Republicans in the House do not know how to govern

Simple question. Will their be a budget if the Senate votes against it or the president vetoes it?

 

That is not a merit worthy counter argument.

 

Your view appears to be simplistic.

The president has a budgetary agenda, makes it known to congress and the senate.

congress, knowing that the only thing that the Prez will pass is something at least resembles to what he wants,. both having discussed what both can find acceptable, then with that information, congress puts forth a compromised budget knowing in advance that the president will PROBABLY sign it, and the Senate, being a Dem majority, will sign it as well.

You seem to think that all three operate in a vacuum, which would be necessary for your question to be valid or relevant.

Since that isn't how it works, your question misses the mark.

The phrase “Congress controls the purse strings” is often used to describe the power of the United States Congress to manage the country’s finances. This power is vested in the Congress by the Constitution of the United States, specifically in Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 (the Appropriations Clause) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Taxing and Spending Clause).

This means that Congress has the authority to levy taxes, allocate funds for government programs and initiatives, and oversee how these funds are spent. This power is a crucial part of the checks and balances system in the U.S. government, as it allows Congress to limit or control the actions of the Executive Branch by withholding funding or placing stipulations on the use of funds.

Over time, however, there have been concerns about the Executive Branch challenging this power. Regardless of party, there have been instances where the Executive Branch has sought to claim control of the nation’s purse for itself. To address this issue and protect democracy and the Constitution’s separation of powers, legislation such as the Congressional Power of the Purse Act (CPPA) has been introduced. This legislation aims to reassert Congress’ constitutional power of the purse by increasing transparency, demanding accountability, and strengthening checks and balances.

 

Congress is the legislative branch of the US government. Legislative means that they make law. That's their one and only job.

 

It is a fact and what he said is also a fact. There is no conflict. Government funding eventually depends on the house of representatives and the eventual passage of a law. The process leading to that law involves everybody as you say.

 

I became rich when Obama was in office. Its not that I made more money; he just deemed me "rich" for the purpose of increasing my taxes to create this uber-rich government.

We already know what happens when your party controls more money. You get Los Angels, SF, etc. It is big gov that is unnecessary.

 

OK no answer.....the Dems choose this and no ine else.

 

We one sixteenth Native Americans have an expression for what you just wrote:

He speak much. He say little.

In spite of the saying that the house has the power of the purse strings. It takes the house, senate and executive branch to approve a budget. The house does not even always originate it. White in the Air Force, I prepared budget requests for the following year many times. They got passed up the chain to DOD and the president and was then sent to the house as a budget request.

 

One and only job?

That is utterly incorrect, and not only is it incorrect, your statement is egregiously incorrect.

Here is a list of their duties, functions, and responsibilities and it may not be complete, and many of the facts are hotlinked to sources:

The functions, duties, and responsibilities of the United States Congress include:

1. Lawmaking: The primary function of Congress is to pass rules that all Americans must obey.
2. Declaring War: Congress has the duty of declaring war.
3. Creating and Changing Laws: Congress is responsible for creating and changing laws.
4. Establishing an Annual Budget: Congress establishes an annual budget for the federal government.
5. Ratifying Treaties: The Senate is responsible for ratifying treaties.
6. Confirming Presidential Appointments: The Senate confirms people who have been appointed by the President.
7. Impeaching Federal Officials: The House of Representatives has the duty of impeaching federal officials.
8. Introducing Revenue Bills: The House of Representatives introduces revenue bills.
9. Electing a President in Case of an Electoral College Tie: The House of Representatives elects a President in the event of an electoral college tie.
10. Approving Treaties and High Executive Officers: The power to approve treaties and high executive officers rests with the U.S. Senate.
11. Establishing the Annual Government Budget: This is done by passing and collecting taxes from U.S. citizens.
12. Authorizing the Federal Government to Borrow Money: In the event that there is a shortfall between the money brought in by taxes and the amount of money needed to run the government, one of the duties of Congress includes authorizing the federal government to borrow money.
13. Providing Governmental Oversight: The duties of Congress also include providing governmental oversight to ensure that no one branch of the government abuses power.
14. Representation, Legislation, Constituent Service, and Communication: The duties carried out by a Member of Congress are understood to include representation, legislation, and constituent service and communication, as well as electoral activities.

