What happened to the debt clock that seemed to disappear in the early part of 2017?
No it didnāt.
That is the way it was from 1979 to 1995, Republicans took the House back, and mandated the 2nd vote to approve spending the money, Congress already voted to spend in the budget.
It is simply a tool for the minority party to use to show its power.
We need to get back to sanity. Requiring 2 votes, sometimes years apart, for the same spending, is stupid.
The tea party went south for the winter once trump got inā¦
Allan
1 Like
And that has to do with the debt clock ā¦ how?
National budgets are under the purview of congress.
If you want to change it, amend the constitution.
The debt limit isnāt in the constitution.
The congress can delegate powers. An ammendment isnāt required, legislation will do.
Extreme fiscal conservatives were in demand when Obama was in office.
Dispersed completely when trump was in.
Allan
1 Like
I never said that it was.
Iām saying that if you want to take a power of congress away from congress it would need to be done through amendment.
Why would they intentionally give up power?
The executive branch has amassed enough power as it is over the past century.
They need to just man up and do their ā ā ā ā ā ā ā jobs.
2 Likes
The debt ceiling issue is a power they made up with legislation. they can undo it with legislation.
Exactly. Congress can do that.
Itās their choice. But it would be better if it they did their job.
And I ask again: What does that have to do with the allegation that the debt clock has disappeared?
Focus, man!
I donāt disagree.
No power is being taken away.
From 1980-1995, when a spending bill was passed, the debt ceiling was raised to the amount of the amount spent in the bill.
This was done automatically, which met the congressional guidelines, per the Parliamentarian.
Congress, is still in control on what is spentā¦by what they put in the bill.
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4:
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
That is enough right there to get rid of the debt ceiling. Stick debates to budgets where they belong.
1 Like
Reasonable but a) will never happen and b) the idea national budgets always need to be in balance is silly. Itās been the exception, not the norm, all throughout the existence of the United States.
Stop talking about dollars and cents limitsā¦talk about what the dollars are being spent on first.
Make a plan as opposed to artificially constraining the budget.
Well itās not silly, but I agree itās not the normā¦
Doing something because āWeāve always done thisā is not a good rationale for continuing it.
Your suggestion that it will never happen is certainly true because ā¦ politicians.
But man, wouldnāt it be refreshing if some day one statesman president finds a way to rise above that!
Once again, thatās spot on.
Or, talk about asking why weāre spending $x-y-z on a-b-c at all. Is it really for the good of the country? Or do we spend it because weāve always spent itā¦
Forcing a balanced budget would force those questions.
And further, I canāt ever recall seeing a government (at any level in this country) that did not address an unexpected windfall by discussing how to spend the extra money. Never look to paying down existing debt. Always spend every available penny (and in the case of the fedgov, spend trillions beyond every available penny.)
Of course, I started out that post saying itās what I would do if I were king.
And if I were king, it WOULD happen.
