keep voting for the Tea Party aka Freedom Caucus aka Republican party are those people who love to be outraged when they think anyone is getting a "perk" they shouldn't. They love to complain 60% of the country is on entitlements. Whoaa, got that from fake fox news no doubt. These same people will be angry at Obama when they see their social security check stagnate. Who they gonna blame? Themselves for not getting the facts? No The GOP and Tea Party fruit loops. No. They will blame the federal government because, in truth, these people don't know what any of this means. It means by voting GOP they have screwed themselves, their neighbors, and every disabled person in the country. It's the Tea Party that has all the entitlements of controlling congress and the media and their obsession with changing the the politics of this country since 1963,
15
I just keep loving the way Republicans are their own worst enemy with elderly voters on Social Security. It's so great to be a Democrat these days.
9
LET'S MAKE A DEAL? Let's face it--nobody wanted a government shutdown and all the disruption it entails. Nobody except the purple kool aid drinkers among the Tea Partiers--the "true believers." You know the type, Dying for the cause is victory. Well, I ask you, What kind of victory party can you have if you're 6 feet under?
I'm glad that the majority of members of Congress have seen fit to do what they're paid to do; namely to legislate and to govern.
But I'm cynical about the possibility that such improved job performance will continue. Unless Paul Ryan quits drinking purple kool aid before he becomes speaker.
I'm glad that the majority of members of Congress have seen fit to do what they're paid to do; namely to legislate and to govern.
But I'm cynical about the possibility that such improved job performance will continue. Unless Paul Ryan quits drinking purple kool aid before he becomes speaker.
4
The Republicans were paid off by big oil. They managed to secure an agreement to sell the oil reserves at a low price after that oil was purchased at high prices. We need that reserve and more in case of war. Now the price of oil will skyrocket next time we need that reserve to moderate prices. Republicans are crooks.
13
Every chance they get republicans cut social security and medicare and increase military. Shows their priority's. That is why we need Democrats in Congress. Vote.
31
But, but....Obama and the Democrats agree with the cuts and the bill will only pass the house with Democrat support.
1
We are screwed, Bernie Sanders is the only one that doesn't follow the corrupt script. Then we need to kick everyone who voted for this attack on the american people to the curb ... democrat and republicans. Vote them out !
So we need the right kind of Democrats in the White House and in Congress.
1
"The agreement would raise spending by $80 billion, not including $32 billion for an emergency war fund." The cool 32 is not included because being permanently at war has sadly become as much a given in our culture as football, hamburgers, and sold-out politicians.
19
In deciding who are the net winners in this negotiation, which is not yet a done deal, watch the reaction of the Republican right.
It is a mixed bag. I do think standardization of national programs makes economic and administrative sense. I would assume that most beneficiaries do not move much, but for those who do it should also benefit them as they will know that they still qualify no matter where they live.
I am not thrilled about the apparently unfettered and mystery funding of the military and "emergency war fund" which seem to be where a lot of waste and dubious projects occur.
There is a definite need for the Export-Import Bank and I am not sure why the GOP would be against it.
No real mention of infrastructure or education funding in this article, which is a shame as both need to remain in the public eye.
I am not thrilled about the apparently unfettered and mystery funding of the military and "emergency war fund" which seem to be where a lot of waste and dubious projects occur.
There is a definite need for the Export-Import Bank and I am not sure why the GOP would be against it.
No real mention of infrastructure or education funding in this article, which is a shame as both need to remain in the public eye.
29
The whole GOP isn't against the Ex-Im bank; the Kochs are. It is about the oil. If they are against it, the GOP is against it.
If Americans lose jobs (and they are) and smaller corporations lose opportunities, so what? The Kochs get what they want, always.
If Americans lose jobs (and they are) and smaller corporations lose opportunities, so what? The Kochs get what they want, always.
“The agreement raises spending caps by $80 billion over 2 yrs, not including a $32B increase… in an emergency war fund… [to be] offset by cuts in Medicare & SS disab benefits…”
Both parties always unite when it comes to increasing an already over-bloated military budget by cutting benefits to the neediest people in our society. The NY Times acknowledges this exclusion- one of many such requests during the year & then continues analyzing the budget numbers based on $80B. We raised caps of $40B this year & an add’l $32B in, “emergency” military expenditures = to 44% of the total increase. There are many ways the ann military budget hides the true total costs & one has to wonder if numerous such requests approved by bipartisan support are standard procedure for obscuring the military’s true share of the ann budget. Why is it necessary to continually increase the military budget when we are already the overwhelming military power in the world? We are well into our 14the consecutive year waging wars of aggression against the Muslim world with little to show for except the enormous killing of innocent Muslim civilians & rising wealth generated for corporations & extreme wealth.
“House Rep Justin Amash (MI- (R))… “It’s another ‘gov’t by crisis’ deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the House but rather the will of the speaker.” What about the will of the people you represent? Aren’t they the primary constituency that elected you to represent their interests in Congress?
Both parties always unite when it comes to increasing an already over-bloated military budget by cutting benefits to the neediest people in our society. The NY Times acknowledges this exclusion- one of many such requests during the year & then continues analyzing the budget numbers based on $80B. We raised caps of $40B this year & an add’l $32B in, “emergency” military expenditures = to 44% of the total increase. There are many ways the ann military budget hides the true total costs & one has to wonder if numerous such requests approved by bipartisan support are standard procedure for obscuring the military’s true share of the ann budget. Why is it necessary to continually increase the military budget when we are already the overwhelming military power in the world? We are well into our 14the consecutive year waging wars of aggression against the Muslim world with little to show for except the enormous killing of innocent Muslim civilians & rising wealth generated for corporations & extreme wealth.
“House Rep Justin Amash (MI- (R))… “It’s another ‘gov’t by crisis’ deal that doesn’t reflect the will of the House but rather the will of the speaker.” What about the will of the people you represent? Aren’t they the primary constituency that elected you to represent their interests in Congress?
25
I guess strange things happen when there is a full moon.
A compromise budget agreement, no threat of government shut down, no speeches about how the national debt will be passed down to generation after generation, no playing chicken between Democrats and republicans, no "red lines" from the White House, no Wall Street fears. Why? A miracle occurred.
The GOP now can claim they can govern. They do not have to face voters because they played games Russian Roulette, like they did several times during the Obama Administration. I guess their oligarch minders could not deal with a major Wall Street loss that budget uncertainty, debt limit crisis or government shut down would have caused.
Now they sing Kumbaya. in Congress. They have not done so since 9/11/2001. We saw the mess that that little moment caused of the past 14 years.
Now that Paul Ryan is two heart beats away from the White House, he can go with cutting, and privatizing Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, what this newspaper calls "entitlements". Cut other domestic programs. And, make the state pay more. Which most states will not do.
So, the only thing sort of standing in the way is a lame duck, Democrat in Name Only, weak president. Who helped today's miracle to happen. He has helped pave the way for a complete GOP takeover of Washington. And, the ACA? The GOP may finally get to dismantle it apiece at a time.
While Canada decided to move to the middle, the US will continue its march to the far right.
A compromise budget agreement, no threat of government shut down, no speeches about how the national debt will be passed down to generation after generation, no playing chicken between Democrats and republicans, no "red lines" from the White House, no Wall Street fears. Why? A miracle occurred.
The GOP now can claim they can govern. They do not have to face voters because they played games Russian Roulette, like they did several times during the Obama Administration. I guess their oligarch minders could not deal with a major Wall Street loss that budget uncertainty, debt limit crisis or government shut down would have caused.
Now they sing Kumbaya. in Congress. They have not done so since 9/11/2001. We saw the mess that that little moment caused of the past 14 years.
Now that Paul Ryan is two heart beats away from the White House, he can go with cutting, and privatizing Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, what this newspaper calls "entitlements". Cut other domestic programs. And, make the state pay more. Which most states will not do.
So, the only thing sort of standing in the way is a lame duck, Democrat in Name Only, weak president. Who helped today's miracle to happen. He has helped pave the way for a complete GOP takeover of Washington. And, the ACA? The GOP may finally get to dismantle it apiece at a time.
While Canada decided to move to the middle, the US will continue its march to the far right.
32
@Nick Metrowsky
Longmont, Col
Like most hysterics you find it hard to separate substance and rhetoric. In fact Obama and the Democrats pretty well got everything they wanted out of this deal.
Longmont, Col
Like most hysterics you find it hard to separate substance and rhetoric. In fact Obama and the Democrats pretty well got everything they wanted out of this deal.
4
What is being cut?
The planned cuts to SS disability benefits planned for next year will be cancelled by this deal.
The planned cuts to SS disability benefits planned for next year will be cancelled by this deal.
Weak President? Prefer an American Patriot who thinks he's an exceptional leader of the greatest country ever? Chief Executive of the Whole Wide World? A Lone Ranger who ignites war whenever it suits his whims? Read your history. Not some ideological screed by an Ivy league academic who confuses megalomania with higher purpose. Newsflash: Superman is a comic book for kids, not a leadership manual for 350 million people, at least half of whom are illiterate, angry and inclined to shoot first and never ask questions, and the rest exist in some altered reality, whether drug or alcohol induced, who are cynically stupid, embrace denial as a life strategy, and espouse hedonism as a defining purpose. No shortage of "strong" leaders around the world. No shortage of victims either. Imagine, you could have had a "strong" President like McCain or Romney. You have no idea how lucky we are.
According to this article, once again our leaders have capitulated to take care of big biz the most, with the reauthorization of Export-Import Bank (big biz Boeing, is the largest recipient of the Bank loans, and some foreign companies get them too, who don't even pay taxes to the US).
And the liability has been dropped upon the backs of the little guys, by givebacks whacking Social Security and Medicare. If payments are reduced to Medicare providers, which providers will continue to treat us, who are forced to be in and forced to pay our monthly tithe for this program?
Yes, apparently some inequities have been worked out for some, but the little guy will continue to be hammered, every time the debt limit has to be raised, which was never the case for past decades. And the loopholes that the 1% have doled out to themselves, have not been, and with this philosophy, will never be touched.
Next, watch Paul Ryan and Company privatize Medicare which will pay less and be insufficient for benefits according to analyses; and 401k our social security to Wall Street which will tank us the next time the biggest banks fail, which will happen sooner than later...
Yes, it's good to be the king, because what we have here in the US is an oligarchy which isn't to far from Putin's kleptocracy in Russia. What ever happened to our democracy?
And the liability has been dropped upon the backs of the little guys, by givebacks whacking Social Security and Medicare. If payments are reduced to Medicare providers, which providers will continue to treat us, who are forced to be in and forced to pay our monthly tithe for this program?
Yes, apparently some inequities have been worked out for some, but the little guy will continue to be hammered, every time the debt limit has to be raised, which was never the case for past decades. And the loopholes that the 1% have doled out to themselves, have not been, and with this philosophy, will never be touched.
Next, watch Paul Ryan and Company privatize Medicare which will pay less and be insufficient for benefits according to analyses; and 401k our social security to Wall Street which will tank us the next time the biggest banks fail, which will happen sooner than later...
Yes, it's good to be the king, because what we have here in the US is an oligarchy which isn't to far from Putin's kleptocracy in Russia. What ever happened to our democracy?
54
I thought we were a Republic?
Wow, I'm shocked that Obama strong arm another TRILLION dollars out of them, lol
Could it be at the end of his last term he can quit throwing tantrums and not spend our great grandchildren's futures on green energy scams and privileged classes of entitlement seekers?
Could it be at the end of his last term he can quit throwing tantrums and not spend our great grandchildren's futures on green energy scams and privileged classes of entitlement seekers?
7
Wow, I'm shocked that Obama strong arm another TRILLION dollars out of them, lol
Could it be at the end of his last term he can quit throwing tantrums ....
^ Or Boehner is on his way out and poked a finger in the eye of the tea party, while Obama sat back and smiled.
But hey....you can look at it in whatever why makes you feel better.
Could it be at the end of his last term he can quit throwing tantrums ....
^ Or Boehner is on his way out and poked a finger in the eye of the tea party, while Obama sat back and smiled.
But hey....you can look at it in whatever why makes you feel better.
yes because your great grandchildren will have no use for green energy right?
Uhh in case Youu did not notice, the DOW is back to the mid 17,000s and unemployment is 5.1%.
And as for the priveleged class of entitlement seekers you must be referring to GE which is closing its big generator plant and movng it to Canada because Republicans are refusing to fund the Import Export bank.
Right.
Uhh in case Youu did not notice, the DOW is back to the mid 17,000s and unemployment is 5.1%.
And as for the priveleged class of entitlement seekers you must be referring to GE which is closing its big generator plant and movng it to Canada because Republicans are refusing to fund the Import Export bank.
Right.
Michael-- I'm assuming Obama's remarks criticizing Republican attempts at obstruction of any and all of his initiatives will always be classified by you as tantrums. So be it. I saw, over the past 6 1/2 years, many more GOP tantrums... Ted Cruz reading Dr. Seuss,the Congressman from South Carolina shouting "you lie!" at the President. The President has been called every disrespectful name possible by the denizens of your political world. Why? Because you were on the losing side, twice. The tantrums came not from Obama, but from those that tried to paint Obama as an outsider, and then were outraged when the majority of voters elected him to be the leader of our country not once but twice. You seem in prime tantrum mode yourself.
Btw, yes, there was Solyndra, just to put a name on your "green energy scam." But, "privileged classes of entitlement seekers." Surely you must be talking about the tax breaks (welfare) that are given to corporate America, the largest group getting entitlements. It's not food stamp recipients, and it's not "welfare queens" and it's not people on unemployment.
Personally, I kind of like not shutting down the government, and evidently, going into the election year of 2016, so did most Republicans. The grown-ups in the Republican Party weren't strong-armed out of anything, except escaping blame going into election year for another government shutdown. They got a few things they wanted, too. I think Donald Trump might call it "The Art of the Deal."
Btw, yes, there was Solyndra, just to put a name on your "green energy scam." But, "privileged classes of entitlement seekers." Surely you must be talking about the tax breaks (welfare) that are given to corporate America, the largest group getting entitlements. It's not food stamp recipients, and it's not "welfare queens" and it's not people on unemployment.
Personally, I kind of like not shutting down the government, and evidently, going into the election year of 2016, so did most Republicans. The grown-ups in the Republican Party weren't strong-armed out of anything, except escaping blame going into election year for another government shutdown. They got a few things they wanted, too. I think Donald Trump might call it "The Art of the Deal."
We need to oust legislators who work for the Military/Industrial/Financial Complex. Perhaps older voters whose security in age is under constant attack will see beyond the incumbents and the "red meat" to remember themselves.
39
We really need to stop depending on the Federal government; an individual buying a private disability policy makes far more sense than relying on the bread crumbs from social securities disability program. The same can be said for social security itself, it is a lousy retirement plan.
4
Yes, it is a lousy retirement plan, but, thanks to Congress, fro most people, it is the only retirement plan. Unless you are lucky and a public employee, or work for a very rare employer, you have a pension to look forward to. But, everyone else, you may have a 401k or an IRA. And you are at the mercy of what investors do on Wall Street. For example, my 401k lost 8% of its value in that August "adjustment".
So, for me, like millions of others, I at least have a base income to supplement what I managed to save. Sp, maybe you should research the world outside of your public service job.
Disability insurance, yes it exists. But, usually available through one's employer. Of course if you can't get a job, because you are disabled, then you don't have access to disability insurance. It is the very reason why Social Security Disability (SSI) exists. So, what happens when you dump SSI? Who takes acre of disabled people, especially those who were dependent on their parents? Charity? Neighbors? What will happen is people will end up on the street; homeless or dead.
The 7.65% payroll tax (15.30% employer and employee) has kept people healthy with Medicare, helped the disabled, helped the retired. and became a giant IOU to the US Government by robbing from it. A vast part of the National Debt is this IOU that Congress, and politicians, do not want to pay back.
I worked over 40 years and earned my Social Security. I hope to live long after my working years collecting my benefit.
So, for me, like millions of others, I at least have a base income to supplement what I managed to save. Sp, maybe you should research the world outside of your public service job.
Disability insurance, yes it exists. But, usually available through one's employer. Of course if you can't get a job, because you are disabled, then you don't have access to disability insurance. It is the very reason why Social Security Disability (SSI) exists. So, what happens when you dump SSI? Who takes acre of disabled people, especially those who were dependent on their parents? Charity? Neighbors? What will happen is people will end up on the street; homeless or dead.
The 7.65% payroll tax (15.30% employer and employee) has kept people healthy with Medicare, helped the disabled, helped the retired. and became a giant IOU to the US Government by robbing from it. A vast part of the National Debt is this IOU that Congress, and politicians, do not want to pay back.
I worked over 40 years and earned my Social Security. I hope to live long after my working years collecting my benefit.
86
What are you talking about? How will that provide for you after a financial collapse. Like when everyone lost everything in their 401Ks. That proved to be a pretty lousy retirement plan for people.
4
Medicare Advantage and Part D was passed by a GOP partisan vote without any funding save for new debt. Together they represent a $200 billion dollar a year hole in the budget (nearly $3 trillion dollars so far). Each and every senior in America, regardless of need, gets $500/month from their grandchildren. A large part of the problem is that the federal government is restricted by GOP supported statute from negotiating with the drug companies for the best price.
2
Remember when George W. Bush took office we had a surplus of $237 billion—the third consecutive surplus and the largest surplus ever. Then he had the government send us all checks. Then a war on fake facts. Then a financial collapse. Now we are cutting needed programs to fund the military. Great.
159
Oops. You somehow forgot seven years of Obama.
1
It's all going according to plan. No secrets there. The beast is now malnournished and starvation is looming. The chipping away at the New Deal can now go forward, with very few hitches as the government can be held over a barrel, year upon year. It's going to take a very strong political machine to reverse this. Barring a financial calamity, I don't see it happening in the near future. I've been planning for a diminished Social Security for nearly 20 years. I hope I've been wrong.
Moderation has impelled my choice to register as a Democrat for the last 37 years, to vote for Obama, and to guide my political choices. Moderation entails compromise. This one strikes me as excellent, the best of our democracy. I really don't like Mr. Boehner or Mr. McConnell, but they have risen to the occasion as have Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Reid, and President Obama.
It's hard to accept the middle way. It never serves either extreme or any ideal. But ideals are just that: goals we hold before us. If we can move the ball a little bit down the field together, we all succeed.
It's hard to accept the middle way. It never serves either extreme or any ideal. But ideals are just that: goals we hold before us. If we can move the ball a little bit down the field together, we all succeed.
72
Citizens voted for a Democratic president and many have voted for Republican legislators (and the Republican state legislators who fixed the districts). That's the reality of it. The agreement is a compromise. Most people won't agree with all the details, that's the point of a compromise, and it wouldn't be bad at all if we all started getting used to this sort of thing again. People who are really unhappy about it should just mobilize their fellow citizens to win a few more elections.
