Concerning the so-called "Debt Ceiling," without additional borrowing authority, the federal government could prioritize payments after the debt ceiling hits - but only for a very short time. Within weeks, cash flow problems would force some pretty uncomfortable choices. The element of uncertainty would spook capital markets and increase the cost of borrowing. Even slightly higher interest rates would increase debt service payments substantially, exacerbating our budget problems. It's nowhere we want to go.
However, raising the debt ceiling in perpetuity would have the same cumulative effect as previously described. That's why using the debt ceiling to force spending cuts is a good, and necessary, move. That's what gave us the Budget Control Act of 2011, which has resulted in two straight years of lower discretionary spending. Previous negotiations over the debt ceiling have yielded other significant budget agreements.
The Senate passing the Murray-Ryan Budget Deal would short-circuit future government shutdown possibility, thus pacifying would-have-been-disgruntled government-services-disrupted voters to not un-elect and oust would-be-hamstrung demoncrats having their politicizing funding mechanism cut by Shutdown before the upcoming 2014 Election.
The U.S. House of Representatives recently passing the Murray-Ryan budget deal connived by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and sexist-feminist Obamanite twit and Senate Budget Chairwoman Patty Murray, D-Wash., would lock in spending levels for the next two years, which proposed legislation has understandably caused serious confusion and apprehension within the Republican Party.
The deal was approved by a woefully-misguided majority, 332-94, and is expected to come up for a vote next week in the U.S. Senate, where the Democratic leadership is reportedly unsure of whether it can pass.
In a last-ditch effort to gather support for the measure as debate came to a close, deluded budget-bill co-author Paul Ryan declared, “I was part of the last presidential election. We tried defeating this president. I wish we would have.
Elections have consequences. To really do what we want, we’re going to have to win elections.”
If the Patty-Murray Budget Deal does not pass, GOP-election-beneficial government shutdown might likely occur again just before the upcoming 2014 election, causing enraged voters to oust crucial sitting demoncrat legislators and replacing them with "better-than-nothing" Republican newcomers.
Just after the vote, Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., blasted the House Republican leadership for pushing through “a two-year budget that will allow the federal government to spend an additional $63 billion more than current law allows – money that our country does not have.
“Sixty-three billion dollars of new spending – and therefore new taxes in some form – is not a small amount of money,” McClintock warned. “It averages about $570 of added burdens for every family in America. The new congressional budget is a mistake at a time when we can’t afford many more mistakes. The path of least resistance, even if paved with good intentions, is not a path America can afford to travel any longer.”
However, mindless Rep. Randy Hultgren, R-Ill., shared a far different perspective after he voted in support of the measure.
Wrong-headed mis-logic was his raving rant:
“This budget agreement preserves fiscally conservative principles, ensures our military readiness and makes the first step toward breaking the cycle of government by crisis,” he said. “By actually capping discretionary spending levels below two previously passed House budgets and the caps put in place by the Budget Control Act of 2011 – without raising taxes – we are preserving fiscal responsibility and opening the door to true reform of our $17 trillion debt problem.”
Acquiesce-to-the-demoncrat-enemy Hultgren argued that governing through continuing resolutions and short-term budgets “hurts our ability to properly oversee federal spending, endangers our national defense and squelches opportunities to pass debt solutions that require looking further than six months down the road.”
Obama and Sen. Harry Reid have repeatedly proved themselves non-willing to address America’s exploding debt and deficit, which is why we are left with this too small incremental step. This budget imposes meager and inadequate and continuing uncertainty to job creators and small business owners. The Murray-Ryan budget boondoggle in no substantial way achieves the balanced budget that the American people deserve, which is why it cannot be supported.
A White House statement reveals awareness that the bill insulates demoncrat legislators against dissatisfied voter appeasement concerning next year's 2014 elections potentially affecting the partisan balance of both Senate and House in that it marks an important moment of misguided bipartisan compromise, exposed by deceptive Obamanite demoncrats with their revisionist weaselword re-wording statement: "Washington can and should stop governing by crisis" in which "both sides can work together" [ to continue Obamanite deception and tyranny ].
Before the vote, Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, said it would be a terrible mistake for his GOP colleagues to approve the deal because, “It makes Obama’s exploding deficits and budgets [appear to be] the official policy of the Republican Party.”
Stockman was one of the few Republicans to blast the bill, and a growing number of GOP lawmakers have expressed overwhelming dissatisfaction with the so-called compromise.
Media-suppressed contrary-to-the-bill is, of course, the fault of subversive network media illegitimately blaming the government shutdown on both establishment and tea-party Republicans trying to thwart and block Obamanite-demanded Obamacare funding.
The Ryan-Murray proposal is, conveniently for entrenched demoncrat-legislators re-election prospects in 2014, expressly designed to avoid future government shutdowns until after the 2014 Election. The bill abandons many sequester cuts and replaces them with limpid and baseless pie-in-the-sky-by-and-by promises of future budget cuts.
The revenue raised because of The Budget Bill would come from "fees" as opposed to "taxes."
Stockman, however, said that it is absolutely not an incremental step to lower spending, but actually increases spending.
“It explodes the spending caps, balloons the deficit and betrays conservatives and the Constitution,” he charged.
Fiscal conservatives have demanded to know how more taxing and spending will address the monumental debt of $17 trillion, with more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities that will burden future generations.
One of the few other lawmakers scathingly critical of the bill, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., told the media: “What [the Bill does] is raise fees, raise money, steal money. Raise the costs of pensions for federal workers. Do these other things in the out years that will never be guaranteed to be there.”
The Cato Institute called the deal a “huge Republican cave-in.”
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. warned the GOP not to trade budget cuts already in the law for promises of future cuts.
“What you end up having is a promise that they may or may not adhere to,” he said. “I think the deal’s a bad deal..…If you want to put our country on a more sound footing, keep the sequester and add to it.”
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who did not support the deal, released a statement before Thursday’s House vote saying the budget deal moves in the wrong direction by spending and taxing more, while allowing continued funding for Obamascare.
Cruz noted that under the sequester, Congress took a small step forward by reducing spending by 2.4 percent, and suggested increasing that number while protecting the military from disproportionate cuts.
“Instead, this proposal undoes the sequester’s modest reforms and pushes us two steps back, deeper into debt. Supporters of this plan are asking for more spending now in exchange for minor changes that may possibly reduce spending later,” said the Texan.
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who didn’t support the deal, argued that sequestration may be far from ideal, but at least it forces Congress get serious about excessive spending.
The senator worried the Ryan-Murray deal would merely trade concrete spending reductions over the next two years for theoretical spending cuts a decade from now.
“In the meantime, the deal raises taxes on all air travelers, so that Congress can continue to ignore both waste in discretionary spending and the ticking fiscal time-bomb of our [vital-for-the-helpless-poor] entitlement programs.”
At USA Today, Michael Needham, chief of Heritage Action for America, said the budget agreement struck by Ryan and Murray is a step backward as it calls for an immediate increase in federal spending, raises taxes and fees, and relies on “promises of future cuts that the demise of the sequester vividly illustrates cannot be counted on.”
Former Reagan Budget Director David Stockman didn’t feel constrained to blast the deal, telling CNBC “It’s a joke and betrayal.”
He said House Republicans “capitulated” in agreeing to a two-year budget deal that left the country to deal with an unsustainable fiscal situation until the peak of the presidential primaries in 2015, when nothing will get done.
“It’s the final surrender of the House Republican leadership to Beltway politics and kicking the can and ignoring the budget monster that’s hurtling down the road,” was his blistering critique.
Meanwhile, Heritage’s Needham, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, American Conservative Union chairman Al Cardenas and others have rebuked the Murray-Ryan plan.
In a letter, they state: “Though conservatives support more spending restraint, the discretionary spending limits defined in the Budget Control Act represent a promise to the American people to marginally slow the growth of government.”
Intriguing is the intensity of the subversive-media-insinuated "Republican civil war" in the wake of Paul Ryan's caving in to consorting with stern-faced demoncrat and sexist-feminist Washington "senator" Patty Murry concerning a concocted budget proposal insuring against government shutdown and thus insulating entrenched demoncrats in Congress against voter dissatisfaction which assuredly would cause their ouster in the 2014 election.
