Skip to main content

Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor talk about budget deal on Wednesday, December 11, 2013
On the heels of Tuesday evening's announcement from Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan that they had reached a budget deal for 2014 and 2015, the big question is whether Republicans can muster enough support for the package to pass it through Congress.

Already, some Senate conservatives are moving against the proposal, which Murray and Ryan say would provide sequester relief by increasing spending by $63 billion over the next two years, but offsetting that increase with $86 billion in new spending cuts and revenues over the next decade. For example, Rand Paul:

“Senator Paul will oppose the reported cap busting deal,” Doug Stafford, Paul’s senior adviser, told POLITICO on Wednesday. “He opposes increasing spending and undoing the minimal sequester cuts in current law, which weren’t even close to enough to begin with.”
And Sen. Mike Crapo, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said:
“It doesn’t appear to be something I will likely support,” Crapo said. “It’s pretty light on entitlement reform and the entitlement reform that’s done is not structural. It doesn’t do anything to actually change or fix that. We’re looking now to see if it can pass the Congress.”
But even if Senate Republicans don't provide much support for the deal, history suggests it can still pass the Senate because it has the support of Senate leadership and President Obama. The real question is whether Republicans will be able to get it through the House without Democratic help, and whether House Democrats will provide that help if Republicans ask for it.

Yesterday, Ryan said he expected conservatives would support the deal, pointing out that its spending levels are lower than the ones contained in the budget that House Republicans passed last year. And this morning, House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor appeared at a press conference with Ryan to demonstrate their support for the deal—and to try suggest that if Republicans pass it, it will allow them to pivot their focus back to Obamacare instead of dealing with another fiscal crisis.

Nonetheless, conservative groups were already railing against the deal even before it was announced, putting pressure on House Republicans to oppose it—and their efforts may be having an impact:

Many House GOP lawmakers leaving meeting on budget deal obviously not thrilled with Ryan-Murray budget deal
@jamiedupree
Obviously, "not thrilled" doesn't mean they'll vote against it, but given the history of House Republicans, it would be foolish to discount the possibility. So, if enough Republicans bolt to tank the deal, will House Democrats provide John Boehner cover?
"Stay tuned" @Nancypelosi says in regards to whether Democrats will support #budget agreememt.
@edatpost
The one thing we do know is that whether or not this deal passes, a huge economic issue remains unresolved: Extending emergency unemployment benefits for out-of-work Americans. Whatever Congress does with the budget, there's no excuse for cutting unemployment insurance now, especially in the middle of the holiday season.

::

Tell your member of Congress: Don't cut emergency unemployment benefits

8:21 AM PT: Here's more on how Boehner is pushing back against right-wing criticism of the budget deal. Also, other GOP senators opposing the deal include John Barrasso of Wyoming, Marco Rubio of Florida, and Jeff Sessions of Alabama.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Paul Ryan Cut off at the knees then (6+ / 0-)

    thrown under a bus

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:14:13 AM PST

  •  Can you spell JAMMED?.....where are my plane (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WattleBreakfast

    tickets out of here?

  •  If the corporations gain anything from this deal (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    varii, WattleBreakfast

    It is a non starter.

    In my opinion.

    Sarcasm on...It is so nice I live in a post racial America...Sarcasm off.

    by wbishop3 on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:27:50 AM PST

  •  it's hilarious how Nancy (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phoenix Woman, ruellia, scamperdo

    is still, despite being in the minority, still more powerful that Boehner in all ways other than those that are institutionally bestowed on him.

    "It's almost as if we're watching Mitt Romney on Safari in his own country." -- Jonathan Capeheart

    by JackND on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:29:22 AM PST

    •  Competent minority leader trumps incompetent (8+ / 0-)

      speaker.  I could also add she doesn't have an insane caucus to wrangle.

      If Hobby Lobby is against contraception, why does it buy its inventory from China, the country that limits the number of children by law?

      by Inland on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:35:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  more importantly, when she (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mr MadAsHell, Phoenix Woman

        speaks for her caucus, whether they will or won't do a thing, you can count on it. Time and again Boehner has shown that is mos decidedly not so for him.

        "It's almost as if we're watching Mitt Romney on Safari in his own country." -- Jonathan Capeheart

        by JackND on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:39:26 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Somehow I don't see what there is to "celebrate" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr Robert

          that  Dem caucus is cohesive, considering the fact that the deal is not an especially good one.