12
This is a deal which only a mother could love (or at least like a little bit), but, given the terrible situation of political life in Washington, it may well be the very best anyone could have hoped for.
1
So, there has evidently been $5 Billion of "waste, fraud, and abuse" ... because:
"Aides said that the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion."
But this is only a "projection". The money will go into the Social Security "lock box" and strengthen the program, no doubt.
"Aides said that the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion."
But this is only a "projection". The money will go into the Social Security "lock box" and strengthen the program, no doubt.
4
The devil is in the details which, I hope, the Times will spell out and analyze by competent people (Gretchen Morgenson, perhaps).
The article states, "Aides said that the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion."
The only way that can make sense is if there is $5 billion dollars worth of fraud in the twenty states not requiring an examination. If that is so clear and the amount so large, then why is there no Justice Department investigation of the fraud?
The article states, "Aides said that the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion."
The only way that can make sense is if there is $5 billion dollars worth of fraud in the twenty states not requiring an examination. If that is so clear and the amount so large, then why is there no Justice Department investigation of the fraud?
58
This little item will simply push the costs down the road. The way the system operates now, the doctor hired by SS will deny almost all claims for permanent disability, thus setting up a 2-3 year quest by the claimant to prove that they actually have a disability. This often involves lawyers and payments to these individuals from state funds to support them until they can prove their case. In almost every case that I'm aware of (and I work with many people who are on SSDI) a judge eventually decides that these individuals, surprise, surprise, were actually disabled all along. The government mus then provide them with back payment for the time they should have been collecting the funds. This is a terrible "fix" to what is already a broken system.
It does not necessarily mean fraud is involved. The disability requirements should be the same in every state. Some states might have rules that are more lax than others. Thus allowing a person in NJ, let's say, to qualify for federal disability, but not to qualify if that person lived in NY.
It is not about fraud only. They want stricter rules so that people that were considered disabled now will not be considered disabled. My question is: Are they applying the new rules to people that have been on disability for a long time or if it will only apply to new applicants. The other option they are considering is reducing all benefits to just below the poverty level. I do not think that will get through.
.
.
According to this story, and others I read, the deal includes funneling $32 billion to the military via an "emergency war fund" that is not subject to generally-applicable budget restraints.
Has Congress declared war in the last 70 years? If so, I missed it. If not, there is no excuse for using an emergency war fund now.
[The Korean conflict has not concluded; there is merely an Armistice in place. But Congress never declared war on any of the nations involved there, so our last declared war ended in the late 1940s.]
.
According to this story, and others I read, the deal includes funneling $32 billion to the military via an "emergency war fund" that is not subject to generally-applicable budget restraints.
Has Congress declared war in the last 70 years? If so, I missed it. If not, there is no excuse for using an emergency war fund now.
[The Korean conflict has not concluded; there is merely an Armistice in place. But Congress never declared war on any of the nations involved there, so our last declared war ended in the late 1940s.]
30
You want to raise that tired old complaint feel free. But you are being deliberately obtuse.
As near as I can tell the Civil War was never a "war" by your definition. Congress never "declared war" or even "authorized military action". Congress merely authorized spending for all the soldiers, bullets, gun powder, ships, etc
BTW - The Korean War was an action authorized by the United Nations against North Korea. Technically the US only provided troops to the UN. The truce is not between the US and North Korea - it is between the UN and North Korea.
Throughout history the US has conducted military operations without "declaring war". And those actions have been accepted as valid. George Washington raised an army to confront the Whiskey Rebellion in 1791 without a "declaration of war".
I'd also point out that - as Commander in Chief - the President does not need authorization from Congress to use military force.
As near as I can tell the Civil War was never a "war" by your definition. Congress never "declared war" or even "authorized military action". Congress merely authorized spending for all the soldiers, bullets, gun powder, ships, etc
BTW - The Korean War was an action authorized by the United Nations against North Korea. Technically the US only provided troops to the UN. The truce is not between the US and North Korea - it is between the UN and North Korea.
Throughout history the US has conducted military operations without "declaring war". And those actions have been accepted as valid. George Washington raised an army to confront the Whiskey Rebellion in 1791 without a "declaration of war".
I'd also point out that - as Commander in Chief - the President does not need authorization from Congress to use military force.
The only war "our" government declares is their war on American citizens and their well-being. "Our" government only makes peace with oligarchs in service of plutocracy. Maybe you should re-read Eisenhower's words about that "military-industrial complex"; it's one of the large churches at which so many in "our" government worship.
I have been in a Social Security waiting room, no one there is getting rich off the system. There were people in wheel chairs and with walkers none of whom would be a first choice hire for the any job I am aware of. Cuts to these people is inhumane and reflects the Republican party's insensitivity to those who struggle to survive in our society. Collect social security taxes on all income and make it stronger not weaker. There is no need for a defense budget if our people are going to be destroyed by our own government's negligence. Hillary takes Florida with this vote.
174
Wonderful addition to this thread. The TP/GOP are the real terrorists to worry about. Their heartless cuts will hurt the most vulnerable! Shame on them!
I am an independent (left-leaning I will grant) who WANTS Social Security to stay in place. But I think it is important to not make villains of the other side on things like this. Yeah some of them are being willfully greedy but some of them genuinely encounter abuses of the system. THOSE are the people you need to engage because they are worth talking to. Because I have been attending a bipolar peer support group weekly for 10 years and I know (based on my own experience) that it is important to recognize that there will always be people using the system for all kinds of reasons (including abuse). People always use things for good reasons and abuse it... both are always true for anything of appreciable size and scope. But they perform an important function and we just need to work at getting them to work even better. That is where we will find a way to get fiscal conservatives onboard. Because I don't think they like the nuts they have to share policy decisions with.
@Joe: The article did not say they would cut SS disability payments arbitrarily -- only to those without a legitimate claim.
I've known several, personally, who fake a disability or convince themselves they have one when they don't.
Do you want us to continue to support this fraud?
I've known several, personally, who fake a disability or convince themselves they have one when they don't.
Do you want us to continue to support this fraud?
As usual more for the military coming from Medicare and Social Security.
How did the old song go: "When will we ever learn?"
How did the old song go: "When will we ever learn?"
44
Never, that's when.
13
Social Security is NOT AN ENTITLEMENT! Do not cut the thread that is keeping the elderly alive so that you can fund US military hardware manufacturers. That is obscene!
137
Actually, Social Security IS an entitlement. It's the word that's gotten such a bad rap because it's said with sarcasm, as if people are NOT entitled to it. Workers paid into it and therefore are ENTITLED to it. Several years ago, Congress co opted the employers part of the contribution and never paid it back and they still don't want to.
Val in Brooklyn, NY to Knorrfleat Wringbladt in Midwest, Judith Randall in CA,
Robert Koch in CA, Joe B in Sacramento, CA & James in Flagstaff.
Every single one of you: 100% correct and it's painful. My mother, a public school librarian finally retired at age 80 a year ago. She earned every penny she paid into Social Security and she's on Medicare now. My beloved late sister had a disability allowance because she was severely mentally ill, couldn't work and needed the money. Joe B., my mother has balance problems, uses a cane and will be using a walker very soon. As you said, this is unconscionable. James Flagstaff, you're right, as is Bernie. We need to get people out and actually voting. I worry about gerrymandering, but, at least we can tell ourselves we've done everything we can if we do what you say. There's no such thing as an unimportant local election. They all count.
Submitted 10-27-15@3:50 a.m. EST
Robert Koch in CA, Joe B in Sacramento, CA & James in Flagstaff.
Every single one of you: 100% correct and it's painful. My mother, a public school librarian finally retired at age 80 a year ago. She earned every penny she paid into Social Security and she's on Medicare now. My beloved late sister had a disability allowance because she was severely mentally ill, couldn't work and needed the money. Joe B., my mother has balance problems, uses a cane and will be using a walker very soon. As you said, this is unconscionable. James Flagstaff, you're right, as is Bernie. We need to get people out and actually voting. I worry about gerrymandering, but, at least we can tell ourselves we've done everything we can if we do what you say. There's no such thing as an unimportant local election. They all count.
Submitted 10-27-15@3:50 a.m. EST
Don't give an inch. Don't help them save their face. Don't deal with the Devil. If you talk to him he will just keep coming back.
11
They are going to re-evaluate people receiving disability. But more importantly they are going to err on the side of cutting legitimately disabled persons off the rolls and they will have to appeal to an ALJ. This is an extremely stressful state for some who are disabled. It some cases, it is harmful. Most of the so called "abuses" are in the mental health regs. It is pretty hard to qualify for disability based on a mental disability out right. Most have to go through the judges to get approved. Many get disability based on a combination of illnesses that do not meet the regs but when added together limit a person's ability to work. They are going to try to change the rules that allow this. The judges give weight to a person's description of pain. But they will be instructing or advising the ALJ to give less weight to a person's subjective pain. This is not a good compromise for legitimately disabled persons.
33
They would have to repeal The Medical Improvement Review Standard (MIRS), which was established under the Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984. This is an extract from SSA's site:
One of the basic purposes of this legislation was to reemphasize congressional intent that there be national uniformity in the disability programs under standards established by Congress. In general, this legislation allowed the Social Security Administration (SSA) to terminate disability benefits only if there was substantial evidence that showed the individual’s disability had medically improved, and the individual could perform substantial gainful activity.
Specifically, information concerning the individual's impairment(s) during the prior determination is reviewed in deciding whether the individual is still disabled under MIRS. For a Title II or adult Title XVI beneficiary, disability will cease only when (1) there has been any medical improvement (related to the ability to work) in the individual's impairment(s) or certain exceptions to medical improvement apply and (2) the physical and/or mental impairment(s), together with the vocational profile (that is, age, education and work experience), where appropriate, does not prevent the individual from engaging in substantial gainful activity, unless an exception applies (that is, fraud, error on the face of the original determination, etc.).
One of the basic purposes of this legislation was to reemphasize congressional intent that there be national uniformity in the disability programs under standards established by Congress. In general, this legislation allowed the Social Security Administration (SSA) to terminate disability benefits only if there was substantial evidence that showed the individual’s disability had medically improved, and the individual could perform substantial gainful activity.
Specifically, information concerning the individual's impairment(s) during the prior determination is reviewed in deciding whether the individual is still disabled under MIRS. For a Title II or adult Title XVI beneficiary, disability will cease only when (1) there has been any medical improvement (related to the ability to work) in the individual's impairment(s) or certain exceptions to medical improvement apply and (2) the physical and/or mental impairment(s), together with the vocational profile (that is, age, education and work experience), where appropriate, does not prevent the individual from engaging in substantial gainful activity, unless an exception applies (that is, fraud, error on the face of the original determination, etc.).
This crowd wants one thing above all others: privatize all of the elements of "collective good" and transfer all the money into the coffers of the already "filthy rich." They salivate at the prospect of getting closer and closer to gutting Social Security which they have hated since FDR. They long for the eradication of Medicare - and if old people and disabled people are sacrificed in the process, oh well. Filthy, filthy, filthy oligarchs, Republicans and Democrats alike - it was Obama, after all, who put the most vocal proponents of privatizing and eliminating - Alan Simpson being a major one of those, ("greedy geezers" he said) in charge of analyzing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And it is Obama who is advancing, promoting and extending military OCCUPATION! What has happened to America? Wake up, people: Bernie Sanders might actually deserve the slogan of "hope and change." Go Bernie! Save America these crass, cruel vultures and the death merchants!
Government health care spending has increased at unprecedented rates since 1960. For the first time, such spending exceeds all other categories in the budget. Military spending is a close second. So we spend most of our wealth prolonging our lives and bossing around everybody else. Republicans want us to be bossier. Democrats want us to be healthier. When it comes to foreigners, most of us think we need to keep them from coming here illegally because rules are rules. When these are the principles you live by, according to a BBC poll, worldwide opinion of you is more negative than toward any other country except Iran.
15
For all you Red State middle-class and poor people you love to vote Republican they just did you in again. Republicans always want money for the Military and the Corporations and guess where it comes from, the Social Safety Net. They can't tax the Rich but they sure have no trouble taking away from the bottom 30%. Yeah keep voting for them Red States.
188
Couldn't agree with you more. The sad thing is that these red state people are woefully uninformed and they won't be getting the truth about this deal from their local Fox affiliate.
Why did the president and democratic leaders in Congress agree to the accounting gimmick of a $32 Billion increase in the off budget Overseas Contingency Operations account when the President just recently vetoed a republican passed bill that included this phony budget gimmick which he at that time rightly denounced? Progressive democrats and republican fiscal hawks should band together and prevent congressional leaders from imposing this off budget corporate welfare for contractors provision.
31
The simple truth is that it's a minor concession to the GOP to relieve them of 'the nuclear option' (debt default or government shutdown). Perhaps in your fantasies you could do better.
Sp we are being blackmailed into cutting Medicare and Social Security to raise the debt limit so the Tea Party wins? Democrats go home and explain that to the voters. If you have any reason to be Democrats do not yield to extortion and kill that deal.
55
News Flash Democrats signed off on it. Something about negotiations with the White House. Imagine that.
There should be NO cuts to Social Security and /or Medicare without an increase or elimination of income caps on FICA taxes. Congress, growup and fix this.
72
Cuts in social security and medicare benefits - outrageous! If true, I want to know Hillary's stance on this proposal. I already know Bernie's.
37
She will have to wait until the polling results are in.
13
I've read the draft text. It isn't in the draft bill.
Did you have a problem with Obama taking $712 million from Social Security to help fund the ObamaCare start up?
Not sure I agree that uniform uniforms standards for SSD and SSDI are necessarily benign. As a now retired/disabled attorney who's been there I sense the GOP want a return to the bad old days when the last administration aggressively pursued the position that in order to qualify a claimant had to be incapable of doing any full time job offered anywhere in the country, without regard to whether or not positions were open within 100 miles of the claimant, or anywhere for that matter.
And what really led to state-by-state difference wasn't the states, whose only substantive role was to assemble the panel of reviewing physicians, and then pass their recommendations back to SSA. The standards were always federal, and the differences in application came about through through "splits" at the level of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 9th Cir. on the Pacific Coast, along with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Circuits - from New England to PA - were often favorable to claimants, while the 4th, 5th and 11th - from MD to TX - were not.
Now the GOP is apparently seeking to obtain results by statute that were not always achievable in Court. Not unlike what happened with "Bankruptcy Reform" in 2005, And this relatively gun-shy administration is now throwing some of the weakest among us under the bus. Oh, and on Bankruptcy Reform, after saying she "fought the banks" Hillary didn't show up for the vote. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/clinton-and-the-bankruptcy...
And what really led to state-by-state difference wasn't the states, whose only substantive role was to assemble the panel of reviewing physicians, and then pass their recommendations back to SSA. The standards were always federal, and the differences in application came about through through "splits" at the level of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 9th Cir. on the Pacific Coast, along with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Circuits - from New England to PA - were often favorable to claimants, while the 4th, 5th and 11th - from MD to TX - were not.
Now the GOP is apparently seeking to obtain results by statute that were not always achievable in Court. Not unlike what happened with "Bankruptcy Reform" in 2005, And this relatively gun-shy administration is now throwing some of the weakest among us under the bus. Oh, and on Bankruptcy Reform, after saying she "fought the banks" Hillary didn't show up for the vote. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/clinton-and-the-bankruptcy...
35
What seems good for the Republicans is actually good for Bernie Sanders. You know who votes proportionally more than any other group in this country? Senior citizens.
30
It looks like they're not going after seniors, but rather after the (younger) disabled.
8
You know, your comment may be correct, but it implies a certain narrow self-interest when, in fact, any American citizen who still has an ounce of humanity, of decency, of compassion - regardless of their age - will vote for candidates who actually care about well-being and fairness for all of our fellow Americans and most especially the most vulnerable and the most desperate. "Our" government cavalierly sends Americans off to die and be maimed for life for specious reasons and then cannot be troubled to take care of them when they are in desperate need upon return. "Our" government turns a cold eye on Social Security and Medicare and disabled citizens and wants those people to fork over payments they have EARNED and paid into so Wall Street and War can get it all. Retched, dreadful crass obscenity rules this erstwhile "good democracy." Bernie Sanders for President and those like him for Congress! Save America.
The cuts to SS Disability are said in other articles to involve going to a flat benefit for all recipients, rather than determining benefit amounts based upon how much you paid in to the program during your working years. The cuts will affect those with higher benefit amounts.
This is what I have read, though nothing has been voted on or completely agreed upon by Congress or the President.
They will also do away with sequester cuts and increase military spending, while they are starving the disabled.
This is what I have read, though nothing has been voted on or completely agreed upon by Congress or the President.
They will also do away with sequester cuts and increase military spending, while they are starving the disabled.
23
SS disability benefits were set to be cut by 20% next year.
This deal means that they won't.
What is your problem with that?
This deal means that they won't.
What is your problem with that?
NYTimes has some pretty weak reporting here. The SS Disability benefit cut is, as reported by other outlets like theHill, a pretty progressive way to trim spending. As the program operates today over 20 percent of Social Security disability recipients live on benefits below the poverty line (often less than 600 dollars a month). People who were high earners before their disability-- and likely have savings and could afford disability insurance-- receive over $2,800 a month. The proposed plan would (in the future, not for current beneficiaries) give a flat benefit tied to and above the poverty line (likely close to $1,000 a month), which would both boost the incomes of the poor and disabled and save money over the long term as part of a deal that increases spending on a lot of other important programs.
From a progressive perspective: Great? probably not. Awful? no-- a deal that increases the benefits of disabled poor people, finally increases spending on other domestic priorities and avoids another debt-ceiling game of chicken can't be awful.
From a progressive perspective: Great? probably not. Awful? no-- a deal that increases the benefits of disabled poor people, finally increases spending on other domestic priorities and avoids another debt-ceiling game of chicken can't be awful.
46
The reason the proposal may be viewed as awful is that it fundamentally alters the nature of the social security disability program from an insurance program into a welfare program. Once this change has been made, we can be guaranteed that Republican officials will begin calling for the elimination of the program. The genius of the social security retirement and disability programs is that they have operated as insurance policies with premiums paid by every working person. So designed, social security has enjoyed widespread support among all Americans regardless of economic status. It would be a terrible mistake to discard the brilliant structure of social security as that would lead inevitably to a collapse in popular support for our nation's most important insurance programs.
6
FYI. Private disability insurance ends at age 65. The only income stream after 65 for disabled seniors is SS Disability. There are no private disability plans that pay until the end of the life.