John Boehner's politically-shrewd chiding against "no-backup-necessary" tea party political front groups (Americans for Prosperity, Heritage Action for America, Senate Conservatives Fund, etc.) should be tempered in light of the grave defects imposed by the Murray-Ryan budget-deal shenanigan. Tea partiers plan to strongly and positively influence and actually plan to ultimately support need-everyone-on-the-team-to-flip-the-Senate enlightened-establishment Republicans in 2014 and beyond.
Money is trickling into Washington from big corporations and Wall Street, much of it going to establishment GOP front groups (the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Karl Rove's funding empire, etc.) to aid establishment Republicans with fervent tea party invigorators.
The government shutdown and near default because of the Reid/Pelosi/Schumer/Durbin/Hoyer and Kenyan-not-Hawaiian-born Obama's insistence on perpetuating, with Raised Debt Ceiling, the Non-Affordable Non-Workable so-called "affordable" "care" Act, (which the tea party strongly opposed) was a demoncat-disruptive technique establishment Congressional demoncrats are so fearful of having happen again, that big corporations and Wall Street are now determined to wisely apportion even more funding from right-and-not-wrong-wing millionaires (the Koch brothers, Foster Freiss, Sheldon Adelson, William Dore, Harold Simmons, Peter Thiel, Bruce Kovner, Art Pope et al) who have been helping finance "tea-party" (whatever that means) front groups.
Noteworthy it is that those millionaires performed with cogent insight from Citizens United along with the Super-PACS and social welfare organizations who came in their wake which across-the-board GOPers supported, correctly ascertaining that they would make it easier to funnel increasingly monies to viable Christian-social-issues-accommodating honorable-reputation non-double-talking Republican candidates.
It behooves everyone to realize (and acknowledge) that Americans did not get Kenyan-not-Hawaiian-born Barack Hussein Obama into office (see the birth-certificate image at http://confrontation.faithweb.com)
Also, Congress did not vote for Obamascare.
Finally, Minnesotans did not vote for Al Franken.
The sneakiness of mouthing too-inclusive overbroad mis-semantics for the sake of demonic deception can be illustrated by referring to some Scriptural passages:
Genesis 3:1 =
Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree of the garden"?
First Samuel 15 =
1 And Samuel said to Saul, "The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore respond to the words of the Lord."
2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, "I will punish what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way, when they came up out of Egypt.
3 Now go and smite Amalek, and completely destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."
4 So Saul summoned the people, and numbered them in Teanim, two hundred thousand men on foot, and ten thousand men of Judah.
5 And Saul came to the city of Amalek, and lay in wait in the valley.
6 And Saul said to the Kenites, "Go, leave, go down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them; for you showed kindness to all the people of Israel when they came up out of Egypt." So the Kenites left from among the Amalekites.
7 And Saul defeated the Amalekites, from Havilah as far as Shur, which is east of Egypt.
8 And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and completely destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.
9 But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep and of the oxen and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them; all that was despised and worthless they completely destroyed.
10 The word of the Lord came to Samuel:
11 "I regret that I have made Saul king; for he has turned back from following me, and has not performed my commandments." And Samuel was angry; and he cried to the Lord all night.
12 And Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning; and it was told Samuel, "Saul came to Carmel, and hey, he set up a monument for himself and turned, and passed on, and went down to Gilgal."
13 And Samuel came to Saul, and Saul said to him, "Blessed be you to the Lord; I have performed the commandment of the Lord."
14 And Samuel said, "What then is this bleating of the sheep in my ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?"
15 Saul said, "They have brought them from the Amalekites; for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice to the Lord your God; and the remainder we have completely destroyed."
16 Then Samuel said to Saul, "Stop! I will tell you what the Lord said to me this night." And he said to him, "Say on."
17 And Samuel said, "Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The Lord anointed you king over Israel.
18 And the Lord sent you on a mission, and said, ‘Go, complete destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed.’
19 Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord? Why did you swoop on the spoil, and do what was evil in the sight of the Lord?"
20 And Saul said to Samuel, "I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, I have gone on the mission on which the Lord sent me, I have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and I have completely destroyed the Amalekites.
21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the best of the things devoted to destruction, to sacrifice to the Lord your God in Gilgal."