          (Of course, it is difficult to discern, since I can't turn up anything but VERY brief summaries of the proposed bill.)

          But from what I see, I am not impressed.  I'm just thankful that I've already completed my Federal Service, and that Mr M won't be affected by the cuts to military retirement (at this time, anyway).

          As for Sanders, when has he not gone along with the "deals" that the Dems negotiated?  (And yes, he is just one man.  He may very well do the best that he can do.  Wouldn't take that away from him.)

          But it appears to me that even when he is critical BEFORE HAND, he practically always "falls in line."

          OH, IF ANYONE HAS FOUND A LINK TO THE "ACTUAL BILL," PLEASE POST IT FOR OTHERS TO READ!
          Thanks!

          Mollie

          "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


          hiddennplainsight

          by musiccitymollie on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 11:38:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  it is far from... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            musiccitymollie

            satisfactory, but Nancy herself admitted that, rather colorfully, with her "embrace the suck".

            The silver lining is that, with the Democratic help, this budget passed, and the GOP civil war intensified considerably today. If anything, Nancy is better at the 11 dimensional chess than the president is.

            "It's almost as if we're watching Mitt Romney on Safari in his own country." -- Jonathan Capeheart

            by JackND on Thu Dec 12, 2013 at 07:31:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sorry, but Pelosi is one of wealthiest members (0+ / 0-)

              of Congress.

              From Wikipedia:

              Financial status [Nancy Pelosi]

              Nancy Pelosi is among the richest members of Congress,[125] with an estimated net worth of approximately $58 million, the 12th highest estimated net worth in Congress, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.[126]

              So not to pick on you--I'm sure you're a nice guy--Pelosi doesn't amuse me.

              I am not impressed if she is "flip" about the plight of financially devastated (in some instance) unemployed folks.  

              And it always distresses me when anyone suggests using fellow citizens as political pawns.

              Not fighting for the extension of Extended UE benefits was a mistake, IMHO.

              If Dems don't remedy this soon, 2014 will make 2010 look like Child's Play, I'm afraid.

              If you care about this, please call your Senators and Rep.  And Pelosi's Office, too.

              I already have. ;-)

              Mollie

              "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


              hiddennplainsight

              by musiccitymollie on Thu Dec 12, 2013 at 09:50:37 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm not... (0+ / 0-)

                seeing the relevance here...FDR was also very rich.

                "It's almost as if we're watching Mitt Romney on Safari in his own country." -- Jonathan Capeheart

                by JackND on Fri Dec 13, 2013 at 06:12:21 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes, FDR was wealthy--he gave us "The New Deal." (0+ / 0-)

                  Pelosi, by your own account, only "quips," and is part of a Leadership that can't [or won't] even get us a one-year extension of Extended UE benefits.

                  IMHO, there is a very big "disconnect" between many lawmakers (including SOME Dems) and everyday people.

                  In some instances, it could be their astronomical personal wealth.  It is "my guess"that this is one reason that she comes across as so callous about the outcome of the Budget deal.

                  (And no, I'm not unemployed--nor are any family members or friends.  But if those of us who are NOT directly affected by these actions don't stand with these people, I suspect that most lawmakers won't.)

                  But maybe your inference is correct--that it has nothing to do with her wealth.

                  But that inference would be even worse--wouldn't it?

                  Mollie

                  "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                  hiddennplainsight

                  by musiccitymollie on Fri Dec 13, 2013 at 11:19:36 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  That's right Mrs. Romney... everything would have (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phoenix Woman, Matt Z

    been buttermilk and biscuits if only Amercia™ would've had the good sense to elect your husband and this Ryan guy.


    Darwin doesn't care if you thought it was unloaded.

    by here4tehbeer on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:31:23 AM PST

  •  What is the best compromise between (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mogolori, librarisingnsf, Stude Dude

    hate and love, greed and compassion, racism and tolerance?

    It sure sucks that in 21st century America, we are we still dealing with such people.


    "We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis Brandies

    by Pescadero Bill on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:31:42 AM PST

    •  It is like a fault line overdue for rupture (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pescadero Bill, Stude Dude

      the way a majority of Americans perceive and want to address 21st century problems but our government is captive to a minority who believe in pre-Great Society and pre-New Deal (non-)solutions.

      "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

      by Mogolori on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:45:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  In the land of diminished expectations, (3+ / 0-)

    I suppose a proposal to do a little less damage could almost seem good news.