Living on $1,000 a month circa 2015 is very difficult. The majority of disabled people rent AND have higher medical/drug costs than the average American. I would advocate setting a livable dollar amount as a floor for SS Disability - certainly in excess of $1,000/mo.
Living on $1,000 a month circa 2015 is very difficult. The majority of disabled people rent AND have higher medical/drug costs than the average American. I would advocate setting a livable dollar amount as a floor for SS Disability - certainly in excess of $1,000/mo.
Oh ye of little faith! Why not wait for the details on this budget deal before giving up on a president who has thus far kept his promise on the day he was elected that as long as you have his back, he'll have yours?
4
You're joking, right?
They think 125% of poverty is good? $14,000? That is nothing. It does not even pay rent. Everything has gone up except gas and SS COLA's since 2010. SSD folks have gotten 0 % COLA's three times sine 2010 including this coming one. And the 3 times I have gotten a COLA it was nothing, $22.00/mo last year come on. "Only 1/3"? That is 33% of folks on disability and we burned up all our savings while waiting for disability. Most are not "gaming the system" as the GOP thinks. It is going to kill the politicians if they take away benefits from almost 4 million folks that are already hurting. I pay 1/3 of my SS on medical even with Medicare. Last year over $9,000 in co-pays. I
25
At least 2 out of 3 people on SSDI are fraudsters. AT LEAST. It is the most corrupt program in the Federal government, with virtually no oversight.
It is not to be confused with Social Security for the elderly. Most people on SSDI put little or nothing into the system.
It is not to be confused with Social Security for the elderly. Most people on SSDI put little or nothing into the system.
Sounds about right. Republican majority will always do whatever they can to cut spending on programs which benefit the people who do not vote for them.
Too bad for the poor people and old folks, but good news for Halliburton and company in the event we need to go to war any time soon! War Hawks win! American people lose.
Too bad for the poor people and old folks, but good news for Halliburton and company in the event we need to go to war any time soon! War Hawks win! American people lose.
25
If the republican party really believes in balancing the budget, then the first thing they need must do is accept responsibility for pushing the nation into TWO wars from 2002 to 2004, Iraq and Afghanistan, each of which has been "off the books" at $1 Trillion a piece.
250 Million tax payers at $1 Trillion each comes to roughly $4,000 per tax payer, per war. The Republicans thus need to ask the citizenry for a one-time tax bump of $8,000 per person or I will not believe their professed "fiscal conservatism."
250 Million tax payers at $1 Trillion each comes to roughly $4,000 per tax payer, per war. The Republicans thus need to ask the citizenry for a one-time tax bump of $8,000 per person or I will not believe their professed "fiscal conservatism."
27
Does this include Obama keeping troops in Afghanistan long after he promised they would all be home?
4
Someone explain to me why subsidies to oil companies and tax breaks to the millionaires and billionaires aren't the first thing to be cut?! Instead this "clean slate" for Ryan is being done on the backs of the disabled and our senior citizens --- disgusting!
57
Cuts in Medicare and SS disability benefits? A lot of us have paid into medicare through our paycheck deductions. How about we cut congressional/presidential pay, extensive paid vacations and benefits and require them to contribute to Social Security? If the cuts are going to be felt by those on the bottom, it is time that the cuts also bubble up to the top as well. Also, it is time that those living in the governmental bubble start to understand what the general public have to deal with every day.
22
"But the real pay-for would be felt on two major entitlement programs. The deal would extend the sequester's cuts to mandatory spending through 2025, which mostly involves a 2 percent cut in reimbursements to Medicare doctors. That reduction was scheduled to expire in 2021 under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which put sequestration into place. It was extended to 2023 under Murray-Ryan deal.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals."
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals."
2
How fitting the Speaker Boehner's podium is labeled Sign The Bill. Why not? It's another Republican end run, the Democrats once again caved. More shell games with SS funds. Another lash of moral rectitude for the aged, disabled, widowed, orphaned. No COLA this year. Have any of these people actually shopped for their own groceries lately? Compromise on core issues? Instead of blinking again further vetoes/executive actions could be used. Is there a new 'emergency war' pending we don't know about yet? Training for another few Syrian counter insurgents? At a half a billion dollars for 5 doesn't sound like much of a bargain. Are we now to sigh with relief that Paul(we'll privatize Social Security)Ryan has taken over the Mad Hatter's Tea Party? Should we expect the Defense Budget to break through the 60% of discretionary spending ceiling? And the President we elect next year will get to face a new debt ceiling crisis a month after he or she assumes office in Jan. '17. Wow.
The candidate I'm supporting, the only one who has consistently displayed that NO is a complete sentence, is Sen. Bernie Sanders.
The candidate I'm supporting, the only one who has consistently displayed that NO is a complete sentence, is Sen. Bernie Sanders.
22
At first I was angry that Obama had cut parts of Social Security and Medicare. I felt he had sold us out. Then I realized that the 'us', the seniors, had voted for Romney by a 12% margin. Seniors are lucky the Democrats are as good as they are to them. If (mostly white) seniors want to slit their own throats, that's their right, but they drag the rest of us along with them. As the old saying goes, "No fool like an old fool."
12
Your statistics sound about right, and your point is a good one, but it's truly unfortunate you that you need to rely on an ageist saying to make your point.
3
All the proposals to cut social security are for future, not current beneficiaries.
Tell that to the Social Security recipients who will see stagnation in their check but increases in every single expense they have to pay, especially prescription drugs because the GOP passed a law preventing drug companies from reducing prices for Medicare. The GOP caters to corporations and their agenda of changing the course of democracy in our country.
It looks like Democrats are sounding the alarm because of the tie to social security disability funding. I get the concern. I also love the idea of an 18 month deal. We have to look at the whole deal.
2
Ihve worked for SS disability- the fraud is unbelievable.
9
I work currently for Social Security (whose view as an agency this post most certainly doesn't express, I'm offering my own individual opinion) writing disability decisions for an Administrative Law Judge whose job it is to make those decisions. Prior to that I was a "single decision maker" (technical jargon that matters for purposes of this discussion, ruling on disability claims at the state level. The 20 states it appears they want to join the rest of the nation are the Single Decision Maker states because, allegedly, single decision makers allow claims at higher rates-- or so said OIG in a report, found if you Google A-01-12-11218 and SSA OIG. But the report actually shows, first of all, that individual states, offices, and regions also vary widely in disability allowance rates, and does nothing to control for those differences. Far more important, table 2 of the report shows that in 10 of the 20 states, those that adopted the later "SDM II" model, allowance rates were actually lower--meaning that even more money would be saved by adopting it. In all other respects than allowance rate, SDM was judged to be a better model for adjudication by OIG, and based on ample professional experience I have to agree.
1
Thank you! The fraud is appalling and very real. I know countless personal examples and that is just in my own small circle of friends & family -- in the entire nation, the amount of fraud is vast and it includes collusion from dishonest law firms and doctors who rubber stamp claims.
there is hardly any fraud, less than 1 percent.... Stop making things up. Fraud- like the fraudsters on Wall St and their mortgage scammers that helped destroy this country, are still going unpunished.
This is another instance where those on the extremes of both parties decry what is obviously a compromise on both sides. If enacted it will prevent a debt crisis for quite some time. Republicans get increased military spending and some modest Medicare cuts. Democrats get increased domestic spending and remove the threat posed by the "Freedom Caucus" to shut down the government. All Americans benefit from government actually working. Hooray!
3
Since when is "domestic spending" only a win for democrats. Are you telling me that conservative ranchers grazing on public lands don't need the massive infrastructure that enables them to market their product. Are you telling me that conservative wheeler and dealers on Wall Street don't fly on airplanes or use the toilet. Everything, EVERYTHING that all of us have is dependent on a strong and active central government to keep the wheels rolling (domestic spending). Our Grandparents built this country by using a piece of the national wealth to build with. We've stopped doing that.
A cut in social security, which was running a surplus in receipts until 2010, is a bait and switch. Social Security has a "trust" of over 2.6 trillion dollars. This surplus, along with current payroll receipts, should be able to pay for benefits through 2036. Here's the problem. The Feds (republicans) have spent that 2.6 trillion so that they could cut taxes. Even so, all other receipts and the robbery from the trust fund, were not enough to prevent the explosion in the Federal debt. If they cut social security payments they can do two things. One, hide their thievery, and Two, get social security back in the black so that future surpluses can be robbed again, so that more tax cuts can be handed out. Here's another thought. You and I pay the same level of taxes as we did in 1980. So who got all those tax cuts? To fix social security is simple-tax all income and not have a ceiling at $111,0000
A cut in social security, which was running a surplus in receipts until 2010, is a bait and switch. Social Security has a "trust" of over 2.6 trillion dollars. This surplus, along with current payroll receipts, should be able to pay for benefits through 2036. Here's the problem. The Feds (republicans) have spent that 2.6 trillion so that they could cut taxes. Even so, all other receipts and the robbery from the trust fund, were not enough to prevent the explosion in the Federal debt. If they cut social security payments they can do two things. One, hide their thievery, and Two, get social security back in the black so that future surpluses can be robbed again, so that more tax cuts can be handed out. Here's another thought. You and I pay the same level of taxes as we did in 1980. So who got all those tax cuts? To fix social security is simple-tax all income and not have a ceiling at $111,0000
8
Some of the knee jerk expressions of horror at what seem like fairly sensible adjustments to medicare and disability payments show that the Tea Party folks aren't the only people who don't understand what compromise means.
5
Why should the disabled sacrifice for billionaires?
29
I am pretty sure most of us understood full well what "compromise" means. How about you tell us where is the compromise that isn't centered around the neediest, most vulnerable, oldest, sickest, most exploited in this country? Where is the "compromise" when it comes to the astronomically, obscenely wealthy paying more taxes? Where is the "compromise" when it comes to ending the trillions that have been transferred into the coffers of the wealthy while American citizens fight their wars, only to come home and have to beg and hold bake sales or rely on local do-gooders to get them the help they desperately need? "Compromise" is always on the backs that are most bent!
1
A ludicrous misrepresentation and public airing of pennies for Planned Parenthood, and now a last minute non-debated back door rug pull on our nation's most voiceless and vulnerable? Who are we?
29
Simple standard compromise. The Republicans get what they want and the Democrats eat crow.
Read the fine print and the in-between-the-lines carefully.
The war costs go up in and outside the budget which has been agreed to by Obama and the Democratic Party. Change we can be proud of?
But as we now must have learned, "The Republicans have a party and the People get the honor to pay for it."
We can see Bernie voting against it and the other Democratic candidate being silent or saying it is a good compromise, or they are for parts of it and against other parts or...
The polls will tell one candidate how to respond. Then we will know that person's position until the next poll.
Sanders doesn't need a poll.
That is the difference.
Read the fine print and the in-between-the-lines carefully.
The war costs go up in and outside the budget which has been agreed to by Obama and the Democratic Party. Change we can be proud of?
But as we now must have learned, "The Republicans have a party and the People get the honor to pay for it."
We can see Bernie voting against it and the other Democratic candidate being silent or saying it is a good compromise, or they are for parts of it and against other parts or...
The polls will tell one candidate how to respond. Then we will know that person's position until the next poll.
Sanders doesn't need a poll.
That is the difference.
23
Val in Brooklyn, NY to ed g in Warwick, NY
I hear you, every last word including re: Sanders. Thanks for the translation, painful though it is to stomach.
Submitted 10-26-15@11:02 p.m. EST
I hear you, every last word including re: Sanders. Thanks for the translation, painful though it is to stomach.
Submitted 10-26-15@11:02 p.m. EST
1
About half the country wants Planned Parenthood's parts brokers written out of the budget. Do you see the Dems letting go of that?
I don't want to infer that Mitch McConnell is just a disguise that Harry Reid wears, but has anyone ever actually SEEN the two in the same room at the same time?
I don't want to infer that Mitch McConnell is just a disguise that Harry Reid wears, but has anyone ever actually SEEN the two in the same room at the same time?
5
What half of the country do you mean? Half of the red state country?
Planned Parenthood is not a "parts broker" as you so crudely state. If you knew anything about them, you would know how they save women's lives with screenings and tests. But the phony pro-life people gave given PP a black eye because they are against abortion but they are not for the child once born. The same phony pro-life are the GOP who cut funding for public education, healthcare, food for families and decent housing while giving corporations and big oil passes on their taxes, farm credits, oil credits. Name calling is a sign of the un-informed.
Planned Parenthood is not a "parts broker" as you so crudely state. If you knew anything about them, you would know how they save women's lives with screenings and tests. But the phony pro-life people gave given PP a black eye because they are against abortion but they are not for the child once born. The same phony pro-life are the GOP who cut funding for public education, healthcare, food for families and decent housing while giving corporations and big oil passes on their taxes, farm credits, oil credits. Name calling is a sign of the un-informed.
1
I just re-read this and I am confused about disability benefits. Will existing people on disability have their benefits reduced to pay for the medical exams in the 20 states that currently do not do the exams but will with this deal? Or, is there no actual money cut to those currently receiving disability?
I went to Politico after reading the Times story and Politico reports how angry the Republican Tea Partiers are and how Obama got everything he wanted. So I then re-read this story in the Times and am (hopefully) wrong about thinking there will be cuts to existing disability payments.
I went to Politico after reading the Times story and Politico reports how angry the Republican Tea Partiers are and how Obama got everything he wanted. So I then re-read this story in the Times and am (hopefully) wrong about thinking there will be cuts to existing disability payments.
5
Cutting disability benefits would push folks into nursing homes, homeless shelters and even more perilous shelters. Requiring medical exams in 50 states would be a welcome standard.
9
Can you clarify what "previously agreed-upon budget caps" means? Does that mean the sequester baseline? Or does that mean from where we're at right now (the Murray-Ryan levels agreed to nearly two years ago)? No news organization seems to have reported this clearly.
4
There have been 5 or 10 ''laws'' passed requiring such things as balanced budgets and pay-as-you-go. All are routinely disregarded by voice vote whenever spending comes up by the elites of D.C. representing both parties.
Previously agreed-upon-whatevers are a paragraph lower on the same page of verbal redundancy on the Speaker's podium. A podium of odium.
Previously agreed-upon-whatevers are a paragraph lower on the same page of verbal redundancy on the Speaker's podium. A podium of odium.
2
".....but it would call for cuts on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits, officials said."
NO!!! That a Democratic administration would be a party to such cuts represents the ultimate betrayal.
This kind of softness in the face of Republican attacks on everything even remotely progressive cost the Democrats control of the Congress; too many of them simply wouldn't run on what they supposedly stand for. When you don't give your base a reason to vote for you, they'll just stay home.
Ironically, it takes an Independent senator running for president to show the Democrats how to rediscover their soul.
NO!!! That a Democratic administration would be a party to such cuts represents the ultimate betrayal.
This kind of softness in the face of Republican attacks on everything even remotely progressive cost the Democrats control of the Congress; too many of them simply wouldn't run on what they supposedly stand for. When you don't give your base a reason to vote for you, they'll just stay home.
Ironically, it takes an Independent senator running for president to show the Democrats how to rediscover their soul.
20
I am stunned. Social Security and Medicare are pillars of Democratic (yes, with a capital D) achievements. I cannot believe that Obama is going to agree to this. The reduction of S.S. benefits at a time like this, when on top of everything else medical costs are rising, is not only a nightmare for millions of retirees, but potential suicide for the Democratic Party. Clinton and Sanders need to jump on this and very quickly and strongly state their differences with the president, reaffirming the party's commitment to its historical (well, at least since the New Deal) base.
34
Obama finally got his "Grand Bargain". What a legacy!
6
You shouldn't be. Social Security Disability is subject to a good deal of fraud, and requiring that medical exams be extended to the 20 states that don't have them. The deal also reallocates funds so that some Medicare recipients who were facing a huge cost-of-living increased will now be spared this, You need to understand the details before criticizing this. I hope Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are not finessed into opposing something that is ultimately good for lower income people due to a need to respond to knee jerk reactions.
6
I am disabled and know some disabled folks via the internet and they have not "gamed the system" This so called fraud is almost non-existent. I would lose my home. I cannot afford to give up a dime. Who thinks that 125% of poverty is a lot? Try living on it. I pay half almost half my disability to medical expenses. My car is sitting in the driveway because I cannot afford to fix it.
8
Perfect. After wasting $4.5 million of the people's money in the Benghazi witch-hunt, Republicans can now reclaim the mantle as the party of fiscal responsibility.
17
Do you realize the cost to the tax payer for Obamas last vacation to Hawaii to play golf was more than twice that amount all picked up by you and me.
2
Just make this up or would you like to share where you got the $9 million you allege a POTUS trip to Hawaii cost?
1
i wonder what these Reaganomics Republicans who have been insulting the homeless on a companion blog on the Times have to say about this? "Go ahead and cut SS , SSI, Disability and Medicare"? If these cuts go through the number of homeless in NYC will jump significantly. Manhattan will become an island for the rich much sooner. What has de Blasio and other left wingers have to say? Has anyone at the Times bother to ask?
3
So first they are going to make new applicants for social security disability benefits take a medical exam and then they are going to reallocate money in the trust fund to ensure there is enough left to pay those who qualify. To top that off they are going to prevent increases to Medicare premiums. Sounds kind of like a bipartisan way to run the government. I wish they had put that information at the beginning of the story instead of at the end.
13
Take the money from the old and to poor and protect the 1% at all cost - That's our dear Obama's Change.
17
Only the most vulnerable--the disabled--will pay any price for this Grand Bargain. A great example of American Exceptionalism.
27
As long as the lobbyists get all they paid for, I guess we can have a budget.
11
Yet again, and again, and again... the budget is balanced on the backs of the poor.
SHAME on this administration for acquiescing!
SHAME on this administration for acquiescing!
34
Death Panels?
Thats what the GOP called them when they accused the Dems of creating in the Affordable Health Care act. Well, now Obama and the GOP congress has chosen to collude in creating the real Death Panel and its called the US government.
Thats what the GOP called them when they accused the Dems of creating in the Affordable Health Care act. Well, now Obama and the GOP congress has chosen to collude in creating the real Death Panel and its called the US government.
8
Hoppin' mad about the cuts to Medicare and Social Security? Call or email your congress people and the White House pronto.
9
Why cut Medicare? Is it that big of a line item? Won't that cost more in the long run as the elderly get sicker?
My mother is 92. Do Boehner and Ryan have parents that age who rely on Medicare.
Or is it cowtowing to the arch conservatives?
Don't give in Barak!!!
My mother is 92. Do Boehner and Ryan have parents that age who rely on Medicare.
Or is it cowtowing to the arch conservatives?
Don't give in Barak!!!