 

You're not following the conversation. Chickpea's view of the function(s) of congress is rather anemic. I illustrated this in detail at #259

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-how-to-govern.614020/page-11#post-1074479401

 

No, you're not rich, and you're missing the point. Big tax cuts for the super rich, especially when the economy is doing fine, are not necessary.

America is a big country, and big countries need big governments.

The debate isn't about size, it's about what is needed, and are those departments operating efficiently? Can things be improved? America needs a governments that works, whatever size it might be, what will be, will be. Que sera, sera, as it were.

 

You post little, and say even less.

My comment stands.

 

Good. That is the way you do it.

 

Sadly I think that is true, although Gingrich excelled at governing and as speaker.

Quoting Boehner on Jordon is like quoting Stalin on republicanism. If Jordon becomes speaker, you are correct there will be trouble ahead because Jordon, unlike others, knows how to bring real trouble to the Democrats.

 

If you want to ignore my answer and just keep repeating the same false statement, don't even waste my time responding.

Meanwhile, the Republican clown show continues........14 days with no Speaker, no House ............

 

The term "super rich" was fed to people to rebleat for the purpose of demonizing those that are responsible for economic growth. These gullible people are quick to vote for slick politicians promising a better life if we just take more from these evil rich people. These gullible people think that "super rich" people just eat loses and never suspect that they will end up paying.

There is already a perfect petri dish showing what we can expect when excessive taxes are imposed on those responsible for growth. Can you make a case that the poor and low income are better off in Los Angeles, and SF?

Another term fed to the gullible is "Necessary". The burden of justifying what is "Necessary" should be on government. They are certainly quick to deem others non-essential when it suits their political agenda.

Instead of using vague terms like "Big", I prefer to use a more accurate term: Minimal. Government should have minimal power to impose rules. Government should be held accountable for how they spend our money.

You can disagree and support more government power, but you also have to accept excessive government when the pendulum swings right. Abortion laws, who can marry, go to prison for having a plant, etc.

 

Another day and Jordan makes his move…….and falls 20 votes short.

This is totally the fault of the Democrats.

LMAO @ the Republican clown show.

 

Another vote tomorrow at 11:00 AM says Jordan although it should be noted he doesn’t have the power to call one.

There’s rumblings of giving McHenry the power to temporarily act as Speaker for a short period 30-45 days. Idea is to get the budget and Ukraine/Israel funding done.

 

The chaos created by Republicans in the House continues. They are incapable of conducting any business of government, and we have no idea when that will end.

Jim Jordan was asked recently if he believed that Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election. Jordan said no. Biden did not win the election. Apparently, the speaker that the Republicans want is someone who still wants to overthrow our elected government, although that is quite impossible today.

Jordan is a poor choice to defend our Constitution.

CNN reports, "Conservative Republican Rep. Jim Jordan fell significantly short of winning the House speaker’s gavel on a first ballot Tuesday, leaving the House in paralysis after 20 Republicans opposed the Ohio Republican.

"The vote, in which Jordan failed to secure a majority of the full House, was a disappointment for Jordan’s allies who had expressed hopes that the number of holdouts would be in the single digits.

"Immediately after the vote, the House went into recess, giving Jordan time to try to convince his opponents – a group of GOP moderates and allies of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy and Majority Leader Steve Scalise – to change their votes.

"Jordan had initially considered holding a second vote on Tuesday, but he told reporters that the next speaker vote would be at 11 a.m. ET on Wednesday."

Despite the fact that the Republicans hold the majority in the House, the Democrat got more votes than Jordan.

"Jordan lost the support of 20 of his fellow Republicans in Tuesday's election, winning just 200 votes. The Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries received 212 votes." CBS.

No doubt the forum's Republicans will continue their silence. After all, what the hell can they say? But they want to pick our next President, and their overwhelming choice is a man charged with 91 felonies within four criminal indictments. The man is Jordan's powerful cheerleader.

 

Another day and Republicans STILL don’t know how to govern!

Better luck tomorrow Jim.

 

Irony 101

 

Day 17 and still no Speaker. The Republican clown show continues.

 

Why would the democrats save a person who has lied to them and not negotiatied in good faith?

 

Of course they wouldn't save a person like that, especially one in a politically powerful position. In fact, assisting in ejecting a dishonest individual like that IS good for the country.

 

How about for the good of the country because right now we need a functioning house of representatives? There can always be a call to vacate.