  •  don't they just need "something" (5+ / 0-)

    to pass the house, and the senate can add UI and jam it thru conference with Nancy's votes and the R's from swingy districts?

    Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

    by Loge on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:31:51 AM PST

  •  This deal allows Boehner to give a big (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hulibow, Phoenix Woman

    kiss off to the Tea Party and blow off the Hastert Rule.  I think he was setting up that very thing by allowing the shutdown.  There is no way he won't bring it to the floor if Ryan has signed off on it.  He knows he has to pass it with Dems.  He also knows that continuing to let the TP drag the Republican Party around by their short hairs is bad for business...not just the business of the country, but the business of collecting campaign contributions, and business in general in terms of the Chamber of Commerce, etal.

    Now the Republican leadership can (and will) say, "see, those guys were keeping us from governing, but now we see that's not good for the country.  Those of us who are reasonable Republicans want to be re-elected so we are throwing those guys under the bus."

    It sucks.  The deal isn't what we needed.  But I'm happy if it has the effect of marginalizing the Tea Party.

    If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you’d have left is pavement ~Robert Reich

    by k8dd8d on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:34:02 AM PST

  •  Sen. Murray (paraphrased) (3+ / 0-)

    This is not the best deal in the world. I didn't get the extension in unemployment benefits I wanted and the goppers didn't get to cut SS and Medicare, as they wanted.

    The deal was a stinker, but she won the battle of the press conference, imo.

    You can't make this stuff up.

    by David54 on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:36:14 AM PST

  •  So we're cheering again for losing? (7+ / 0-)

    Well, can't say we aren't loyal to Team Blue.  I mean did we get anything at all?  Isn't it always just a question of who we sell out next?  While I am happy that seniors still seem to have more political clout than other groups, that doesn't mean I'm happy to sell out federal retirement security or unemployment.  

    I mean the Republicans NEVER really lose do they?  They are never worse off after the negotiation.  Ever.  

    •  Murray did not have much leverage, given the (4+ / 0-)

      alternative was a CR that continued sequestration cuts, which many in the GOP would have been happy with.

      So, she could have taken a stand, but we'd have gone to shut down again, and this time it would be the Dems forcing it.

      That wouldn't have played too well in November 2014.

      The refrain of "they all suck" vs. "the Tea Party sucks", is rather important to holding the Senate and making gains in the House.

      Politics won the day, but as I said elsewhere here, there is another win in that the Hastert Rule may be history.

      If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you’d have left is pavement ~Robert Reich

      by k8dd8d on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:45:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No- wrong - the Dems had the leverage (4+ / 0-)

        They just won't use it.

        So, she could have taken a stand, but we'd have gone to shut down again, and this time it would be the Dems forcing it.
        Totally and completely wrong.

        That kind of thinking is what gets us this kind of crap.
        That kind of thinking is responsible for 2010.

        •  what should she have done? (0+ / 0-)

          If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you’d have left is pavement ~Robert Reich

          by k8dd8d on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:57:54 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How about - Stood Her Ground? (3+ / 0-)

            How about working it like she had the upper hand - which she did.
            How about telling the Republicans that we, the Democrats, would be happy to walk away from this "negotiation" with no deal what-so-ever. That would give us the chance to kick your ass once again.
            That would give us the chance to watch the Republican Party's approval rating drop even lower.

            How about trying to actually win?

            •  my point was that if she did the (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Phoenix Woman, ruellia

              walk with no deal, the general public would have come away with "both sides do it" mentality, because the Dems would have been blamed for a shut down.  

              Not saying that is right, but that I think that's how it would have played out.

              So then 2014 would have looked like "both sides suck" vs.
              what it will look like, which is "the Tea Party sucks".

              Is that how it should be?  Of course not.  But with perpetual campaigning and money driving everything, this is the place she was forced to.

              She did not have the upper hand, because the Reps were not against sequestration.  Go over to Red State and they think sequestration was the best thing since sliced bread.  Slightly more nuanced politicians in the Republican party understand it wasn't, but they were willing to accept that rather than the alternative of revenue.

              If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you’d have left is pavement ~Robert Reich

              by k8dd8d on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 09:40:54 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Nope - wrong (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                WattleBreakfast
                the general public would have come away with "both sides do it" mentality, because the Dems would have been blamed for a shut down.
                Why is it that Democrats are so afraid?
                Why is it they always think they will be cast in a bad light when they do the right thing?
                This timid, frightened approach is what cost us the 2010 election. We had nothing to stand for.

