Democrats Say GOP Complaint of Spending 'Shutdown' Strategy Doesn't Add Up
CQRepublicans are uttering a word that for 12 years has been utterly unspeakable.
Shutdown.
It's a word that can send shudders through those who saw the last one — actually, two — play out after Republicans took control of Congress in 1995. The Newt Gingrich-Bill Clinton standoff was so traumatic that since then, neither party has ventured anywhere in that direction.This year's appropriations tug-of-war between a new majority in Congress and a president of the opposing party does not appear to be headed for a government shutdown, but a rhetorical taboo was lifted when the word became part of the partisan message of the moment.
"The obvious plan of the Democrats is to not do appropriations bills but put everything together in a giant omnibus appropriations bill in a kind of legislative blackmail with all of the policy and increased spending, to in effect threaten the president to either sign the bill or be accused of shutting down the government," Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the chairman of the Republican Conference, said Wednesday.
President Bush has threatened to veto seven appropriations bills because together they would exceed his discretionary spending limit by more than $20 billion.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Look who's stallling now...
I love the audacity of the Democrats accusing the Republicans of stalling on appropriation bills. The idea that the Democratic circus this year – hearings to conduct political fishing expeditions over incidences when no crimes took place and their repeated statement votes about the Iraq war – aren’t to blame for the Congress’s inability to get things done is ridiculous. The Democrats came into the House promising bipartisanship and then immediately launched investigations whose sole purpose was to score political points and hope that someone might perjure himself. Followed that up with a few votes about Iraq whose only meaning were scoring political points and providing propaganda for the enemy, some more hearings, and then more meaningless votes on Iraq and we’re here. They promised to balance the budget, then increase spending. They promised to cut out earmarks, then fill every spending bill as full of earmarks as possible. It’s rather amusing to think that they can pass off this line.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment