Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Obama Signs Order To Begin Spending Cuts

March 1, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama has signed an order authorizing the government to begin cutting $85 billion from federal accounts, officially enacting across-the-board reductions that he......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(36)

Howard

Mar-03-13 1:55 PM

Brent1 and sueanne, my replies come from the facts of the Congress. Obviously you two are not looking in the right place, or just don't care to. I wish you well in your fantasy world.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brent1

Mar-02-13 7:36 PM

Sueann, I also am interested in laying out the facts which can be checked out by the thousands of readers and they are smart enough to decide. I dont suggest relying on any news outlet but to do the leg work themselves. The senate bills are a matter of written record that no one can pollute. To the people, Please do your research, the senate and house have their agenda, votes and minutes so you can see the truth without the filters of the left or right. Do not use Google....

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sueanne

Mar-02-13 7:26 PM

Howard, the facts are what they are. Im not interested in convincing you, i am more intersted in the readers of this forum, they will decide for themselves. But thanks for your reply.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Howard

Mar-02-13 6:55 PM

Brent1, OMG, the only senate vote that was 38-62 was a cloture vote to continue with or end the sequester. It gave the president zero power to do anything. Where did you find such nonsense?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Howard

Mar-02-13 6:43 PM

Brent1, There was never a vote because the republicans demanded a 60 vote super-majority which IS a filibuster. There are some bills (votes) that do need a majority of 60 but NOT the recent budget/sequester/fiscal cliff mess we are in at this time. Please try to understand this. Fox news slides over these facts. I watch Fox more than MSNBC. I wish you would do the opposite for a short time and really open your mind up.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brent1

Mar-02-13 4:23 PM

Howard, with all due respect, you come on a little strong with "get the Facts" and "Fox" news. There was never a filibuster.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brent1

Mar-02-13 4:19 PM

One last article,

The Senate killed, 38 to 62, a GOP measure to give President Barack Obama more flexibility in implementing the sequester cuts set to take effect on Friday. The proposal -- a last-ditch effort to stave off the across-the-board, $85 billion in spending cuts -- would have allowed Obama to submit an alternative package of spending cuts to congress by March 15.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brent1

Mar-02-13 4:15 PM

another news article:

On back-to-back votes Thursday, the Senate killed the last two legislative options standing between Congress and tens of billions in across-the-board spending cuts — now expected to take effect by midnight Friday

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brent1

Mar-02-13 4:11 PM

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- A Republican bill that would replace the onset on Friday of automatic spending cuts under the sequester failed a test vote in the Senate on Thursday. Without a replacement, $85 billion in across-the-board cuts are due to take effect beginning Friday. Congressional leaders are scheduled to meet with President Barack Obama on Friday to discuss replacing the cuts, which go into effect gradually through September. The Republican bill would have given Obama flexibility to determine what cuts to make, but would not have raised any taxes.

So they did vote on it.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brent1

Mar-02-13 4:00 PM

A filibuster is a type of parliamentary procedure where debate is extended, allowing one or more members to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a given proposal. It is sometimes referred to as talking out a bill.

Howard, I dont recall these bills that sueann refers to ever being "brought up for a vote" (bringing a bill up for vote is up to the majority leader). Meaning there could be no filibuster....

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sueanne

Mar-02-13 3:51 PM

Howard do you have proof that the senate republicans filibustered the republican bills that the house sent to the senate concerning the sequester? And if you are right, ill be the first one to say your right.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sueanne

Mar-02-13 3:43 PM

I may be hard for you to accept that i don't believe that the republicans filibuster their own bills. Nor do i depend on info and talking points from the liberal media liars. The idea that you think we follow whats on tv tells me you think it acceptable to do so. I dont.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Howard

Mar-02-13 1:55 PM

sueanne, the house bills that go to the senate that are not voted on are because the republicans are demanding a 60 vote super majority or they will FILIBUSTER. All of you have your head in the clouds (Fox Noise) that don't realize what is really happening. Are you refuting the fact that there have been a record number of republican filibusters since Obama took office? If so you you don't know your facts. There can not be a super majority as demanded by conservative senators therefore nothing gets done. The majority of Americans realize this. Sound bites look good when Boehner says he sends bills to the senate and they aren't voted on. YES, sueanne, they DO filibuster their own bills - Get the facts!

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KittyCat

Mar-02-13 12:35 PM

What is going to happen with obamacare with all these cuts. Agreed that we need to stop sending aid and food to these other countries when they don't want us there.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KabobBilly

Mar-02-13 11:47 AM

How many expenses can we push on the 1%ers before they run out of money? This is nothing but a liberal scam. If we took all of their money the costs would not be covered. This is an unworkable class warfare scheme.

8 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Emelye

Mar-02-13 11:16 AM

With about 20% - 1 in 5 - U.S. corporations paying ZERO tax on billions of dollars in profits I cannot support the Republican attempts to fix our government's financial problems on the backs of the poor, working and middle classes. Are there wasteful programs in government? Sure! But this ill advised (to the point of insanity) sequester targets none of them specifically. It's a joke and the congressional Republicans are its primary authors.

I suspect that the right wing deficit hawks (bought and paid for by the U.S. plutocracy) have realized there's no way through normal procedures that they could get the radical cuts to government agencies they wanted so they forced Boehner to do nothing substantive to engineer a compromise. They gave up a paltry income tax increase of about 4½% and think they can use that as an excuse to protect the wealthy elite's loopholes, tax breaks and corporate welfare with that as an excuse. I don't think the American people are buying it.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MyRushie

Mar-02-13 10:41 AM

Uh, BINGO!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sueanne

Mar-02-13 10:26 AM

I don't believe that the republican house bill would be filibustered by the senate republicans either. Harry never brought it up for a vote.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MyRushie

Mar-02-13 9:32 AM

GA: Details? Or just BS?

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MyRushie

Mar-02-13 9:32 AM

But, won't your sister get back pay retroactive. That is what's being reported.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-02-13 9:32 AM

I can't believe some of the misinformation from the righties--must be their limited sources, or simply denial.

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

jamestownresident26

Mar-02-13 9:13 AM

This is a horrible thing. I agree we need to cut spending, but you are taking money away from middle class working Americans. My sister who makes less than $70k a year is going to lose one day a week of her employment due to this. And you people think this is good? How about cutting how much Senator's and POTUS spend willy nilly on themselves?

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sueanne

Mar-02-13 8:58 AM

Get the rich, never enough. The republicans compromised raising the rate on the rich and here we go again, more more more, never enough. Its exactly like a drug addict, never enough.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Conservative1212

Mar-02-13 8:49 AM

Cuts in gov't except the military needs to be mare drastic. I would start with foreign aid also but then cut welfare and medicaid to illegals.

8 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Howard

Mar-02-13 8:40 AM

sueanne, you did not comprehend my post to you: The senate republicans filibustered those bills. They would not allow a vote to be taken.

7 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 36 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web