                This timid, frightened approach will cost us the 2014 election.

                She did have the upper hand. I've been to Red State. I know exactly what they're about.

                You don't win by being reasonable with these folks. You win by kicking their ass over and over.

              •  They "were" against sequestration of military or (0+ / 0-)

                defense spending (that is, the corporatist Republican lawmakers).

                McCain and Graham were just two of the most outspoken Repubs regarding the Sequester.

                This is well documented.  

                Not to mention that I have repeatedly posted video of Democratic Rep Van Hollen flatly stating this.

                And there were beau coup mainstream newspaper articles on this topic (for months).

                Mollie

                "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                hiddennplainsight

                by musiccitymollie on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 11:43:19 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  that's 3, but I think you will find something (0+ / 0-)

                  different when you look at the ones who call themselves "conservatives" rather than "Republicans".  Been watching RedState...they are livid because they want the sequestration cuts...

                  If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you’d have left is pavement ~Robert Reich

                  by k8dd8d on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 12:10:17 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That may be--my point was that the Republican (0+ / 0-)

                    "Establishment and Leadership" got what they wanted (more than we did, IMHO).

                    Honestly, I'm not concerned about what conservative "bloggers" think.  But that's just me.

                    What we just say was another chuck of the Bowles-Simpson Catfood Commission proposal being written into law (and I presume soon to be passed and implemented).

                    Here's from a previous comment:

                    I hope that folks will take the Summary of yesterday's budget deal, and check out the Bowles-Simpson proposal that I've linked to here.

                    Many of the budget cuts and policies [just agreed to] come from Section IV of the Bowles-Simpson proposal.

                    It is appropriately titled:  Other Mandatory Policies.

                    This Section begins on Page 44 of this document.

                    The cuts to federal employee and military personnel pensions are in this proposal (and further cuts, for that matter), as well as many of the "fees."

                    Oh, and cuts to the Farm Bill (SNAP).

                    Really, the bulk of the negotiated "budget deals" that we've seen since "The Moment Of Truth" was published in 2010 is the incremental adoption of this proposal (ongoing, obviously).

                    Mollie

                    "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                    hiddennplainsight

                    by musiccitymollie on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 12:37:29 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

      •  But that just reinforces the fact that the (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Capt Crunch, stewarjt, k8dd8d

        sequester deal was an epic fail.  

        All they worry about is what plays in the next cycle so they get played every time.

        Obamacare is what they need to worry about in 2014.  

        •  Yes, and I think they have realized (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ruellia, Stude Dude

          what a colossal mistake the sequestration was.  Obama should have stood his ground in 2011 and we wouldn't be where we are now.

          But we are where we are, and we have to play the cards we have.

          Holding the Senate & gaining in the House next year is important.

          Obamacare can do that.

          If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you’d have left is pavement ~Robert Reich

          by k8dd8d on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 10:01:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  greenbell, this "deal" came straight out of (0+ / 0-)

      the Fiscal Commission's playbook, Section IV, Other Mandatory Policies.

      Please see my link and comment below.

      Mollie

      "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


      hiddennplainsight

      by musiccitymollie on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 12:41:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Small Government losers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    msdrown, Phoenix Woman

    To all of those so-called conservatives and tea-baggers who pine for small government - small government is for small countries and small minds.  A country and economy as large and diverse as America requires quite a lot of governing to balance out all of the competing interests.  So far it's not doing a particular good job at making the balance fair between business and personal interests, social welfare vs. corporate welfare, religious and secular interests, civil rights vs. intolerance, privacy vs. public safety, diplomacy vs. military actions, etc.  But small government is for small countries.  There are only a few reasons that people want smaller government - they have the mistaken belief that their taxes will be lowered and that their personal bigotries will be preserved to their own benefit.  Neither is ever going to happen.  What's far more important is to educate the general public on the role of government in modern society. Our educational system is doing a failing job of that.

  •  I think this deal sucks (5+ / 0-)

    No unemployment extension. That shouldn't even be open to "negotiation".
    No programs to stimulate job growth. It locks in a do-nothing, austerity approach to the economy.
    It doesn't close any of the tax loop holes for the wealthy.
    It doesn't restore food stamps to those who have already suffered cuts.

