Senator Claire McCaskill (D), via her blog:
Jan 3, 2011
Sometimes it’s important to fight your party’s leadership.
I believed over a year ago that spending caps were an important part of our effort to fight the deficit. Jeff Sessions(R-AL) and I worked hard and came very close to passing the Sessions -McCaskill spending caps. While I was able to secure 16 of my Democratic colleague’s support, we fell just short of the 60 votes needed. The leadership in my party was opposed to our effort and fought to defeat these caps. Keep in mind that this was a cap on BOTH domestic and defense discretionary spending that took into account our current fragile economy, and placed caps on spending for the next three years. It was supported unanimously by the Republican senators…
Senator Jeff Sessions (r)? Really?
Blue Girl, over at They gave us a republic…:
And that’s when my head exploded…
by: Blue Girl
Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 14:00:00 PM CST
I swear, I watched it three times.
Honest…Three times…and no one should EVER watch a segment of a Jeff Sessions interview three times, I don’t care how strong ones constitution is. It just shouldn’t be done, because if the person being subjected to his nonsense repeatedly isn’t a ridiculously hyper-partisan douchebag, or if you don’t handle cognitive dissonance very well and can’t just let it roll off your back, you run the risk of a cranial event like the one pictured that I just experienced.
I’m going to share the video, but please, promise you will only subject yourself to it once…
No — don’t watch it again — he really did say that the trillion dollars in debt reduction in President Obama’s proposed budget is chump change and does nothing to get us on sound financial ground — right before he touted the same savings as ‘significant’ when in the context of what republicans want to do budget-wise.
Here are his exact, transcribed words when asked about the Obama budget that was rolled out today:
“No, it’s not. This is a ten-year budget. It sets the president’s plans and what the country should do for the next 10 years…. $1 trillion reduction is insignificant and does not get us off the right course.”
And here are his exact transcribed words on republican plans to reduce the deficit:
“[E]ven the $100 billion House proposal in reducing spending will amount to $1 trillion. And that’s a step. I mean, because, you carry it out for ten years and you save $1 trillion in that fashion.”
Keep in mind — this obviously-addled joker is the top republican on the Senate budget committee.
I weep for my country. Care to grab a box of kleenex and join me in a good cry?
The republicans aren’t serious about the deficit and the national debt. You know it. We all know it. You even showed everyone in attendance at your Concordia, Missouri town hall:
Senator Claire McCaskill (D): town hall in Concordia, Missouri (August 11, 2010)
Hey, we use that CBPP chart all the time!
Their behavior created the mess and now they’re suddenly deficit hawks?
And you helped them add to it (the “other purposes”)?:
Senator Claire McCaskill (D): evidently any concern about the deficit has been alleviated (December 15, 2010)
….And the final vote on the deal, perpetuating dubya’s tax cut windfall for the top 2%:
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Concur in the House Amdt. to the Senate Amdt. with Amdt. No. 4753 to H.R. 4853 )
Vote Number: 276 Vote Date: December 15, 2010, 01:02 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Motion Agreed to
Measure Number: H.R. 4853 (Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2010, Part III )
Measure Title: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the funding and expenditure authority of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to amend title 49, United States Code, to extend authorizations for the airport improvement program, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 81
Bond (R-MO), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
….Do us a favor. Spare us those lectures on the deficit. Otherwise, you’re just telling us it’s raining.
The “bipartisanship” continues in a press release from Senator McCaskill’s office:
McCaskill & Corker Introduce Bill to Cut Spending Over 10 Years
Bipartisan ‘CAP Act’ would put binding cap on all federal spending
February 1, 2011
WASHINGTON – As the Congressional Budget Office reports a record $1.5 trillion U.S. deficit for fiscal year 2011, U.S. Senators Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) are introducing legislation to force Congress to dramatically cut spending over 10 years.
“At a time when many families have been forced to tighten their pocketbooks, Congress must also learn to do the same. This bill isn’t just about cutting back this year or next year; it’s about instilling permanent discipline to keep spending at a responsible level,” Senator McCaskill said.
“Washington continues to borrow and spend, and despite the pleas of the American people, there is no end in sight,” said Senator Corker, “As we approach our debt limit of $14.29 trillion and more and more Americans – Republicans, Democrats and Independents – call on Washington to get spending under control and reduce our deficit, I see no better time to change course. What Senator McCaskill and I are offering is a legislative straightjacket, a way of forcing Congress to dramatically cut spending over 10 years. The beauty of the CAP Act is that it imposes fiscal discipline and smaller government, while incentivizing lawmakers to pass policies that promote economic growth.”
The Commitment to American Prosperity Act is a simple, 10-page bill that does four things:
1. The bill permanently limits all federal spending – both discretionary and mandatory – to a responsible level compared to our economy using historical markers to set limits.
2. It eliminates oft-used budget gimmicks in order to take into account the true reality of our economic situation.
3. It authorizes the Office of Management and Budget to make evenly distributed cuts throughout the budget to bring down spending if Congress fails to meet the annual cap.
4. It requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress to override the binding cap.
The Corker-McCaskill CAP Act is cosponsored by Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), and John McCain (R-Ariz.).
In 2009 the federal government spent $1.4 trillion more than it took in, borrowing nearly 40 cents of every dollar. The gap between spending and revenue is almost four times the historic average. Even when the U.S. reaches historic revenue levels, we are still projected to be spending nearly six percent more of our gross domestic product than we take in, and the gap will continue to widen. By 2035, on our current trajectory, U.S. debt will reach 185 percent of GDP. If this occurs, interest payments on our national debt will reach nearly nine percent of GDP – as much as we currently spend on national defense, education, roads, and all government agencies combined.
Have you asked Senators Corker (r), Alexander (r), Burr (r), Chambliss (r), Inhofe (r), Isakson (r), Kirk (r), and McCain (r) what they think of President Obama’s one trillion dollar budget cut, as opposed to the republican controlled House’s one hundred billion dollar cut (maybe over ten years)?
Senator Sessions (r) wasn’t available? Just asking.
And why don’t republicans ever bother to address the impact of dubya’s tax cut windfall for the top 2% on the deficit and wealth redistribution upward in this country?
Apparently, it’s always raining in Washington, D.C.