6
It is a big line item, but there are better ways to handle it than just cutting it. We could focus more on preventive care, cut down on payments to providers, and stop the fee service where every test is totaled separately for the doctors. Making insurance more affordable for people to use private insurance would help. Controlling drug costs would help.
We pay twice as much for health care in this country than others for less care. The ACA was a small step towards controlling costs, but far more is needed. But you need a congress willing to work on it.
We pay twice as much for health care in this country than others for less care. The ACA was a small step towards controlling costs, but far more is needed. But you need a congress willing to work on it.
3
This is infuriating.
I just want back every penny I put into Social Security in my 45+ years working if all I'm going to get back for the two or three years of retirement I can afford to take is enough to keep me eating dog food while defense contractors and do-nothing congressmen have generations worth of wealth to pass on.
I just want back every penny I put into Social Security in my 45+ years working if all I'm going to get back for the two or three years of retirement I can afford to take is enough to keep me eating dog food while defense contractors and do-nothing congressmen have generations worth of wealth to pass on.
11
Have you seen the price of dog food lately?
Holy Cow!
Did anyone actually read this article or did you all just start shouting?
Nothing was said about cutting anything for Social Security or Medicare. They may be doing it, but it's not stated here. The article says that they will require a medical test for people receiving disability and that money will be shifted AS IT HAS BEEN NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE PAST to better fit the needs of Social Security and Medicare.
Take a breath. Then reread the article before you whip out your 2nd Amendment guaranteed weapons and just start shooting. For a party that thinks it's the smart one, most people hear would fail reading comprehension on the SAT.
Did anyone actually read this article or did you all just start shouting?
Nothing was said about cutting anything for Social Security or Medicare. They may be doing it, but it's not stated here. The article says that they will require a medical test for people receiving disability and that money will be shifted AS IT HAS BEEN NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE PAST to better fit the needs of Social Security and Medicare.
Take a breath. Then reread the article before you whip out your 2nd Amendment guaranteed weapons and just start shooting. For a party that thinks it's the smart one, most people hear would fail reading comprehension on the SAT.
6
"Those increases would be offset by cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits".
It seems that cuts is exactly what they are saying.
It seems that cuts is exactly what they are saying.
4
"Those increases would be offset by cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits, as well as savings or revenue from an array of other programs,..."
Actually it looks like you would fail reading comprehension on the SAT.
Actually it looks like you would fail reading comprehension on the SAT.
1
@mj: I agree and I am one who panicked. I saw 'cuts to social security disability' and though I think the article is somewhat confusing regarding disability, you are absolutely correct. And now I think I can exhale. :)
4
Cuts to Medicare and Social Security? How about higher taxes on the very rich instead?
Oh, that's right. We live in a plutocracy with a government working for the very rich.
Oh, that's right. We live in a plutocracy with a government working for the very rich.
26
This is exactly why I'm voting for Bernie Sanders !
1
So what is the cut to Social Security Disability? I can't believe they'd cut people who NEED every penny! Why not close one or two of the way-too-many military bases around this world that we think we own but we don't? Am I angry? YES. When will Democrats stand UP for us?
18
It was under Obama that the formula for this years cola for SS was changed to include retail gas prices thus giving granny angd grandpa no increase.
2
Not mentioned in this article is one of the most frightening facts - that Mr.Ryan would be second in line to ascend to the Presidency. What economic havoc could he wreck then?
13
You promised "Hope and Change", Sir.
How does an increased military budget paid for with cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reconcile with your promise?
Do you really believe that's what We The People voted for?
And you were the "liberal"?
My God, we're in trouble, Folks.
How does an increased military budget paid for with cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reconcile with your promise?
Do you really believe that's what We The People voted for?
And you were the "liberal"?
My God, we're in trouble, Folks.
12
What I don't understand is: Why are cuts to Social Security and Medicare even doable in a budget "deal"? Don't we pay for those benefits separately, rather than through the income taxes that fund everything other than those two programs? Given that payroll taxes are already the most regressive tax ever invented, we need a constitutional amendment making that money untouchable for anything other than retirement/disability benefits!
16
Read the article. There is no mention of cutting SS and Medicare. The cuts are from disability payments, adding physicals in all states. There is a feeling that there is a lot of abuse in mental illness diagnoses.
Does this now set the "happy" precedent that every time we want a budget deal (and not just CRs), the Speaker of the House needs to resign? Maybe we can call it the Boehner rule.
2
To all of those who feel that Bernie Sanders will fix everything, please tell me how he will get Congress to pass his perfectly progressive budget. Politicians have to deal with the situation as it is, not how they wish it could be.
6
"please tell me how he will get Congress to pass his perfectly progressive budget"
He's been very very clear about this:
1. Refuse to budge on obvious stuff like protecting Social Security and Medicare, and loudly vetoing every budget proposal that comes his way that threatens them.
2. Encourage citizens to contact their representatives and demand that they do what is best for the nation as a whole.
3. If that doesn't work, announce congressional representatives are doing to their constituents, which will encourage them to elect new congressional representatives.
One thing Sanders does extremely well is present a case for liberal ideas to voters who are not traditionally liberal (e.g. the folks at Liberty University). He has the support of about 1/3 of Republicans in his home state of Vermont for a reason. I'm of the viewpoint that giving him the Oval Office would really challenge Republicans on their home turf in a way that Hillary Clinton never would.
He's been very very clear about this:
1. Refuse to budge on obvious stuff like protecting Social Security and Medicare, and loudly vetoing every budget proposal that comes his way that threatens them.
2. Encourage citizens to contact their representatives and demand that they do what is best for the nation as a whole.
3. If that doesn't work, announce congressional representatives are doing to their constituents, which will encourage them to elect new congressional representatives.
One thing Sanders does extremely well is present a case for liberal ideas to voters who are not traditionally liberal (e.g. the folks at Liberty University). He has the support of about 1/3 of Republicans in his home state of Vermont for a reason. I'm of the viewpoint that giving him the Oval Office would really challenge Republicans on their home turf in a way that Hillary Clinton never would.
5
OK, so President Obama can finally deliver on his desire to cut Medicare and Social Security. The Democrats are lost in the wilderness if they truly think this is the way forward. We've lost eight years under this President.
9
This reporter ought to read his own paper's columnists; Paul Krugman, for example. He might refrain then from characterizing Ryan's hollow rhetoric as "bold ideas." Ryan put together a make-believe budget with made-up numbers that "proved" yet again how trickle-down economics, tax cuts for the super rich, etc., would be an amazing elixir for the USA. Krugman has called Ryan a "flim-flam man" and a "snake oil salesman," and that's exactly what he is. There is nothing bold abot him except his mendacity and raw ambition. He will be the faux-Speaker of a do-nothing, obstructionist Congress controlled by a corrupt entity that used to be a political party .
23
No doubt, the devil will be in the details. But just once in Obama's presidency I would like him to tell the Republicans that if they want to reduce the deficit, then they must (1) raise the income tax rate of the rich, or at least close some of the loopholes used by the rich; and (2) reduce the defense budget.
This deal stinks. It sounds like increases in defense spending and cuts to Medicare. Who will not suffer from cuts to Medicare? You guessed it - the rich.
This deal stinks. It sounds like increases in defense spending and cuts to Medicare. Who will not suffer from cuts to Medicare? You guessed it - the rich.
25
Congrats, they already did that! When the Bush tax cuts expired for high income earners (but not for everybody else), rich people's taxes went up. Then they also got tagged with Obamacare taxes. In the meantime, defense spending was cut. Read up on sequestration.
3
It only slowed down the rate of increase for the military, plus this deal would increase spending for the military.
And the rich still don't pay their fair share of taxes, they could afford to pay more and stop asking the rest of us to sacrifice for them.
And the rich still don't pay their fair share of taxes, they could afford to pay more and stop asking the rest of us to sacrifice for them.
2
President Obama has already done both of those things in past negotiations. The American Taxpayer Reform Act of 2012, which was enacted by the lame duck Congress on January 1, 2013, allowed the Bush tax cuts for those with incomes above $400,000 ($450,000 for married couples) to expire. That increased the marginal tax rate from 35% to 39.6% on ordinary income and from 15% to 20% on capital gains income. In addition, the Clinton tax provisions that phased out of tax deductions and credits for those with incomes above $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples) were reinstated. The estate tax was increased from 35% of the amount above $5,120,000 to 40% of the amount over $5,000,000. The ACA, which of course was enacted without any Republican agreement, reduced the deficit by imposing a 3.8% Medicare Part A tax on investment income for those with total income above $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples) as well as increasing the tax from 2.9% to 3.8% on ordinary income of those above those limits. To put that in perspective, the carried interst income that Mitt Romney paid 15% tax on in 2012 was taxed at 23.8% in 2013.
In the negotiations that led to the increase in the debt limit to stave off default in August 2011, the deal included almost $1 trillion in defense spending cuts over ten years. Most of those cuts for FY 2013 through 2016 have been implemented.
In the negotiations that led to the increase in the debt limit to stave off default in August 2011, the deal included almost $1 trillion in defense spending cuts over ten years. Most of those cuts for FY 2013 through 2016 have been implemented.
2
As already pointed out by others, many Americans saw their 401ks drop close to 10% in the last round of wrangling over the debt ceiling. This time around - close to an election- a stunt like that may well be political suicide.
8
After reading about the deal Mr. Boehner has been working on as his gift to Paul Ryan and the rest of the Republicans in the House before he steps down as Speaker, I said to myself " These Republicans are __it-heads for making cuts to Medicare and Social Security part of their bargain. What has happened to this country? We are one of the wealthiest, most successful countries in the world, and our Congressional leaders don't even have the decency to take care of the poorest people in the land.
We can afford to keep these programs going and to make modest increases in them if we want to do so. It is that a minority of really creepy, fiscally-paranoid, far-right members of Congress insist we stop funding social services at the expense of corporate welfare and our defense budget. They have no problems with these Federal expenditures. But, when it comes to helping out ordinary people with social programs, they balk like old mules. It makes me sick.
46
Didn't Obama promis the clean debt limit raise not negotiable?
"It also would give Mr. Ryan a clean start as speaker and Republicans a reset on trying to convince voters that they can be an effective governing majority." "Clean start" means he and the GOP don'tt have to take responsibility for cuts in social security and medicare. Will someone explain to me why sacrificing the disabled so that Mr. Ryan gets a "clean start" is good for the country.
OK - let's let Bernie and Hillary speak up on this one. Do they support it or not? Yes or no.
"It also would give Mr. Ryan a clean start as speaker and Republicans a reset on trying to convince voters that they can be an effective governing majority." "Clean start" means he and the GOP don'tt have to take responsibility for cuts in social security and medicare. Will someone explain to me why sacrificing the disabled so that Mr. Ryan gets a "clean start" is good for the country.
OK - let's let Bernie and Hillary speak up on this one. Do they support it or not? Yes or no.
10
Which Presidential candidate will stand up on the Medicare and Disability cuts? This is where the rubber meets the road on Presidential leadership. Obama has failed the test repeatedly on this issue. Will anyone promise to do better?
8
Bernie Sanders
"Mr. Obama and Democratic leaders had insisted that any increases in military spending be matched with equal increases in spending on nonmilitary programs. The deal under consideration appears to meet that goal, ..."
How so, Mr. Obama and Dems-when SS and Medicare will be cut? Is this called "talking out of both sides of the mouth"? I just hope poor-Republican- voters in Southern States realize when they sent their "limited government" representatives to Dee-Cee, they also voted for a cut to their benefits: The tragedy of low-information-non-thinking voters who cause everyone else pain.
How so, Mr. Obama and Dems-when SS and Medicare will be cut? Is this called "talking out of both sides of the mouth"? I just hope poor-Republican- voters in Southern States realize when they sent their "limited government" representatives to Dee-Cee, they also voted for a cut to their benefits: The tragedy of low-information-non-thinking voters who cause everyone else pain.
15
When Democrats are as unreasonable in favor of most Americans' wants and needs as the Tea Party GOP is to enrich the already rich, we may see the USA again.
14
On the surface, this actually sounds like good news because the 19% cut might be averted. But the real what's-in-store for SSDI recipients might instead be found here:
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/258165-gop-eying-social-security-re...
So lets see, Heritage Foundation says a 19% cut would put the average SSDI check below federal poverty level. Then they endorse a flat benefit tied to that poverty level to keep us, well, at the poverty level, regardless of how much we paid into the system.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/258165-gop-eying-social-security-re...
So lets see, Heritage Foundation says a 19% cut would put the average SSDI check below federal poverty level. Then they endorse a flat benefit tied to that poverty level to keep us, well, at the poverty level, regardless of how much we paid into the system.
16
Obama's solution to get Republicans to raise the debt ceiling is to put the Social Security Trust Fund and Medicare on the chopping block and with the Republicans swing away. It's the greatest betrayal. Obama's tried to direct as much of the blow towards the disabled as opposed to the elderly (for now) because the elderly are a more unified/powerful voting bloc. Nonetheless, the die has been cast. Obama wants a deal so badly (what else is new) that if the Republican Congress refuses to pay for things they've already bought (it's what raising the debt ceiling is) he'll sell out the American people. Once it's done, a precedent with be set; anytime the Republicans throw a fit Social Security and Medicare will receive even deeper cuts. Remember this well, if Social Security and Medicare die history will show it was Obama who held the knife. Does anyone wonder why Democrats are flocking to Bernie Sanders? Despite my admiration for Sanders I never thought I'd vote for him, but I'm most definitely going to vote for him now. Once Obama is done with this reprehensible deal he will be free to move on to his next pet project; the TPP. He can then give big Pharma and Wall Street what they want and decimate American workers. "Hope," "Forward," these were the catchwords Obama ran on. Obama's only true words are "Audacity" and "Change." His Audacity is not "Boldness" but "Arrogant Disregard" for others. "Change" is for the worse. He's betrayed every principle he claimed to have stood for.
20
Is Congress going to receive a pay raise?
9
Probably not. They have not gotten a pay raise since 2009 and despite the 27th Amendment to the Constitution which provides "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." have enacted laws to cancelling raises that were required by the law in effect at the time of the last election. If one member had the guts to bring a suit for the pay that he was deprived of by these unconstitutional actions he would win, but it appears none of them do.
By the way, the president has declared for the seventh year in a row that the regular increase in civil service pay schedules, designed to keep pace with the private workforce, should be limited due to the economic emergency.
By the way, the president has declared for the seventh year in a row that the regular increase in civil service pay schedules, designed to keep pace with the private workforce, should be limited due to the economic emergency.
1
So now Republicans are insisting on cutting back aid for the disabled in exchange for not shutting down the government. Nice family values. Such a sweet group of people.
23
Not raising the debt limit does not cause a default. It simply means the government's spending is limited to the taxes coming in. Reporters are either misinformed or deliberately deceiving us.
6
"Not raising the debt limit does not cause a default. It simply means the government's spending is limited to the taxes coming in. Reporters are either misinformed or deliberately deceiving us."
That's false. The government has committed to certain outlays (such as debt payments and Social Security payments) that it cannot choose to fulfill or not. If the government does not make its debt payments it will by definition default. It's exactly the same as me racking up huge credit card bills then deciding I don't want to pay them.
That's false. The government has committed to certain outlays (such as debt payments and Social Security payments) that it cannot choose to fulfill or not. If the government does not make its debt payments it will by definition default. It's exactly the same as me racking up huge credit card bills then deciding I don't want to pay them.
1
Democrats complain about the results of these negotiations and yet they don't show up for the midterm elections because they can't be bothered.
Sounds like generally a good deal to me. We give way too much money from the young to the old in this country. Older citizens have had decades to save for themselves, and should have done so. Children need education and they are not, in direct contrast to older people, in control of their own destiny at that stage of life.
Sounds like generally a good deal to me. We give way too much money from the young to the old in this country. Older citizens have had decades to save for themselves, and should have done so. Children need education and they are not, in direct contrast to older people, in control of their own destiny at that stage of life.
2
And what about people on disability? Have they been able to 'save' all these years? No. How can they on the measly amounts they have to live on? Your compassion is just overwhelming.
1
Older people have been paying social security tax their entire working lives with the understanding that it would be there for them. And if you've looked lately at the benefit it's very hard to live solely on social security income in old age. Plus it's not like cuts to the very minimal level of income and health security would go to children, or incentives for clean energy; they go to tax breaks for those who don't need them, and to maintain the defense budget which is a protected cash cow for an employment sector that votes with these guys.
2
Sure let's balance the budget on the backs of he elderly and the sick
18
"increase spending by $80 billion, not including emergency war funding"
STOP right there!
emergency war? what on earth are they thinking??????
Have we not had enough wars? are we funding 'old wars' (which obviously we are not winning, hence 'old'). New wars on the horizon?
We truly learn nothing, do we?
STOP right there!
emergency war? what on earth are they thinking??????
Have we not had enough wars? are we funding 'old wars' (which obviously we are not winning, hence 'old'). New wars on the horizon?
We truly learn nothing, do we?
21
Maybe the war funding has something to do with Obama's decision to keep troops in Afghanistan.
Has no one been paying attention? Obama has been trying to get SS & Medicare cuts since his first budget negotiations. Neither party cares what the voters want. They only care about who gets credit with Wall Street for the cuts.
18
Cuts to disability benefits ... Jesus would be so proud of these self-proclaimed "Christians."
20
And the Season of Hypocrisy is coming right up. Yep, Jesus would be so proud of these Republicans.
1
The congress has the best medical care; a salary that is ludicrous for the work that they fail to produce and a disgusting lack of understanding what's happening outside the DC bubble.
The people need to rise up and toss these Republicans back to their
country clubs.
The people need to rise up and toss these Republicans back to their
country clubs.
25
What does Social Security and Medicare have to do with balancing the budget? SSI pays for itself. It gets robbed by Congress. The GOP chips away at those programs which Americans make contributions to, unlike corporations or the very wealthy who just get richer from the Reaganomics of the last 30 plus years. God forbid they make concessions.
27
Medical costs are definitely rising, so reducing Medicare at the same tine as providing no COLA increase is absurd. Possible incoming Speaker Ryan has proposed privatizing both Social Security and Medicare. This would be a windfall or the middlemen in the financial industry at the expense of the elderly. Thank you GOP for the results of your holding the country hostage -not!!!
12
Obama has been pushing for 7 years for a grand bargain which would include cuts to Medicare & SS. This fits within his simplistic framework to revive the economy (upgrade the quality of the American workforce through educational "reform", cut the growing cost of medical care via ObamaCare; rebuild aging infrastructure; expand trade via the Pacific Trade Partnership; and reduce the coming "bankruptcy" of Medicare & SS by various cuts). The plan is internally logical but simplistic and based on false assumptions and analysis.