    This is nuts.
    Didn't we just kick their ass? Twice?
    And this is what we get?

    Again - this deal sucks.

    Where are the Democrats with spines?
    Where are the Democrats with the ability to learn?
    Why do the Democrats keeps pissing on their own shoes?

  •  My spidey sense (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    varii, Jerry056, Phoenix Woman, ruellia

    says this thing will tank, due to lack of support from both left (for very practical reasons like unemployment benefits) and the right (because they won't tie their own shoes if Democrats support the idea).

    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

    by raptavio on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 08:49:40 AM PST

  •  I believe Cummings, et al are rallying for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phoenix Woman

    a companion UI extension as an agreement to vote for the bill, or something like that.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 09:23:40 AM PST

  •  I'm sorry, I couldn't read the post. (0+ / 0-)

    The oddly equivalently angled--to the right, natch!--tilt of the two heads in that picture is mesmerizing. I now want to vote for Republicans . . .
    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

    by bryduck on Wed Dec 11, 2013 at 09:56:14 AM PST

  •  Congress reaches agreement on a budget and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WattleBreakfast

    It's more of the "let them eat cake" governance that the GOP has patiently fomented in their sly long game. Consider: media pundits and DLC/Clintonian Democrats have bought in hook, line and sinker to the false construction of a need to strike balance between "far left and far right", "reducing the deficit" propounded by discredited Simpson-Bowles dogma.

    it's hailed as progess? Appears that addressing inequality has become more of a Third Rail issue championed by far left Democrats; the Democratic Leadership at the DNC, DSCC and DCCC have basically surrendered, desperate to provide cover for incumbents and those running for open seats in 2014 as having any sort of accomplishment to cite in efforts to salvage their reelection bids.

    The unemployment number followed by economists is more like 13% (Table A-15 of BLS report), or ~20 million Americans! Liberals should be up in arms- learning from the success of the Tea Party in reshaping the GOP. There is no "Third Way", save for the Neville Chamberlain Wing of the Democratic Party.
    Strategically, the GOP's probability of taking the six seats necessary to control the Senate just rose. I hope I'm wrong.
  •  Defense contrators win, soldiers lose! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WattleBreakfast

    If you retired from the military at age 52 after 20 or more years active service, your retirement benefits will be cut by about 12% for the rest of your life under this Murray/Ryan deal. It works like this. If the COLA for Congress and everyone else is 1.7% for the year, your retirement will only increase .7%, or one percent less than everyone else. This will go on every year until you are 65, and you will not only have reduced benefits then, but for the rest of your life.

    Defense contractors will now get more jobs and more money at the expense of our soldiers. Who the Hell would want to join the military now?

  •  GOP senators can filibuster this, right? (0+ / 0-)

    It's not a presidential nomination, so this still needs 60 votes to get to a floor vote in the Senate.

    I'd love to see them filibuster it.  Please proceed.

  •  I want to hear from Federal Employees (0+ / 0-)

    I'm glad they reached a deal and all but I think making federal employees pay more for their retirement as part of the deal will make any federal employees riding on the Democrat/Republican fence say "There's no difference, with either party for us"

    I mean Obama went along with a pay freeze for them too.

    I think that little part of the deal was bad politics for the dems.

    However I haven't talked to any federal employees.

  •  SOCIAL SECURITY AND THE OLDER UNEMPLOYED (0+ / 0-)

    Perhaps it is time to consider lowering the Social Security and Medicare age to include those who are unemployed and 55 or above. One way to pay for such an increase could be as follows:
     Change the pay roll tax by reducing it from 6 to 5 per cent on the first $1,000,000 the first 250,000 would be matched by the employer.   A graduated upward tax on all earnings (gross income) above that amount would be applied which could look something like this:          
    The first $1,000,000              5%
    $1M   -   5M                     +2%
    $5M   -   & above             +3%
    Everything paid above the first $5,000 would be a tax deduction.  In other words a person making one million dollars would pay $50,000 of which $45,000 would be tax deductible.  Someone fortunate enough to be making $10,000,000 would pay $5,00000  plus $80,000 or 2% on the next $4M and $150,000 or 3% on the final $5M for a total of $280,000 or 2.80% of earnings of which $275,000 would be tax deductible.
    By raising the minimum wage to $15/h would also increase contributions.
    A ten per cent (10%) increase in the social security dividend should also be included.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site