22 And Samuel said, "Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Hey, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to respond than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He has also rejected you from being king."
24 And Saul said to Samuel, "I have sinned; for I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord and your words, because I feared the people and obeyed their voice.
25 Now therefore, I beg you, pardon my sin, and return with me, that I may worship the Lord."
26 And Samuel said to Saul, "I will not return with you; for you have rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord has rejected you from being king over Israel."
27 As Samuel turned to go away, Saul laid hold upon the cloth of his robe, and it tore.
28 And Samuel said to him, "The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you this day, and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you.
29 And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or repent; for He is not a man, that he should repent."
30 Then he said, "I have sinned; yet honor me now in front of the elders of my people and in front of Israel, and return with me, that I may worship the Lord your God."
31 So Samuel turned back after Saul; and Saul worshiped the Lord.
32 Then Samuel said, "Bring here to me Agag the king of the Amalekites." And Agag came to him cheerfully. Agag said, "Surely the bitterness of death is past."
33 And Samuel said, "As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women." And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.
34 Then Samuel went to Ramah; and Saul went up to his house in Gibeah of Saul.
35 And Samuel did not see Saul again until the day of his death, but Samuel grieved over Saul. And the Lord regretted that he had made Saul king over Israel.
First Samuel 28 =
15 Then Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" Saul answered, "I am in great distress; for the Philistines are warring against me, and God has turned away from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams; therefore I have summoned you to tell me what I shall do."
16 And Samuel said, "Why then do you ask me, since the Lord has turned from you and become your enemy?
17 The Lord has done to you as He spoke by me; for the Lord has torn the kingdom out of your hand, and given it to your neighbor, David.
18 Because you did not obey the voice of the Lord, and did not carry out his fierce wrath against Amalek, therefore the Lord has done this thing to you this day.
19 Moreover the Lord will give Israel also with you into the hand of the Philistines; and tomorrow you and your sons shall be with me; the Lord will give the army of Israel also into the hand of the Philistines."
Only about half of "americans" got the anti-Torah apostate-catholic/cultic-islamic liar-in-chief Barack Obama into office, mostly by non-fraudulently voting for him.
Also, majority-demoncrat Obomanites in both the Reid-controlled Senate and the Pelosi-controlled House of Representatives of the Congress voted for Obamascare between 2008 and 2010 - NOT all of Congress.
Hopefully, the reader can - by now - understand the statement that "Minnesotans" did not vote for Al Franken. If the dull of mind still do not "get it," here's a little help: Only some "minnesotans" voted for Al Franken instead of Norm Coleman.
If the Obama-administration federal government defaults without raising the Debt Ceiling in 2014 for the first time in our nation's history, because Kenyan-not-Hawaiian-born foreign-born-nigroid Barack Obama and patsy demoncrat Obomanites insist on funding not-affordable non-workable anti-Medicare Obamascare without first negotiating about That Big Entitlement (Obamascare), Barack/Barry/Barack Hussein Obama/Soetoro/Obama will have clearly and plainly violated an amendment of the United States Constitution and thus obviously and treasonously endangering America's financial national security as a virtual traitor against the United States.
In that case, both houses of Congress would then have no logical alternative but to immediately call up impeachment legislation against not only Obama himself but (if there was obstruction of justice) maybe also obstructionist Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
If Reid did not comply with consideration of the impeachment legislation, each State (like Scott Walker's Wisconsin) would have to direct their State Police and National Guard (along with deputized anti-Obomanites) under their command to override any federal use of marshals or various pro-Obamanite personnel of the armed forces of the U.S. military.
Impeachment against Barack Obama and perhaps Harry Reid (and, if necessary, potential accomplice Joe Biden) would then quickly result in the third-in-line John Boehner becoming acting President of the United States and temporary Commander-in-Chief who would promptly oust obstructionists Eric Holder and his attorneys, and thus catastrophic collapse of America would thankfully be prevented in time.
Perhaps threat of financial default across America could have some benefits in forcing certain americans to stop spending beyond their means and quit living on credit (whether by credit cards, mortgage or student or car loans, etc.) per the Biblical instruction:
Proverbs 22:7
The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender.
Romans 13:8
Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.