And in the 11th hour it looks like he will get his way and start undercutting the safety net for seniors.
And in the 11th hour it looks like he will get his way and start undercutting the safety net for seniors.
15
Are you aware that Medicare and SS were Republican demands, not the President's?
Cuts to SSA and Medicare? Why? Are they running surpluses while the boomers are aging? Or is this some sort of ransom paid for not having our credit rating damaged in default, with the hope that the public won't notice that there wouldn't BE a default threat were it not for a radical fringe group in Congress given license to threaten their colleagues with rigged districts back home? This is government by blackmail. And its happening because unscrupulous politicians would rather pick their voters for purpose-built districts, than let voters exercise their choice in a fair election. Its the political class that is bankrupt, not America.
13
So as parting gifts to John Boehner, President Barack Obama will sell out seniors on Medicare AND Social Security - is this Obama's last sellout to the Republicans or is worse still to come?
This makes support for increasing Medicare and Social Security payments to seniors - question number one for Hillary and Bernie before they get our votes !!!!
This makes support for increasing Medicare and Social Security payments to seniors - question number one for Hillary and Bernie before they get our votes !!!!
14
But the real pay-for would be felt on two major entitlement programs. The deal would extend the sequester's cuts to mandatory spending through 2025, which mostly involves a 2 percent cut in reimbursements to Medicare doctors. That reduction was scheduled to expire in 2021 under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which put sequestration into place. It was extended to 2023 under Murray-Ryan deal.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals.
From the Huffington Post.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals.
From the Huffington Post.
Did Boehner fully comprehend Pope Francis' message when he heard the address a few weeks ago? Does he want this pending bill to seal his legacy?
8
Jesus would be so proud, right? Take help away from the least among us. What is the MATTER WITH AMERICA? Who ARE we?
Heaven forfend we cut funding for bombing hospitals in Aghanistan, or drone attacks on weddings in Yemen.
17
Cuts to social insurance programs like Old Age and Survivor Income and Medicare are unacceptable. The cuts in taxes for the wealthiest Americans over the last 35 years would more than pay for a dignified retirement for our seniors, as would the 2 trillion+ squandered in our pointless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. American citizens must insist on a "clean" raising of the debt ceiling instead of giving in to the economic terrorists on the right-wing fringe of the GOP.
13
This is not a budget that any normal, taxpaying American would approve.
9
After reading about the deal Mr. Boehner has been working on as his gift to Paul Ryan and the rest of the Republicans in the House before he steps down as Speaker, I said to myself " These Republicans are __it-heads for making cuts to Medicare and Social Security part of their bargain. What has happened to this country? We are one of the wealthiest, most successful countries in the world, and our Congressional leaders don't even have the decency to take care of the poorest people in the land.
We can afford to keep these programs going and to make modest increases in them if we want to do so. It is that a minority of really creepy, fiscally-paranoid, far-right members of Congress insist we stop funding social services at the expense of corporate welfare and our defense budget. They have no problems with these Federal expenditures. But, when it comes to helping out ordinary people with social programs, they balk like old mules. It makes me sick.
10
Where are the cuts to Congressional salaries?
65
I will oppose any, and I mean any, political leader who does not oppose cutting Medicare and Social Security benefits.
19
After paying into Social Security and Medicare for all of our working lives, These programs support us in our retirement, as they should.
What have you got against me and Daphne?
What have you got against me and Daphne?
1
As we have seen over the years, the Republicans target those least able to fight back. That means those on the lower economic ladder.
Their ideology tells them don't raise taxes, no matter what the need for it. The irony is, a great many of their supporters do not earn enough to pay taxes, like those in the trailer parks in this city, with a median income of $23,500, and they vote 66% GOP.
Congress is too cowardly to restore the Bush tax cuts, that would be an admission of failure; they just pretend it worked.
The big target is military spending, but the majority of that spending goes to workers in the defense industries. Cuts there will affect Dems and Repubs alike. Try to get reelected after your vote causes layoffs there.
The tax laws allow corporations to park profits in other countries, which keeps them from paying taxes on that money, while still enjoying American protections.
The most egregious tax avoidance is in the hedge fund industry. These are only open to people with $1 million, or in many cases a minimum of $5 or$10 million. The funds charge 2% on investment, the managers keep 20% of the gains called carried interest, those are taxed at 15%.
These conservative voters in my district deserve any cuts in benefits they get, they voted for them. I do feel sorry for those who did not, but maybe they will start beating their GOP neighbors with their canes and crutches.
Their ideology tells them don't raise taxes, no matter what the need for it. The irony is, a great many of their supporters do not earn enough to pay taxes, like those in the trailer parks in this city, with a median income of $23,500, and they vote 66% GOP.
Congress is too cowardly to restore the Bush tax cuts, that would be an admission of failure; they just pretend it worked.
The big target is military spending, but the majority of that spending goes to workers in the defense industries. Cuts there will affect Dems and Repubs alike. Try to get reelected after your vote causes layoffs there.
The tax laws allow corporations to park profits in other countries, which keeps them from paying taxes on that money, while still enjoying American protections.
The most egregious tax avoidance is in the hedge fund industry. These are only open to people with $1 million, or in many cases a minimum of $5 or$10 million. The funds charge 2% on investment, the managers keep 20% of the gains called carried interest, those are taxed at 15%.
These conservative voters in my district deserve any cuts in benefits they get, they voted for them. I do feel sorry for those who did not, but maybe they will start beating their GOP neighbors with their canes and crutches.
32
These are the consequences of voting these clowns in. They want to reduce SS and Medicare funding. If the Congress is in session for 10 days after delivery to President Obama, I believe that the bill becomes law without his signature (correct me if i am wrong, I am not a constitutional scholar). This is what I hope the president will do, let the bill become law without his signature and let the chips fall where they may.
3
Why do they have to 'gut' Social Security and essential benfits for the people who can least afford it?
25
Why do they have to cut already meager Social Security disability benefits? It's not like disabled people can get a job to supplement their income. Pick on someone who can fight back, for the love of Pete.
4
If Obama signs this he is pretty much handing the next election to the GOP.
4
Nonsense. Take the budget and the debt ceiling off the table! The outline of the deal as currently indicated seem fine. Yes, it may be nice to dare the recalcitrant Republicans to play out the clock and maybe even force a short government shutdown, but enough of these games. Especially, stop toying with the debt ceiling. We (Democrats) don't have to play these games as long as there is a solid 2-year budget without any ridiculous demands (e.g., defund the ACA or defund the PPF, etc.), and especially including at least a 2-year debt ceiling increase. Then we can get on with the 2016 elections. We can certainly win, and by no means is this "handing the next election to the GOP." Let's lead by example. Sanity first!
1
Ah, keeping billions in Shell subsidies alive on the backs of the poor, elderly, and disabled! That's the America I know.
53
A deal that is disliked equally on both sides of the aisle is probably a pretty good compromise.
54
Facile, at best.
1
Oh please. And I suppose that budget cuts that no voters support (like this one) are pretty good democracy. Right.
The consequences of the Republicans getting what they want: Thousands of elderly Americans will die due to starvation and lack of medical care. Thousands of disabled people, including children, will meet the same fate.
The consequences of the Democrats getting what they want: The quarterly earnings of billionaires will be somewhat lower this year.
To say that this is a "pretty good" compromise is to forget the basic ideas of morality in favor of selfishness.
The consequences of the Democrats getting what they want: The quarterly earnings of billionaires will be somewhat lower this year.
To say that this is a "pretty good" compromise is to forget the basic ideas of morality in favor of selfishness.
1
Let's not cut military spending. That's always been a wise investment ever since WWII. Wise for the war-profiteers that is. For the rest of Americans and the world, it's always been a catastrophe monetarily & in lives.
27
Let me add just one thing about Social Security Disability. If one has a relative who depends on it for their rent and health care (because they have Medicare deducted from the payments), the thought of a 20-25% reduction in the payments in 2016 has serious implications. So if Congress and the White House can negotiate a deal to move money from the regular fund to the disability fund, I'm inclined to support it, so long as the rest of the agreement plays fair.
9
Since SS disability payments were going to be cut by 20% next year and with this deal they won't be, I don't understand why so many people are ranting about it.
I wonder if they read anything past the headline.
I wonder if they read anything past the headline.
1
Obama will sell the people who elected him down the river.
Count on it.
This has been obvious since the beginning of his second term. Loss all the high-toned palaver and you basically have Republican Lite. The GOP has played him like a cheap violin.
Count on it.
This has been obvious since the beginning of his second term. Loss all the high-toned palaver and you basically have Republican Lite. The GOP has played him like a cheap violin.
8
Here's how the budget process works now:
1) Republicans move far right of extreme right on their opening budget proposal
2) Democrats and the President counter with a reasonable "centrist" budget proposal
3) Republicans threaten to shut down the government if all right of extreme right demands are not met
4) Democrats in Congress and the President "compromise" with the right of extreme right Republicans and sign a "merely" extreme right wing budget
And We The People lose again.
Democrats seem to have no concept of effective negotiation concepts...
What happened to Democrats with the guts and the gumption to say what is best, and do what's best for 99% of the American People? The Democratic Party is now established as Centrist Right.
Which leaves We The People with only one alternative: Bernie Sanders
1) Republicans move far right of extreme right on their opening budget proposal
2) Democrats and the President counter with a reasonable "centrist" budget proposal
3) Republicans threaten to shut down the government if all right of extreme right demands are not met
4) Democrats in Congress and the President "compromise" with the right of extreme right Republicans and sign a "merely" extreme right wing budget
And We The People lose again.
Democrats seem to have no concept of effective negotiation concepts...
What happened to Democrats with the guts and the gumption to say what is best, and do what's best for 99% of the American People? The Democratic Party is now established as Centrist Right.
Which leaves We The People with only one alternative: Bernie Sanders
42
True. Electing Clinton would, at best, slow down the movement rightward.
"...the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion."
About time a medical exam was required by ALL to qualify for SS Disability. Why wasn't this policy in place decades ago???
About time a medical exam was required by ALL to qualify for SS Disability. Why wasn't this policy in place decades ago???
11
Multiple medical exams are required now. This refers to a particular kind of exam, the details of which--who administers it, where, etc.--I don't know; I haven't be able to find out. But yes, exams are required, and doctor's notes and records with them. It is hard to succeed in getting benefits, and recipients face frequent requirements for more exams and paperwork. (I haven't ever received any government benefits, aside from public schooling and so forth, but have a good friend stricken with MS and stripped financially by medical bills who is on disability now.)
2
Really? Cut Social Security disability benefits. How mean and evil are these people?Most people who collect SS disability are barely hanging on as it is. My physically and emotionally disabled sister marginally survives. She has not had a raise in many years. She had to get rid of her cat that provided her solace because she could not afford to keep him. Yeah, let's save a few pennies by kicking the down and out.
55
This is the kind of stuff I've come to expect out of Obama. And if Hillary gets the nomination I'm afraid that I'll have to continue expecting it. There is only one candidate who will defend Social Security (and Medicare and Medicaid), and that is Bernie Sanders. Hillary would just be more Republican-lite.
50
Mr and Mrs elderly White person; you ain't seen nothing yet. Just wait until Paul Ryan becomes speaker of the house. He has been aching to cut social security and privatize Medicare . Again, your vote for republicans have consequences or should have consequences. There is no more room to cut black youth, food stamps and childhood school lunches.
11
Many elderly people vote democratic. Some of us have fought since Reagan's time, and have succeeded sometimes, and have catastrophically lost, too. And there are fairly large numbers of middle-aged people voting republican, you may be sure, and young people also. The desire to divide us by age, race, or religion is one to avoid; cutting social security makes it harder to preserve--and we need to preserve it also for you. Food stamps help the elderly poor and children, as well as others. We love our children and grandchildren, too. So it's not a zero-sum game; we're all in it together. And all of us need to address our peers, our elders, and our youth about these matters, and stand together now.
2
I said in a post last week, it is easy to go after low hanging fruit on the tree and this is perfect example. I will also agree that there are abuses in the various programs that are designed to help those that less fortunate but I wonder how rampant the abuse is, anecdotal stories notwithstanding. SNAP has a fraud rate of about 1%,http://www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2013/fns-001213. Some military programs need careful examination, the F35, has been development for years and we only have one combat ready squadron. Notable by absence are farm subsidies. Do farms, not true family farms, owned by large agricultural corporations really need subsidies? Is R&D by multinationals down outside the US deductible by IRS rules? It is time to look at other branches of the budget tree.
14
This smacks of Grand Bargain 2.0 which was an ill-considered attempt to meet implacable Republican demands to start shredding the social safety net and saddled the federal budget with sequestration.. As a senior citizen dependent on both Medicare and Social Security, this is very worrisome. Even one drop of social safety net blood will only increase the vampire austerity budget plans of soon to be anointed Speaker Paul Ryan and his quest to dismantle and privatize Social Security and Medicare. President Obama should keep his promise not to negotiate over the debt ceiling, especially at the expense of those most in need of government assistance. While I believe compromise is essential to governance, this seems more like capitulation.
20
What Americans generally don't realize, including myself until I read about it recently, is that "taxing the wealthy" is not particularly important metric for progressive goals. That is to say that the progressivity of the tax side of fiscal policy is far less important than the progressivity of the spending side of fiscal policy.
While the "rich" (quotations since it's no one ever effectively defines it) do currently pay a low share of income, the fact is that you can only raise so much revenue from a 1-5% of the population. Broaden the base by removing ALL deductions (including charitable givings) excluding only employer provided healthcare. And add a national consumption / VAT tax.
In other words, NYT commentators need to stop spending so much time arguing for "taxing the rich" and more time arguing for increasing taxing generally and social spending more progressively.
While the "rich" (quotations since it's no one ever effectively defines it) do currently pay a low share of income, the fact is that you can only raise so much revenue from a 1-5% of the population. Broaden the base by removing ALL deductions (including charitable givings) excluding only employer provided healthcare. And add a national consumption / VAT tax.
In other words, NYT commentators need to stop spending so much time arguing for "taxing the rich" and more time arguing for increasing taxing generally and social spending more progressively.
There's nothing progressive about a consumption tax, which hits hardest those who have to spend pretty much all their income, i.e. the poor and the middle class. So that's one place you're wrong.
Also, the provision of health care by employers is not a progressive position either. It allows employers too much of a say over the health care their employees receive, and it chains employees to their employer just to get it. Progressives generally want a unified health care system nationwide, whether you call it "single payer" or "national health."
Also, the provision of health care by employers is not a progressive position either. It allows employers too much of a say over the health care their employees receive, and it chains employees to their employer just to get it. Progressives generally want a unified health care system nationwide, whether you call it "single payer" or "national health."
1
Take another look. Income tax is about 40% of all US government revenue. If Obama had let the Bush tax breaks expire the GOP wouldn't have been able to shut down the government and there would have been no sequester. The point of progressive taxation, is to prevent accumulation of wealth that generates political influence and corruption. A VAT tax is self enforcing, which is a great feature that would offset its non-progressive nature (the poor spend a much larger proportion of their income than the rich and the VAT is essentially a sales tax). The upper limit on payroll taxes needs to go up, way up to fully fund Social Security and Medicare. Oh, and corporate tax is a ridiculous 8% of government revenue.
On the spending side you need to attack corporate welfare to spend more progressively. Why the devil are we subsidizing Big Oil and others?
On the spending side you need to attack corporate welfare to spend more progressively. Why the devil are we subsidizing Big Oil and others?
1
So in short, you want to put the entire burden of taxation on ... the working & middle classes, already staggering under a huge tax load with almost no real deductions anymore.
Yeah, that seems fair ... (NOT).
Yeah, that seems fair ... (NOT).
Pox on the House and Congress and the govt of the rich for the rich....
18
My 94 year-old father-in-law was a bomber navigator in the South Pacific during WWII. He is one of those people who invested most of his money in U.S. Bonds. I would hate to be the poor soul that defaulted on that debt.
Speaking as a retired Vietnam-era veteran I also want to warn those who are considering reneging on their promises. It would be a sad day if you destroy my savings. I wouldn't be willing to let it slide.
Speaking as a retired Vietnam-era veteran I also want to warn those who are considering reneging on their promises. It would be a sad day if you destroy my savings. I wouldn't be willing to let it slide.
6
It is a sad day when a Democratic President cuts Social Security. Social Security is doing just fine. Read Krugman.
Obama is way too cosy with Wall Street.
Obama is way too cosy with Wall Street.
14
From the Huffingfton Post:
But the real pay-for would be felt on two major entitlement programs. The deal would extend the sequester's cuts to mandatory spending through 2025, which mostly involves a 2 percent cut in reimbursements to Medicare doctors. That reduction was scheduled to expire in 2021 under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which put sequestration into place. It was extended to 2023 under Murray-Ryan deal.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals.
Would you all please read this and stop ranting and raving.
But the real pay-for would be felt on two major entitlement programs. The deal would extend the sequester's cuts to mandatory spending through 2025, which mostly involves a 2 percent cut in reimbursements to Medicare doctors. That reduction was scheduled to expire in 2021 under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which put sequestration into place. It was extended to 2023 under Murray-Ryan deal.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals.
Would you all please read this and stop ranting and raving.
Actually, there's good news here for current Disability recipients, because the 19% cut would be averted, providing Ryan's Republicans don't reneg on the deal. Question is, what are the other benefit cuts that aren't being disclosed? As low as the barrier is for passing those mandatory independent physicals, I doubt it translates into $5B in savings. And as already mentioned, there's no Disability/SSI COLA next year, and to many non-disabled analysts, the previous COLAs were already too high for their liking.
4
We don't know the details yet, however I am aghast as the Democrats agreeing to negotiate *anything* in return for raising the debt limit. This creates a horrible precedent for continued blackmail! As far as mixing the non-negotiable debt limit together with the budget (where some horse trading is appropriate), that linkage will be conveniently forgotten by Fox news and Republicans in the future and they will claim that we "always" have negotiated over the debt limit.
16
I'll bet you $10 that abuse in Social Security is dwarfed by fraud and waste in the military budget.
74
Let me guess they both agreed we are out of money and wanted to know how to get more out of the Chinese.
1
"...the emerging accord would increase spending by $80 billion, not including emergency war funding..."
I wonder how much that "emergency war funding" hole is going to cost?
Nice throw-a-way line though. Gotta give 'em that.
"...increases would be offset by cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits..."
Disability benefits? This stuff writes itself.
I wonder how much that "emergency war funding" hole is going to cost?
Nice throw-a-way line though. Gotta give 'em that.
"...increases would be offset by cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits..."
Disability benefits? This stuff writes itself.
16
GOOD PLAN!
Our veterans can't expect better weapons AND better SSDisability benefits...
Our veterans can't expect better weapons AND better SSDisability benefits...
8
Scrap the weapons. Hike Social Security benefits. Prove you're really pro-life, Republicans.
3
Old people vote more then then the young. I paid into Social Security since I was 14 years old and Medicare since it became law and still paying at 73 years old. Who are the old folks going to vote for? Someone that takes care of the home folks or some dam fool that sends all our money over seas?
8
Here's hoping people receiving Medicare are smarter than that TParty woman who said "Keep your government hands off my Medicare."
This should be the clearest sign that both sides are the one percenters and we need a third party badly. America is going to the wayside. I am a young person I want a better America not the same ole stuff every four years.
11
Before we have a knee-jerk reaction, let's see what the "cuts to Medicare and Social Security disability" entail. We might be pleasantly surprised, because there are a lot of moving parts.
Part 1: A huge increase in premiums for 30% of Medicare recipients because of the hold-harmless clause in Social Security. If we could spread that increase around so that everybody pays a little more and nobody 50% more, I'd be happy to pay it.
Part 2: Examining fraudulent Social Security Disability claimants. I have a relative who depends justifiably on SSD, but I have also seen people I suspect of being capable of work.
Part 3: Raising the debt limit. The last time this threatened to expire, my IRA fell 10%.
Part 4: Funding transportation, such that the rail system doesn't shut down next month (that's right, next month).
Part 5: Giving certainty that we will not proceed from Continuing Resolution to Continuing Resolution, hanging on every outcome, with everything in crisis. This will help the whole economy and investors in particular.
Let's understand the Obama holds the whip hand in this situation. If the House agrees to a budget, the Senate can pass it with a simple majority and the President can sign it. I trust his good judgment (at least more than any of the other players), and he doesn't need to worry about reelection.
Part 1: A huge increase in premiums for 30% of Medicare recipients because of the hold-harmless clause in Social Security. If we could spread that increase around so that everybody pays a little more and nobody 50% more, I'd be happy to pay it.
Part 2: Examining fraudulent Social Security Disability claimants. I have a relative who depends justifiably on SSD, but I have also seen people I suspect of being capable of work.
Part 3: Raising the debt limit. The last time this threatened to expire, my IRA fell 10%.
Part 4: Funding transportation, such that the rail system doesn't shut down next month (that's right, next month).
Part 5: Giving certainty that we will not proceed from Continuing Resolution to Continuing Resolution, hanging on every outcome, with everything in crisis. This will help the whole economy and investors in particular.
Let's understand the Obama holds the whip hand in this situation. If the House agrees to a budget, the Senate can pass it with a simple majority and the President can sign it. I trust his good judgment (at least more than any of the other players), and he doesn't need to worry about reelection.
1
"Examining fraudulent Social Security Disability claimants"
Like voting fraud, this is a phony concern.
Like voting fraud, this is a phony concern.
1
We won't know the precise details until the deal is finalized, at which point it will effectively be a done deal.
1
If "Obama holds the whip hand in this situation," why is he agreeing to life-threatening cuts to the benefits of the people who elected him? And, believe me, those cuts are life-threatening.
What a lousy government. And Democrats are happily complicit in it. Cutting spending on programs that help the least advantaged to line the sties of people who have more than anybody needs stinks to high heaven. Up is down. Right is wrong. The worst values of any advanced economy on this planet.
58
Back in the 80s, I knew a guy who was a government lawyer for the EEOC who defended guys on disability.
He used to complain he couldn't win any cases, because the opposing lawyers would always be showing videotapes of his disabled clients skiing, playing golf, and shoveling snow. I don't imagine much has changed, except the government has given up and will give disability benefits to just about anyone with a lawyer.
He used to complain he couldn't win any cases, because the opposing lawyers would always be showing videotapes of his disabled clients skiing, playing golf, and shoveling snow. I don't imagine much has changed, except the government has given up and will give disability benefits to just about anyone with a lawyer.
8
So we have a guy from 30 years ago, and what you "imagine" since.
3
Sorry that your friend's experiences years ago with a teeny number of frauds has apparently turned you into such a heartless cynic. Having gone through the disability process myself, and losing a job I loved as part of the deal, I can tell you it ain't easy. I'd give anything to be fully-able again and working at my dream job.
3
LoL, yes those disabled with their lawyers. They'll be the death of us.
2
Increase in military spending? Serious? Really? Why? We already spend more than the next 10-largest military budgets combined. How about a 30%-40% reduction in military spending - easily done by pulling out the Middle East - we don't need their oil anymore and let the locals solve their ISSI and religious problems. Heck we can save 5-10 billion a year by not giving money to Israel.
Take care of the home front - and remember - this is just to fund expenses already approved by Congress.
Take care of the home front - and remember - this is just to fund expenses already approved by Congress.
41
Sounds like Trump got to you too.
Hillary will spend more on weapons.
Hillary will spend more on weapons.
1
All so the Defense budget and DoD's blank check can get even bigger. The sad thing is most of the added defense money will go to boondoggles like the JSF-35. Many of the subcontractors to Lockheed Martin on this mother of all boondoggles are owned by private equity firms. That is the dirty little secret of todays bloated defense program. The 0.1 percent getting even richer on government contracts.
29
Did you read about the JSF-35's test pilot who put in writing that the aircraft can't dogfight worth a [self-censored]? But never fear, the high tech missiles it carries will shoot down enemy aircraft before they even see the JSF on radar... But...
From an article at globalsecurity entitled JSF Skeptics: "Famed US aerospace engineer Pierre Sprey, the co-designer of the F-16 Falcon jet and the A-10 Warthog tank buster, remarked that the infamous F-35 is so bad it is absolutely hopeless when pitted against modern aircraft. In fact, it would be ripped to shreds even by the antiquated MiG-21, 'let alone a dogfight with Russia's fourth-generation Su-27 and MiG-29 jets.'" The software for the GUN won't even be available until 2019, at the earliest. It also turns out that modern ground-based radars can spot it pretty easily.
Sorry to pick on the JSF, but I'm an airplane nut and it's just too juicy a target. Boondoggle is about the most polite word you can apply to the program.
From an article at globalsecurity entitled JSF Skeptics: "Famed US aerospace engineer Pierre Sprey, the co-designer of the F-16 Falcon jet and the A-10 Warthog tank buster, remarked that the infamous F-35 is so bad it is absolutely hopeless when pitted against modern aircraft. In fact, it would be ripped to shreds even by the antiquated MiG-21, 'let alone a dogfight with Russia's fourth-generation Su-27 and MiG-29 jets.'" The software for the GUN won't even be available until 2019, at the earliest. It also turns out that modern ground-based radars can spot it pretty easily.
Sorry to pick on the JSF, but I'm an airplane nut and it's just too juicy a target. Boondoggle is about the most polite word you can apply to the program.
2
It would be an enormous relief not to lurch from one fake financial crisis to another. Republicans have not acknowledged the huge improvement to the economy under Pres. Obama - 8.4 million jobs added as part of the recovery from Bush's Great Recession and unpaid for wars.
Interesting that Speaker Boehner might actually leave a legacy of sorts, a breathing space for fiscal sanity in Congress that would prevent the tea party crazies from destroying the full faith and credit of the United States. Only the participation of the Democratic leaders reassures me however, and Ryan want to private Medicare and slash the safety net programs.
With the hostage taking and blackmail that has become the norm by Republicans though, I suspect this deal could still be sabotaged.
Interesting that Speaker Boehner might actually leave a legacy of sorts, a breathing space for fiscal sanity in Congress that would prevent the tea party crazies from destroying the full faith and credit of the United States. Only the participation of the Democratic leaders reassures me however, and Ryan want to private Medicare and slash the safety net programs.
With the hostage taking and blackmail that has become the norm by Republicans though, I suspect this deal could still be sabotaged.
5
This article is confusing. The lede indicates that Medicare and SS benefits would be slashed, but the details at the end of the article suggest the benefits would remain intact and in fact expanded. Which is it?
15
More stringent standards for disability insurance seems logical. There was a 60 Minutes report that showed entire towns rural red states using it as a second income. While we do spend too much on our military, you couldn't balance the budget just on military cuts alone. Of course raising taxes on investment income, the wealthy, and hedge funds would net a couple hundred billion a year, but we probably won't get to do that until we get a new democrat in the white house
3
To raise taxes on investment income, the wealthy, and hedge funds doesn't require a "new democrat in the white house," it requires Democratic control of both the House and the Senate as well.
The President can't do anything to raise taxes (or cut subsidies to big business) without a bill to sign.
The President can't do anything to raise taxes (or cut subsidies to big business) without a bill to sign.
2
So the budget deal cuts Medicare and Social Security benefits? Doesn't sound like much of a compromise. It sounds like the Republican agenda, minus defunding Planned Parenthood. Why do the poor, the working class and seniors always feel the pain, the cuts to programs affecting them? How about cuts to programs benefiting the top 1%? How is it that those cuts never happen?
13
So, this is the Republican Party today (at least the one who don't want to burn the country down): cuts to social security and medicare, more money for defense and never raise taxes. Why? Because the Republicans work for the 1% and the corporations not the average American. 25 states have a Republican governor and control the legislature. With people voting against their economic self-interest and falling for slogans that spew hate and fear, I should go into conservative politics. But I won't, because it would selling my soul and betraying my conscience.
7
All these negative comment about cuts from the same people who criticize the Republicans for not compromising. Guess what--this is a compromise where BOTH sides have to give a little. It's much better than a government shutdown or a default.
6
Increase the military (for the 1% contractors) and cut seniors and people of all ages on disability. Yeah, that's a great compromise alright.
2
One would hope that the President, who has no more elections to win, call for tax increases for the rich and no cuts in benefits for the seniors and the poor. He could also ask for more money for the veterans who returned from ill conceived wars. But - yes we can - remains a slogan. Hope remains a hope. And all is back to the same before we had hope and before we knew we can.
Well, Mr. President! We hope you can and we know you won't.
Well, Mr. President! We hope you can and we know you won't.
12
Here is the final solution - starving the Greatest Generation to death in their most vulnerable era of their lives.
7
They're more largely covered than other age groups, and many had pensions--yes, private workers did, too, until Reagan. This is more aimed at boomers, who started getting part-timed, temped, and contract-labored, saw wages stagnate more through life, and are just now trying to retire. And it's aimed at those younger, coming into the contingent work world, who will never have a chance if they and we allow these programs to be cut. For all our sakes, we need to keep them going, as they have and can--for all our sakes.
1
Did any of the writers bemoaning the "cuts" to SS and Medicare actually read this? Requiring a medical exam in order to qualify for SSI in all 50 states and preventing a large increase in rates for some Medicare part B recipients just don't sound like "cuts" to me. My goodness how knee jerk we have become!
12
"Those increases would be offset by cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits..."
Sounds like cuts to me.
Sounds like cuts to me.
1
Medicare cuts, Social security cuts, increased Pentagon spending, no mention of the revenue side - looks like the Dems are "caving" again. We either need to reform the Democratic party (and a Sanders nomination would be a good start) or start a new party because, right now, all we have are the Republican party and Republican-Lite.
18
There's a lot of stuff in this budget that seems weighted against the poor. But I doubt it's as bad as it seems. First of all, disability and Medicare are not programs for the poor. Doctors and lawyers benefit from both. The cuts to disability are to extend a health exam to assure that slackers aren't paid The cuts to Medicare seem more suspect, though they remain vague. If they're as bad as some people think, I'm sure Obama will veto. I don't think he wants to be remembered as the President who gutted Medicare after passing the ACA.
3
Now, let's see if AARP really sticks up for seniors. All that membership money could easily pay for attorneys to restore benefits.
7
Cuts to Medicare and SS Disability is unacceptable! I hope this does not go through!
11
Read the article.
There are NO cuts and SS Disability won't be cut by 20% next year as was planned.
I hope it does go through.
There are NO cuts and SS Disability won't be cut by 20% next year as was planned.
I hope it does go through.
Just curious. Who's the Democratic nominee for speaker? Nancy Pelosi? After all, she's been quite cagey about her own retirement plans (she's 75) even in the face of announced retirements by Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid, two truly epic Dem losses. Of course, it's moot in any case, because Nancy Pelosi will be speaker again when a blue pig flies past Alec Baldwin's bedroom and blows him a raspberry.
There's a lot of grumbling on the far right on this "deal", but it looks like it may fly, which would be a massive relief, certainly for Paul Ryan but for all of America, as well. Among other things, we can get back to focusing on important things, like the expansion of free cheese factories on one side and how many times an American goes to church on the other.
There's a lot of grumbling on the far right on this "deal", but it looks like it may fly, which would be a massive relief, certainly for Paul Ryan but for all of America, as well. Among other things, we can get back to focusing on important things, like the expansion of free cheese factories on one side and how many times an American goes to church on the other.
2
If the cuts to Medicare and Social Security are included, I'll be voting against every Democrat who supports this budget, and for every politician who votes against the Medicare and Social Security cuts.
17
Gee, NYT,, thanks for highlighting this so the special interests can immediately start undermining it. I'd be willing to bet it gets killed before ever seeing the light of day. Inertia, infighting, pathetic attempts at scoring points by baiting the other side to give concessions, then pulling the rug out from under them; this is what our government stands for today.
This tells you everything you want to know about the Obama White House. The man is a con. He agreed to "cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits" to avoid a "cataclysmic default on the government’s debt." What a sad joke. What is cataclysmic Mr. Obama is what you are allowing the Republicans to do to the poorest Americans. Shame on you! Let the cataclysmic default happen, wake up all those poor white red staters who vote automatically for Republicans and expose the Freedom Caucus end goal - make America a Banana Republic.
14
Mo money, mo money, mo money.
Like there is not mammoth waste going on in the federal government. How about eliminating the Dept. of Education. It has been around since the early 70's it costs more than the Iraq war did, year by year, and has even been less effective. There is so much low hanging fruit that we are paying for that gives us, as a country, no benefit. But the political parties benefit and that, of course, is all that matters.
Like there is not mammoth waste going on in the federal government. How about eliminating the Dept. of Education. It has been around since the early 70's it costs more than the Iraq war did, year by year, and has even been less effective. There is so much low hanging fruit that we are paying for that gives us, as a country, no benefit. But the political parties benefit and that, of course, is all that matters.
3
If Democrats don't like the small cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits included in this compromise budget bill, the alternative is clear.
Show up to vote in the next election and most importantly in the next midterm election.
It's that simple.
Show up to vote in the next election and most importantly in the next midterm election.
It's that simple.
627
It's not really. Over a million more votes were cast for Democratic Congressional candidates than Republicans in 2012. Yet, they gained nothing. The districts are gerrymandered so well by GOP statehouses. The GOP is ruthlessly efficient at rigging the electoral system. They could never win on their ideas alone.
You're right. Democrats need to show up and vote in off years for their state reps and governors. That's where Congress is formed for practical purposes.
I could never understand why the Dems don't do ads informing voters about that or why voters should choose a Dem over a Republican. American's have a naive notion about voting for the 'best guy' instead of realizing that the party is what wields power.
You're right. Democrats need to show up and vote in off years for their state reps and governors. That's where Congress is formed for practical purposes.
I could never understand why the Dems don't do ads informing voters about that or why voters should choose a Dem over a Republican. American's have a naive notion about voting for the 'best guy' instead of realizing that the party is what wields power.
7
I believe that you believe that. But, it is not that simple. Public opinion has no affect on these negotiations, and they aren't voted on.
Its that simple.
Its that simple.
What about the disabled people that did show up? This dismissive, cold tone is unnecessary and harsh.
Some must be reading a different article. There was no mention of any "cuts".
"Aides said that the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion.
The emerging deal would also reallocate funds among Social Security program trust funds to ensure solvency of the disability insurance program. Such reallocations have occurred regularly over the decades but Republicans had opposed any new reallocation without changes to reduce costs of the program.
The prospective agreement would also prevent expected increases in out-of-pocket costs for millions of Medicare Part B beneficiaries. The increases would have been caused by the rare absence of a cost-of-living increase in Social Security for some beneficiaries, because of unusually low inflation."
"Aides said that the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states. That change was projected to save the government $5 billion.
The emerging deal would also reallocate funds among Social Security program trust funds to ensure solvency of the disability insurance program. Such reallocations have occurred regularly over the decades but Republicans had opposed any new reallocation without changes to reduce costs of the program.
The prospective agreement would also prevent expected increases in out-of-pocket costs for millions of Medicare Part B beneficiaries. The increases would have been caused by the rare absence of a cost-of-living increase in Social Security for some beneficiaries, because of unusually low inflation."
88
Hello,
Thanks - I was going to say the same thing. It does not look like there is any reduction in benefits. What it looks like is saying "If you want to cut SS and Medicare you will need to wait until I am gone."
Politics wins this one over ideology.
Thanks - I was going to say the same thing. It does not look like there is any reduction in benefits. What it looks like is saying "If you want to cut SS and Medicare you will need to wait until I am gone."
Politics wins this one over ideology.
2
You may be right, but the word cuts is used in the first paragraph of the NY Times article. Maybe that's misleading.
This article has grown and become more specific as the evening has progressed. In its first from, there were no specifics on the type of Medicare and Social Security Disability cuts that were going to be made. Nor was there a link to the draft budget proposal. So please don't blame folks who were concerned by the initial lack of specific details based on earlier, incomplete versions of the article.
If the final deal involves preserving large segments of the tax breaks given to American corporations and the wealthiest 1%, expanding the military budget, and cutting Medicare and Social Security Disability - all to avoid a debt default - then every senior citizen represented by a Republican should ask their congressmen and Senators "Why did you force this deal when it hurts me?"
35
Anyone in the 99% who doesn't vote for Bernie Sanders deserves this lousy deal. President Obama is not a progressive, nor is Hillary Clinton. If elected president, Sanders will use the power of the people to enact progressive change, he will take on the special interests as he did when he was mayor of Burlington, and he will move us away from oligarchy and back to our democratic principles.
Join the political revolution. As Sanders says, when people stand up and fight they win.
Join the political revolution. As Sanders says, when people stand up and fight they win.
55
I apologize for only having the ability to thumb your comment up once, RLS. Your statement is more than 100% accurate. And I believe, if Bernie doesn't win and things get worse (It doesn't matter under who), his message will become more mainstream and will resonate with the majority of our still sleeping populace.
Trouble is, whether the next president is either Clinton or Sanders, if both houses of Congress remain in Republican hands then you can kiss a progressive--let alone lefty revolutionary--agenda good-bye. Given a majority of Democrats in the House and Senate, plus a president who's a Democrat, then I think you'd see plenty of truly progressive legislation initiated by both the executive and legislative branches. And let the One-to-Five Percenters howl...
But the chances of THAT are looking pretty slim because of how Republicans dominate state legislatures and the drawing of boundaries for House districts. It's really to our shame that I and my fellow Democrats let them get away with that.
But the chances of THAT are looking pretty slim because of how Republicans dominate state legislatures and the drawing of boundaries for House districts. It's really to our shame that I and my fellow Democrats let them get away with that.
2
Sanders alone cannot change anything unless he has a Democratic Congress. If you want a better deal for average Americans, then average Americans must agree that some taxes need to be raised and some Republicans must go.
OK, if the warmongering military-industrial complex of the USA will never, ever be reined in--can the USA at least focus its unmatched arsenal of weapons of mass destruction on a worthy target such as Saudi Arabia, the awful country that has given the world the Taliban, ISIS, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Wahhabism, madrassas that have destroyed the societies of Pakistan and Afghanistan, men taught to think it's fine to throw sulfuric acid in women's faces, and on and on?
The president who breaks America's "alliance" with Saudi Arabia will get my vote for greatest U.S. politician since Lincoln. That will take massive courage, rather than just going along with the status quo and helping the Saudi air force--for no good reason whatsoever--bomb and kill civilians in Yemen.
And in addition, junking the debt ceiling wouldn't be a bad idea either. It wasn't instituted in the USA until 1917, and Denmark is the only other advanced industrialized capitalist democracy that even has a similar debt ceiling.
The president who breaks America's "alliance" with Saudi Arabia will get my vote for greatest U.S. politician since Lincoln. That will take massive courage, rather than just going along with the status quo and helping the Saudi air force--for no good reason whatsoever--bomb and kill civilians in Yemen.
And in addition, junking the debt ceiling wouldn't be a bad idea either. It wasn't instituted in the USA until 1917, and Denmark is the only other advanced industrialized capitalist democracy that even has a similar debt ceiling.
11
Let's be honest: Social Security and Medicare are on the chopping block so retiring with minimal resources will, over time, become a thing of the past as will retirement at all.
6
I think it sets a bad precedent to add Social Security and Medicare into the mix of negotiations in order to try to prevent a default. Even if Democrats were open to this, say, in order to clean up the problem of looming increases in Medicare premiums for some, and even if the cuts to Social Security come in the form of screening more potential disability beneficiaries out, rather than cutting levels of existing benefits, for example, it looks to me like the camel's nose is under the tent and that Republicans will learn that they can pull Medicare and Social Security into negotiations and get something they want (like chipping away at social insurance programs) in return for doing something they should be doing regardless, like raising the debt ceiling.
167
If approved, the accord would modestly increase domestic spending over the next two years and raise the federal borrowing limit, but it would call for cuts on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits, officials said.
[ If President Obama agrees to cut Medicare and Social Security benefits, that will be a betrayal of the American people and especially those people who have supported him. I am shocked and dismayed. ]
[ If President Obama agrees to cut Medicare and Social Security benefits, that will be a betrayal of the American people and especially those people who have supported him. I am shocked and dismayed. ]
159
I agree with you.
But we also have betrayed ourselves by not exercising our own power-- the power to vote
if the American people don't want cuts in Medicare and Social Security, they have to do their part and get out to vote for Democrats up and down the ticket in every election, including state elections
Democrats who did not vote in state elections in 2010 handed gerrymandering power to the Republicans after the 2010 Census, resulting in the current right-wing unrepresentative House of Representatives,
The President can't sign a bill into law if the Congress doesn't pass it.
But we also have betrayed ourselves by not exercising our own power-- the power to vote
if the American people don't want cuts in Medicare and Social Security, they have to do their part and get out to vote for Democrats up and down the ticket in every election, including state elections
Democrats who did not vote in state elections in 2010 handed gerrymandering power to the Republicans after the 2010 Census, resulting in the current right-wing unrepresentative House of Representatives,
The President can't sign a bill into law if the Congress doesn't pass it.
13
Excellent, I so agree.
I agree! A betrayal and an outrage! Always the poor and the infirm who suffer the most. Such a disgrace! Politicians are a dysfunctional and untrustworthy bunch. A shocking and shameful act - Obama has bailed - skews as a cowardly turncoat. And I used to hold him in such high esteem. Wow!!
1
What a strange country when cuts to Medicare and Social Security are lauded, as if a major victory has been accomplished after 'deadlock', while spending for the military and for defense spending goes nearly unchallenged.
'Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.'
~ Dwight D. Eisenhower
'Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.'
~ Dwight D. Eisenhower
687
Well said, Tim. President Eisenhower deserves praise for many things not the least of which was striking the correct balance between military strength and
our country's other needs. He is the only post WWII president to accomplish this in my opinion. As much as I liked President Kennedy, he was wrong about the missile gap and consequent increases in military spending. I am a former recipient of Social Security Disability and I detest any cuts to this program that disabled individuals and their children depend on for their support. Cut income benefits for high income retirees if necessary. Democrats in Congress should never agree to this.
our country's other needs. He is the only post WWII president to accomplish this in my opinion. As much as I liked President Kennedy, he was wrong about the missile gap and consequent increases in military spending. I am a former recipient of Social Security Disability and I detest any cuts to this program that disabled individuals and their children depend on for their support. Cut income benefits for high income retirees if necessary. Democrats in Congress should never agree to this.
3
Thank you, Timothy. Your words about cutting benefits being so unfair to disabled individuals and those who depend on the income ring true.
President Eisenhower had the experience, having first hand experienced the horrors of war. President Kennedy evolved during his presidency, without his ardent efforts to come to a peace agreement with the Russian premier at that time - and Kennedy was being pushed to preemptively strike by some - there may well have been a nuclear war. Leaders at that time also did not publicly mock other world leaders, many discussions were held privately so as not to inflame tensions.
President Eisenhower had the experience, having first hand experienced the horrors of war. President Kennedy evolved during his presidency, without his ardent efforts to come to a peace agreement with the Russian premier at that time - and Kennedy was being pushed to preemptively strike by some - there may well have been a nuclear war. Leaders at that time also did not publicly mock other world leaders, many discussions were held privately so as not to inflame tensions.
1
These cuts are precisely why I am not a big fan of Obama and never have been. They undercut any claim he has to be a progressive, let alone a "socialist".
The "socialism" here is for the ever hungry, never satisfied military contractors.
The "socialism" here is for the ever hungry, never satisfied military contractors.
I find it shameful that Obama is willing to achieve a budget deal on the backs of the elderly sick and of the disabled, while the wealthy are enjoying the lowest tax rate in decades. I find it unconscionable that this deal increases military spending more than domestic spending, according to the latest reports.
I hoe that no House Democrats votes for this deal. Let Boehner find the votes.
I hoe that no House Democrats votes for this deal. Let Boehner find the votes.
208
Truly despicable. If this was the deal-breaker for the ever more loathsome republicans, then there should be no deal. Period. Let the government shut down and let the people know why. If this deal goes through, although Obama has done much good in difficult circumstances, selling out the most vulnerable in our society will be, for me, his lasting legacy.
39
This is why I am voting for Bernie Sanders. Im fed up with these wealthy people negatively impacting my family year after year. We let the wealthy get away with a national economic collapse and yet you have the nerve to cut food stamps last year and now you want to go after Medicare and Social Security? Shame on all of you in Congress, and shame on you Mr. President.
74
If this budget deal is passed then i say, Impeach Obama, then work our way down the list to every representative in congress.. kick them all out. Obama goes first!!! a total disgrace ... a true Republican.. "Change"... Social Security and disability changing for the worse, all the while Defense spending keeps going up... Dusgusting!!!
15
Folks.........here's how it is.............
The Democrats "Care" about the unfortunate and try to save lives.
The Republicans support the military that can't live without a war every decade.
These will be tough negotiations and the reason Congress is so gridlocked.
I choose to save lives; that's my meager vote.
The Democrats "Care" about the unfortunate and try to save lives.
The Republicans support the military that can't live without a war every decade.
These will be tough negotiations and the reason Congress is so gridlocked.
I choose to save lives; that's my meager vote.
28
As the wife of a retired Army NCO, I can guarantee you that no one wants war less than a soldier except, maybe, his family.
I assume you have never been in the military and have no idea what you are talking about.
I assume you have never been in the military and have no idea what you are talking about.
1
When are we going to stop paying hundreds of billions of dollars to defend our First World "allies" in Europe and Asia?
And speaking of the other First World countries, when are we going to stop agreeing to pay 25% or 50% or even 100+% or more than they do for the same exact medical procedures and drugs?
If we stopped being chumps we could save hundreds of billions each year.
Our unnecessary spending on just defense and healthcare -- spending that does the American people absolutely no good -- needs to stop. We have too many genuine needs to keep on wasting money on things that we don't benefit from.
And speaking of the other First World countries, when are we going to stop agreeing to pay 25% or 50% or even 100+% or more than they do for the same exact medical procedures and drugs?
If we stopped being chumps we could save hundreds of billions each year.
Our unnecessary spending on just defense and healthcare -- spending that does the American people absolutely no good -- needs to stop. We have too many genuine needs to keep on wasting money on things that we don't benefit from.
50
What's new? The Republicans' taste for war is just ravenous. They will wage war on all fronts, abroad and at home against the elderly, the poor, women and anybody who needs help.
76
I suppose you didn't notice that it is Obama who is keeping troops in Afghanistan long after he promised they would all be home.
He should have known that drawing down the number of soldiers would only embolden the terrorists. Now he is trying to backtrack and, of course, the soldiers and their families having to deal with further deployments doesn't seem to matter to him.
He should have known that drawing down the number of soldiers would only embolden the terrorists. Now he is trying to backtrack and, of course, the soldiers and their families having to deal with further deployments doesn't seem to matter to him.
Oh my, could this be? Government working the way it is supposed to? People negotiate and they reach agreements that meet in the middle?
What an unusual idea! Someone ought to write a book about the governing process in America.
I'm with Mr Diamond (below) - I'll believe it when it's done.
What an unusual idea! Someone ought to write a book about the governing process in America.
I'm with Mr Diamond (below) - I'll believe it when it's done.
5
I'm sorry. Government isn't working the way it's supposed to, when the targets of cuts is are the poor, the working class and the elderly. How about it working to defend programs dedicated to those groups?
3
How can they even touch SS? It's supposed to be in a 'lockbox'.
21
I have news for you Reagan took 2.8 million out of social security in the 80's. It never made the news for some reason.
I do not understand when Americans rage that socialism and social programs are unacceptable. When our manufacturing base is now in CHINA. And two of the world's biggest socialist programs are the US..SS and US...Medicare.,
Please tell me which explaination applys to American here..HYPOCRISY or STUPIDITY.
Please tell me which explaination applys to American here..HYPOCRISY or STUPIDITY.
7
Like many of you, I feel that a cut to SSI and medicare is totally unacceptable
unlike many of you, I am doing something:
I am contacting my congressional delegation, Sen E Warren, Sen Markey, Congressman Kennedy, and letting them know, vote NO
I am contacting my friends relatives and people who I have email for, telling them, contact your congressional delegation....
unlike many of you, I am doing something:
I am contacting my congressional delegation, Sen E Warren, Sen Markey, Congressman Kennedy, and letting them know, vote NO
I am contacting my friends relatives and people who I have email for, telling them, contact your congressional delegation....
52
If you read beyond the headline you might understand what this deal means.
Huffington Post:
"But the real pay-for would be felt on two major entitlement programs. The deal would extend the sequester's cuts to mandatory spending through 2025, which mostly involves a 2 percent cut in reimbursements to Medicare doctors. That reduction was scheduled to expire in 2021 under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which put sequestration into place. It was extended to 2023 under Murray-Ryan deal.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals."
Huffington Post:
"But the real pay-for would be felt on two major entitlement programs. The deal would extend the sequester's cuts to mandatory spending through 2025, which mostly involves a 2 percent cut in reimbursements to Medicare doctors. That reduction was scheduled to expire in 2021 under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which put sequestration into place. It was extended to 2023 under Murray-Ryan deal.
The new agreement also would prevent a 20 percent cut in benefits next year to the 11 million Americans enrolled in the Social Security Disability Insurance program. The cut would be avoided by diverting some of the incoming payroll tax money from Social Security's much bigger retirement insurance program for six years, something Republicans previously said they wouldn't do without cuts to benefits.
Hill sources said the disability changes would save roughly $4 billion to $5 billion over 10 years by requiring all states to have doctors review initial disability applications, which in some states are now checked by Social Security Administration officials and not medical professionals."
1
If Treasury says that Congress should act first on Puerto Rico's crisis to avoid a "humanitarian crisis", why not to use the budget process to pass the proposed initiatives? Simple, Puerto Rico is still not in their radar.
8
Neither Boehner nor Obama have anything to lose by cutting benefits to the disabled and elderly Medicare recipients, since Boehner has one foot out the door, and Obama will be political history by January 2017. Obama's legacy won't be tarnished, since he has already punted on so many important policy decisions in the last seven years, and the public's expectations of anything progressive have essentially evaporated. But no doubt, this early budget deal will yeild some political currency, at least in the short term. What a great country we live in.
24
Money to kill but none to take care of our seniors or sick, the problem is the government, and when both sides get to this conclusion, watch out
228
And yet the defense budget is not only untouchable, it will dependably increase.
363
Our government see military spending as a sacred cow. I see it as the big elephant in the room.
They need to get there minds in order, This is not going to fly cut social security and increase military spending how stupid can they be, They are to serve the people who have worked hard all of there lives and not the military machine who has not won any conflict or war in over 70 years, We are not at War and it time to cut Military spending like we have done in the past, We spend more on the Military then any other in the world and we have nothing to show for it, Go ahead do this path and see if your re-elected, you will not
216
I agree that defense spending is too high. But we are at war.
ISIS is still kicking butt
It's sad that safety net cuts are the price of getting anything done, but that's the consequence of people voting for a GOP Congress. Actually if the deal is as described in this article I think Obama did fairly well.
6
All we need for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing..... or for those 'good men' to agree to slimy cuts that rip the guts out of the poor, disabled and elderly.
Thanks for nothing, Obama and you Republicans. You make a lovely couple.
Thanks for nothing, Obama and you Republicans. You make a lovely couple.
12
Social Security is a benefit for working Americans - many elderly rely on it to live on - the most significant weakness of the Republican party is not it's clown-like array of candidates - but that its base is unwilling or unable to stand up for working Americans. On the other side, President Obama is punting on this issue - perhaps exhausted with fighting congress. Budget issues should be resolved via votes on the floor, rather than this approach by the GOP of putting a gun-to-the-head of America's fiscal solvency in order to demand cuts that a majority of Americans do not support.
17
OK, I'm one of the "white elderly." I am truly dismayed by the thought that our Congress may balance our budget by cutting aid which we have paid for through our payroll taxes. The Republicans need not ask for my vote.
62
We are sooooooooooooooo tired of hearing this same song and dance! It has truly become embarrassing, boring and completely wrong all at the same time.
3
I sincerely hope the strategic oil reserves will be expanded. I mean.......what if we get in a war or are isolated politically? We would only have a month and a half or so of reserves. If the Republicans are cutting the reserves, it's just a ploy to raise the price of oil for all of us. Remember the old Boy Scout Motto;
"Be Prepared".
"Be Prepared".
6
"the Social Security Disability Insurance program would be amended so that a medical exam now required in 30 states before applicants could qualify for benefits would be required in all 50 states." Excuse me all those voicing complaint about cruel cuts - that requirement is not a "cut" even if it it intends to save money.
Actually, Obama is giving up nothing on his social programs because what this is - is reducing the rampant fraud that runs through all the government's disability programs and that are costing the programs and taxpayers unknown billions each year. This especially afflicts the VA in which there are many legitimate applicants but just as many looking for any excuse to game the system and collect the tax free lifetime benefits.
And public service unions are into this game too - witness 98% of Long Island R.R. workers retire on disability - including the conductors - thanks to "doctors" on the take. Disability scam runs deep across the country. This deal will only skim the surface.
Actually, Obama is giving up nothing on his social programs because what this is - is reducing the rampant fraud that runs through all the government's disability programs and that are costing the programs and taxpayers unknown billions each year. This especially afflicts the VA in which there are many legitimate applicants but just as many looking for any excuse to game the system and collect the tax free lifetime benefits.
And public service unions are into this game too - witness 98% of Long Island R.R. workers retire on disability - including the conductors - thanks to "doctors" on the take. Disability scam runs deep across the country. This deal will only skim the surface.
12
Your claim about Long Island RR workers is grossly false. There was in fact a scandal some time back. But it was NOT that 98 percent of workers retire on disability; it was that of some 600 workers who applied for disability (far from all workers, for heaven's sake), about 96 percent or so were approved. This caused investigations, as it should have, and corrupt doctors who were approving too easily were caught, and the scam stopped. I would like to think your mistake was an accidental misunderstanding on your part, and that's what I will think. You might stop repeating it, however.
3
" witness 98% of Long Island R.R. workers retire on disability"
Very old news and simply false today:
"The percentage of eligible Long Island Rail Road retirees applying for federal disability benefits has dropped sharply over the past five years, LIRR statistics show."
http://www.newsday.com/long-island/lirr-retirees-applying-for-federal-di...
Very old news and simply false today:
"The percentage of eligible Long Island Rail Road retirees applying for federal disability benefits has dropped sharply over the past five years, LIRR statistics show."
http://www.newsday.com/long-island/lirr-retirees-applying-for-federal-di...
By "congressional leaders", does the Times mean majority and minority parties or just the Republicans? From the shape of the deal, this seems like the president and Boehner talking, and maybe giving too much on social security and disability. Surely there are other ways to save money except on the backs of the elderly and disabled. Are the Democratic leaders in the house and senate even involved in the talks?
20
John Boehner's bon voyage to the Republicans, Paul Ryan and the Freedom Caucus: to save them from themselves. In a long, undistinguished career, this may just be his single greatest accomplishment. Enjoy your future on K Street, John.
15
The Republican Devil is in the details. What are the "cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits"? Obama ought to veto any attempt to sacrifice these programs on the altar of GOP debt hypocrisy.
42
There are no cuts!
"Officials said the accord would modestly increase domestic spending over the next two years and raise the federal borrowing limit." That's how the Times frames this??!! Cuts to Medicare and Social Security are mentioned as if they are but a small price to pay for such a victory. Man. Thanks to the Benghazi hearings I had just switched my bumper sticker from Bernie to Hillary; good thing they're magnetic, because the Bern is back!
136
Social security disability is severely abused. Hopefully the cuts try to target all the money wasted on fraudulent claims.
One of the factors why the labor participation rate is at an all time low.
One of the factors why the labor participation rate is at an all time low.
39
Agreed, there is too much fraud...but the answer to that is to increase investigations and prosecutions, NOT cut benefits for all -- including those who very much deserve them!
6
"Severely abused?" Having gone through a stringent process here in California I would say out-and-out patient fraud would be very hard to pull off. With colluding doctors it would be much easier I suppose. Given my own experience, combined with reading, I might go for "somewhat abused," and am certainly all for rooting out what abuse there is. Insisting on a physical in all fifty states , for example, strikes me as prudent and worthwhile.
The really HUGE abuse I see is in the Defense Department budget, particularly black-hole for $$$ programs like the Joint Strike Fighter. Absolutely scandalous example of a broken procurement process that is pouring money into the pockets of extremely wealthy folks. And the plane itself is not living up to the hype. According to an article at globalsecurity: "Famed US aerospace engineer Pierre Sprey, the co-designer of the F-16 Falcon jet and the A-10 Warthog tank buster, remarked that the infamous F-35 is so bad it is absolutely hopeless when pitted against modern aircraft. In fact, it would be ripped to shreds even by the antiquated MiG-21, 'let alone a dogfight with Russia's fourth-generation Su-27 and MiG-29 jets.'"
The really HUGE abuse I see is in the Defense Department budget, particularly black-hole for $$$ programs like the Joint Strike Fighter. Absolutely scandalous example of a broken procurement process that is pouring money into the pockets of extremely wealthy folks. And the plane itself is not living up to the hype. According to an article at globalsecurity: "Famed US aerospace engineer Pierre Sprey, the co-designer of the F-16 Falcon jet and the A-10 Warthog tank buster, remarked that the infamous F-35 is so bad it is absolutely hopeless when pitted against modern aircraft. In fact, it would be ripped to shreds even by the antiquated MiG-21, 'let alone a dogfight with Russia's fourth-generation Su-27 and MiG-29 jets.'"
7
If you personally know of people violating the law by defrauding the Social Security Administration, please report them. Otherwise, you're guiilty of abetting them. And if you don't personally know such people, stop making baseless allegations. Speak only from your own knowledge, not from your prejudices. Thank you, John NYC. (Strange last name!)
5
The deal as described is shameful. Why should we, the wealthiest country on earth, throw our most vulnerable citizens under the bus for the sake of politics? The scandal in our country is NOT that we spend too much in supporting the disabled, it is that we don't spend enough. There are not even enough jobs for all of the able-bodied Americans, and that leaves no room at all for the disabled. I know many disabled people and ALL of them would work if they could, but they cannot find anybody who is willing to hire them and provide the accommodations they need in order to work effectively. Why should they, when there are so many able-bodied workers looking for jobs? Disability benefits are, for many, all that keeps them from starvation.
398
If you can work, you are not by definition "disabled".
People with genuine disabilities deserve our compassion and help, but if you actually checked who gets SSDI you would be profoundly shocked -- it is appalling abused, as a kind of "blue collar lotto" or welfare program for those who have used up unemployment or welfare.
People with genuine disabilities deserve our compassion and help, but if you actually checked who gets SSDI you would be profoundly shocked -- it is appalling abused, as a kind of "blue collar lotto" or welfare program for those who have used up unemployment or welfare.
3
Why should we? Unbearable greed.
If SSDI applicants in 30 states need to submit to a medical exam to confirm their disability, but SSDI applicants in 20 states do not need to, then shouldn't the process be standardized?
I'm on the left, and my family survived on SSDI when I was a child, but I think it's OK for the federal gov't to require uniform qualification requirements for a federal disability income program.
To me, this one was a win. Benefits aren't cut for those who qualify, but money is saved by preventing a minority of states from making it disproportionately easy to qualify.
I'm on the left, and my family survived on SSDI when I was a child, but I think it's OK for the federal gov't to require uniform qualification requirements for a federal disability income program.
To me, this one was a win. Benefits aren't cut for those who qualify, but money is saved by preventing a minority of states from making it disproportionately easy to qualify.
1
Social security desibilty befits have to be most abused entitlements today. People should have to requalify for thses benfits every 6 months. Shold be no difference then if person is on workers comp . A lot of abuse is going to people collecting triple different husbands .List goes on an on how people cheating system living off what should be going to poor
12
You have no idea what people now go through who are on disability. Though I've never needed any of this aid (or any aid), I have a friend with MS, and it's a crazy nightmare with her impairments to try to satisfy the demands for paperwork and proofs and multiple doctor testimonies and so forth that have been getting more punitive every year.
But you may someday have a chance to find out for yourself; I wish you luck, if so, and the same to us all. Too bad our taxes have to go to corporation subsidies and drummed up wars, to lower rates for millionaires than for workers. And can't come back to us in time of need, not to mention the vilification we take for ever needing them after a lifetime of paying them. They're coming for your social security next, jerry lee. And they'll call you names while they take it.
But you may someday have a chance to find out for yourself; I wish you luck, if so, and the same to us all. Too bad our taxes have to go to corporation subsidies and drummed up wars, to lower rates for millionaires than for workers. And can't come back to us in time of need, not to mention the vilification we take for ever needing them after a lifetime of paying them. They're coming for your social security next, jerry lee. And they'll call you names while they take it.
24
This gives me great hope. Hillary back on top, government operating, and not defaulting on the Full Faith and Credit of the United States of America. What a good month this has been.
1
While it's nice to give Boehner a valedictory kiss on the cheek I would have wished the Democrats to push this into the lap of the incoming Speaker so as to have a "put up or shut up" moment for him or her. As it is, the Tea Partiers now get to grumble about how they got sold out.
9
They would say that no matter what. It's what they do.
3
From the tenor of the overwhelming majority of the posted comments I've read so far, it's apparently also what we (Democrats) do. This seems to fit the classic definition of compromise: nobody's happy.
1
Cuts in Medicare will not change the calculus one bit with senior citizens.
Senior citizens will continue to vote overwhelmingly for GOP candidates because the Democratic Party, led by President Obama, offers no viable alternate.
Of course none of this would be the case if Mr. Obama or any of the Democratic Party leadership had a backbone and stood up for the rest of us against the GOP cost-cutting thugs in Congress.
And a final message for one of our presidential candidates....
How about it Hillary Clinton, are you going to stand mute while this bad deal goes down or are you going to show us what some fire and backbone will look like in a President?
Senior citizens will continue to vote overwhelmingly for GOP candidates because the Democratic Party, led by President Obama, offers no viable alternate.
Of course none of this would be the case if Mr. Obama or any of the Democratic Party leadership had a backbone and stood up for the rest of us against the GOP cost-cutting thugs in Congress.
And a final message for one of our presidential candidates....
How about it Hillary Clinton, are you going to stand mute while this bad deal goes down or are you going to show us what some fire and backbone will look like in a President?
65
"Of course none of this would be the case if Mr. Obama or any of the Democratic Party leadership had a backbone and stood up for the rest of us against the GOP cost-cutting thugs in Congress."
They can't do it if they don't have the votes You're in NH? You have a Republican Senator (Kelly Ayotte) up for re-election in 2016-- vote against her,
They can't do it if they don't have the votes You're in NH? You have a Republican Senator (Kelly Ayotte) up for re-election in 2016-- vote against her,
15
I'll believe it when I see it.
1
If what you are saying is true, the Republicans' hostage-taking scheme worked. The disadvantaged will pay for violations of the horrible spending cap deal, while businesses like oil companies (the most profitable businesses in the history of the earth) will continue to get subsidies. Absolutely outrageous.
Congress already approved the spending. If they don't really mean it, they shouldn't pass the bills. Raising the debt limit is a technicality based on what Congress already approved. Threats to throw the world into economic crisis and destroy the country's credit and reliability should not be rewarded in any way.
Congress already approved the spending. If they don't really mean it, they shouldn't pass the bills. Raising the debt limit is a technicality based on what Congress already approved. Threats to throw the world into economic crisis and destroy the country's credit and reliability should not be rewarded in any way.
384
The oil companies and the Kochs own the GOP. It is cheaper than hiring lobbyists.
3
The white elderly have voted for republicans in overwhelming numbers for years now. The republicans have been very loud about their plans to cut social security and medicare. Obama has to negotiate with the republicans. I agree totally with his plans here. Voting the way people do have consequences.
30
Yes, let the elderly white Republican voters see how reverently they will be sacrificed on the altar of "fiscal responsibility."
8
Well here you have the Democrats agreeing to cuts in Medicare and Social Security, so how is that supposed to get the elderly excited about voting Democratic? And Obama has never been able to negotiate with the Republicans - all he seems to do is cave in to their demands.
3
It will be cut even further for you, Mike, by the time you stop saying how those old folks got what they deserve (and certainly many are democrats, and many younger are republicans). If it were only republicans, young and old, who were to lose out, you might have some cause for schadenfreude, as unseemly as it is. But as it is, we all lose.
1
Both Ryan and Obama, as well as Boehner, should read the new testament again. Especially the part about caring for the poor and the sick. A deal is useful but why on the back of those who cannot pay politicians. I am crassly calling "campaign contributions" "paying". Sorry but that is what it is. The US has turned into a "pay for play" nation. Sad.
599
Amen! Pay to Play! If I give a politician a bag of cash at 2:00 AM in a Washington parking garage, and the FBI catches him on tape agreeing to a quid pro quo, he MAY got to jail. However, if I write a nice fat "campaign contribution" check while we have a nice expense account lunch, it's perfectly legal.
13
Always has been pay to play...
No cuts to Medicare or SS disability benefits! This is completely unacceptable.
321
Until of course YOU become of age and start thinking about your benefits under Medicare or SS. The richest nation in the history of modern man begrudges those who are old, ill or disabled. Sweet!
1
Wouldn't it be nice if the people elect extremists to Congress, legislators that would shutdown the government if bills were not *pro*-environment, *pro*-poor and "middle"-caste, or *anti*-corporate welfare?
The GOP knows the value of a good extremist to get things done. (Well, minus the "good" part, but like the non-fishing parts of life, that's just details, right? ...right?) The People should too.
The GOP knows the value of a good extremist to get things done. (Well, minus the "good" part, but like the non-fishing parts of life, that's just details, right? ...right?) The People should too.
I have been afraid that obama would cave on social security and medicare. The best republican president since ike.
98
"The best republican president since ike."
I don't like TPP but that's pretty absurd. ACA alone puts him in the liberal tradition, and Kagan and Sotomayor are no Repubs.
I don't like TPP but that's pretty absurd. ACA alone puts him in the liberal tradition, and Kagan and Sotomayor are no Repubs.
14
Obama's toadies will defend him no matter what he capitulates on (and he has been doing so for all his years in office). TPP is nothing short of a sell out of our democracy, but then again, he sold out our Bill of Rights with his support of spying on us and trying to imprison ethical whistle blowers while letting the war criminals walk amongst us. ACA is a half baked mess and not something to be proud of because he was totally hands off on that, leaving it to his dysfunctional party committee members. I would say that mostly, except for a few smaller foreign policy advancements, Cuba, Iran deal, that his legacy is greatly lacking. He is the best Repub since Ike. Hillary will be the follow up act, and as bad or worse. No good options from either corrupt corporate major political party (I'm assuming that the DNC has already rigged the situation so that Bernie can't be the nominee even if he has the votes).
4
Since nixon, who was to the left of obama.
4
Apparently one of the ways Congress proposes to pay for increased spending is to sell oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. On one hand, it's amusing that the free market GOP endorses the idea of buying oil at $100 a barrel and selling it for $50. On the other, it exposes a profound ignorance about accounting and makes me wonder how stupid (or feckless) these people can actually be.
If your neighbor cashed in his IRA to make his mortgage payment (or buy a new boat) and told you he had balanced the family budget, you could correctly conclude that this person is an idiot on the road to poverty/bankruptcy.
If your neighbor cashed in his IRA to make his mortgage payment (or buy a new boat) and told you he had balanced the family budget, you could correctly conclude that this person is an idiot on the road to poverty/bankruptcy.
120
Um, that would be Rubio....
5
Any deal that cuts Medicare and SS disability benefits is a bad deal. How about adequately funding the IRS? The IRS brings in about 4 times what it spends, so increasing its budget will REDUCE the deficit. Isn't that what Republicans say they want? Or they just want to do favors for their rich cronies and lay that on the backs of the POOR and the MIDDLE CLASS.
312
As a volunteer tax preparer I have reason to call the IRS from time to time about my clients' issues.
Without fail, the IRS agents are well informed and helpful.
We need more of them, not fewer. Sometimes the phone wait time is intolerable.
Without fail, the IRS agents are well informed and helpful.
We need more of them, not fewer. Sometimes the phone wait time is intolerable.
4
Keep gov't going with cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits.
Why is it there are unlimited funds for war but not a dime for what we paid into our whole lives? Where did it go?
Finance & gov't used to serve the people, now the people and the gov't serve finance. War, always good business when you're #1 weapons maker & war exporter to the world, should make the markets hum.
Let me know when we amass with pitchforks--I'll grab my walker and be on the front lines.
Why is it there are unlimited funds for war but not a dime for what we paid into our whole lives? Where did it go?
Finance & gov't used to serve the people, now the people and the gov't serve finance. War, always good business when you're #1 weapons maker & war exporter to the world, should make the markets hum.
Let me know when we amass with pitchforks--I'll grab my walker and be on the front lines.
303
We are a nation founded by war.
Hence, the blank check.
Hence, the blank check.
There are no cut and in fact a planned cut to disability benefits next year won't happen.
Read the article.
Read the article.
What about military spending? The article is silent on this.
130
It'll be increased, as will domestic.
The GOP made an effort to increase military funding through a loophole last week without touching the domestic limit. The loophole was closed.
So the more cynical and probably realistic way to look at this is that domestic spending limits will be allowed to rise so that military spending can also be increased. And the pols have something to show to their MIC lobbyist friends.
The GOP made an effort to increase military funding through a loophole last week without touching the domestic limit. The loophole was closed.
So the more cynical and probably realistic way to look at this is that domestic spending limits will be allowed to rise so that military spending can also be increased. And the pols have something to show to their MIC lobbyist friends.
5
you want ISIS to come here ??
3
We need all that defense money to pay to park submarines every few yards along underwater internet cables. Else we won't have enough cats on the internet.
4
Goodness. A last minute exhibit of government the way it could have been for the last years. People talking to each other.
17
The only thing I see is a "last minute exhibit" of a government and president who are selling out the 99 percent to the plutocrats who will not suffer one whit when this budget gets passed.
12
Cuts in Medicare and Social Security disability benefits....
In politics they call it horse-trading. Only some of the horses are people, and die. No billionaires are in danger, thank goodness.
In politics they call it horse-trading. Only some of the horses are people, and die. No billionaires are in danger, thank goodness.
567
And you wonder why senior citizens do not trust the Democratic Party when we have a feckless president who is willing to take part in bad "horse-trading" bu tossing seniors under the bus for the one percenters.....
10
.....so we should trust the Republicans instead?????
4
Cuts in Medicare and SS disability benefits? That's cutting a deal on the backs of the poorest, most vulnerable citizens. I'd like to see the deal pay for the "modest" spending increases with "modest" increases in taxes on the wealthiest.
841
If you read the article, the cuts to SS Disability amounts to requiring applicants to have a medical exam before they could qualify for benefits. I'm as liberal as they come, but that seems a pretty reasonable "cut" in exchange for increased domestic spending. The rest is accounting gimmicks on the trust fund side that will probably not end up cutting anything.
This deal keeps Medicare part B out of pocket costs from sky rocketing which WILL happen if no deal is reached at all. Which would you prefer?
This deal keeps Medicare part B out of pocket costs from sky rocketing which WILL happen if no deal is reached at all. Which would you prefer?
3
I just finished reading the column about the Greek National Day, which reviewed the capitulation of Greece to the impoverishment forced on it by the banks, culminating in the debacle brought on by the fake-left Syrza government. This is the same thing.
But we are not Greece. We do not face the total collapse of our monetary system and our economy. We can survive without disaster.
The billionaire lobby wants to impose austerity on us at pain of defunding the government. I say bring it on.
This is not my government. It is a government of, by, and for the banks. Let it come down. If we face a period of depression now, it is better than a drawn out decline into peonage. We call ourselves free people. Let's act like free people. Let us say NO.
But we are not Greece. We do not face the total collapse of our monetary system and our economy. We can survive without disaster.
The billionaire lobby wants to impose austerity on us at pain of defunding the government. I say bring it on.
This is not my government. It is a government of, by, and for the banks. Let it come down. If we face a period of depression now, it is better than a drawn out decline into peonage. We call ourselves free people. Let's act like free people. Let us say NO.
10
There are too many people like this who support any social program regardless of it's effectiveness. If I told you the waste and fraud in the free and reduced lunch program, you'd be defensive. Do these programs feed hungry children? Yes. Are there fewer and fewer chidlren who prefer to be anonymous while recieving free meals? Yes. Too many have feeleings of entitlement at young age, explaining they don't pay for meals when you refer to their waste. This attitude that social programs can't be touched supports these attitudes.
2
Classic Obama. He capitulates and agrees to cut Medicare and Social Security benefits because he is afraid of Paul Ryan.
87
I had hopes that Obama would call the bluff; but he'd rather do a deal in which some powerless people lose everything and the wealthy... don't get quite everything they want.
77
I completely agree with your anger and I am ashamed that I ever voted for this fraud of a president not once, but twice....which demonstrates again there is not a "dimes worth of difference" between Obama and the GOP plutocrats.
8
Afraid of Paul Ryan? Hardly. But I agree his capitulation is very bad.
1
Cuts in medicare and disability benefits are unacceptable. Obama should resist any concessions as a condition to raising the debt limit. People depend on these resources and they need to be raised, not cut.
400
Cuts?? Democrats, where are you?! Don't agree!!
Beat the GOP/TPs over the head with this one -- no COLA this year, 40% rise in Medicare premiums for those of us finally old enough to sign on, and rising costs for food, housing, medicines. Now, a budget 'deal' made on the backs of the elderly and disabled?? Perfect chance for the President to use the Bully Pulpit to denounce it!
Enough already -- go after the bloated Defense budget! And rescind the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest!
Beat the GOP/TPs over the head with this one -- no COLA this year, 40% rise in Medicare premiums for those of us finally old enough to sign on, and rising costs for food, housing, medicines. Now, a budget 'deal' made on the backs of the elderly and disabled?? Perfect chance for the President to use the Bully Pulpit to denounce it!
Enough already -- go after the bloated Defense budget! And rescind the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest!
248
Social Security Disability Benefits Fraud is killing Social Security as it takes away crucial revenues from Social Security
7
Didn't the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest get rescinded years ago?
That said, better to find the money in the military budget than in SSI and Medicare.
That said, better to find the money in the military budget than in SSI and Medicare.
13