President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#25,527
#25,527
more detailed explanation of the bill process:

Stephen Miller
@StephenM


I’ve seen a few claims making the rounds on the Big Beautiful Bill that require correction.

The first is that it doesn’t “codify the DOGE cuts.” A reconciliation bill, which is a budget bill that passes with 50 votes, is limited by senate rules to “mandatory” spending only — eg Medicaid and Food Stamps. The senate rules prevent it from cutting “discretionary” spending — eg the Department of Education or federal grants. The DOGE cuts are overwhelmingly discretionary, not mandatory. The bill saves more than 1.6 TRILLION in mandatory spending, including the largest-ever welfare reform. A remarkable achievement.

I’ve also seen claims the bill increases the deficit. This lie is based on a CBO accounting gimmick. Income tax rates from the 2017 tax cut are set to expire in September. They were always planned to be permanent. CBO says maintaining *current* rates adds to the deficit, but by definition leaving these income tax rates unchanged cannot add one penny to the deficit. The bill’s spending cuts REDUCE the deficit against the current law baseline, which is the only correct baseline to use.

Another fantastically false claim is that the bill spends trillions of dollars. This is just completely invented out of whole cloth. This is not a ten year budget bill—it doesn’t “fund” almost any operations of government, which are funded in the annual budget bills (which this is not). In other words, if this bill passed, but the annual budget bill did not, there would be no government funding. Under the math that critics are using, if we passed a one paragraph reconciliation bill that cut simply 50 billion in food stamp spending, they would say the bill “added” trillions in spending and debt because they are counting ALL the projected federal spending that exists entirely outside the scope of this legislation, which is of course preposterous. The only funding in the bill is for the President’s border and defense priorities, while enacting a net spending cut of over 1.6 TRILLION dollars.

The bill has two fiscal components: a massive tax cut and a massive spending cut.

==========================================

DOGE cuts are to discretionary spending. (Eg the federal bureaucracy). Under senate budget rules, you cannot cut discretionary spending (only mandatory) in a reconciliation bill.

So DOGE cuts would have to be done through what is known as a rescissions package or an appropriations bill.

The Big Beautiful Bill is NOT an annual budget bill and does not fund the departments of government. It does not finance our agencies or federal programs. Instead, it includes the single largest welfare reform in American history. Along with the largest tax cut and reform in American history. The most aggressive energy exploration in American history. And the strongest border bill in American history. All while reducing the deficit.

=========================================

1748434297995.png



grok:

A rescission bill is a legislative proposal to cancel or repeal previously approved budget authority, meaning funds that were allocated for specific purposes are withdrawn. The process for a rescission bill in the United States primarily stems from the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which governs how the President and Congress handle such proposals. Here's a clear outline of the process:
  1. Presidential Proposal: The President submits a special message to Congress proposing the rescission of specific budget authority. This message must include:
    • The amount to be rescinded.
    • The reasons for the rescission.
    • The program, project, or activity affected.
    • The estimated fiscal, economic, and budgetary effects.
    • The message is sent to both the House of Representatives and the Senate and published in the Federal Register.
  2. Congressional Review: Congress has 45 days of continuous session (excluding recesses or adjournments longer than three days) to consider the rescission proposal. During this period, the proposal is referred to the appropriate committees, typically the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.
  3. Introduction of a Rescission Bill: For the rescission to take effect, Congress must pass a rescission bill approving the President’s proposal. This bill must be introduced in both chambers and follow the standard legislative process:
    • Committee Review: The relevant committees review the proposal and may hold hearings or mark up the bill.
    • Floor Consideration: If the committee approves, the bill moves to the floor of the House and Senate for debate and a vote.
    • Passage: The bill requires a simple majority in both chambers to pass.
  4. Expedited Procedures: The 1974 Act provides for expedited procedures to ensure timely consideration:
    • A rescission bill can be introduced by any member of Congress but is often spurred by the President’s message.
    • In the Senate, motions to proceed to the bill are non-debatable, and amendments must be relevant to the rescission.
    • The bill is privileged, meaning it can bypass some procedural hurdles to ensure a vote within the 45-day window.
  5. Presidential Approval: If Congress passes the rescission bill, it is sent to the President for signature or veto, as with any legislation. If signed, the specified budget authority is canceled, and the funds are no longer available for obligation.
  6. Automatic Expiration: If Congress does not pass a rescission bill within the 45-day period, the President must release the funds, and they remain available for their original purpose.
==================================================


Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸
@RepMTG
·
4m
I was just told that we are going to see the first DOGE cuts bill on Monday.

Foreign aid and NPR/CPB on the chopping block.

I have not seen the bill yet, but I’m just passing on what they told me.

Personally I want to pass DOGE cuts every single week until the bloated out of control government is reigned back in.

As a country, we cannot survive our national debt and honestly, we may be past the point of return. We should be aggressively attacking our debt and aggressively, cutting all waste fraud, and abuse and unnecessary programs.

Our future literally is in peril.
 
#25,528
#25,528
It cuts spending so much that it requires the debt ceiling to be raised. The bill is a debt nightmare and mtg will likely go along with it

It's likely that Trump will have added 1/3 of the entire national debt during his terms. A remarkable achievement for a guy who intended to pay it off completely
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, swampfoxfan, 85SugarVol and 3 others
#25,530
#25,530
SpaceCoastVol said:
What damage has he done?
Click to expand...
tariffs on tariffs off. rewriting trade deal with UK is worse than it was before. more debt. pissed off our allies instead of engaging in actual negotiations first. DOGE deleting departments then having to spend even more money to turn them back on. he was extremely fortunate that leaks from his DoD leader didn't literally blow up in our face.

then there are all the unconstitutional items he has pushed, removing birthright citizenship, suspending habeas corpus, restricting freedom of speech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#25,531
#25,531
utvolpj said:
It cuts spending so much that it requires the debt ceiling to be raised. The bill is a debt nightmare and mtg will likely go along with it

It's likely that Trump will have added 1/3 of the entire national debt during his terms. A remarkable achievement for a guy who intended to pay it off completely
Click to expand...
Blaming spending increases on Presidents is sloppy, regardless of what those Presidents may say.

It absolves the real culprits - Congress.

Presidents can propose all the increases they want or all the cuts that they want, none of it happens without Congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and whodeycin85
#25,532
#25,532
Ritzwatch said:
Blaming spending increases on Presidents is sloppy, regardless of what those Presidents may say.

It absolves the real culprits - Congress.

Presidents can propose all the increases they want or all the cuts that they want, none of it happens without Congress.
Click to expand...
Partly but a potus who disagrees can refuse to sign for their spending. When they do sign they own it. That just comes with the job. Not too many on the right making that argument for Biden

Besides, the gop holds 2, and likely 3, branches of govt. Is it possible that they just aren't serious about cutting spending unless they're in the minority?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and volfanhill
#25,533
#25,533
BeardedVol said:
Apparently Trump is going pardon every fraudster he can before the year is up.

Birds of a feather and all...

www.dailymail.co.uk

Trump pardons reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley

President Donald Trump pardoned reality television stars Todd and Julie Chrisley on Tuesday, calling their daugher Savannah and informing her of his decision.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...
Nice picture of Trump and Alice Marie Johnson. Hit me with that bird talk again.
 
#25,535
#25,535
EasternVol said:
The Wilsons were leftists? That's a reach.
Click to expand...
WW was a Statist who greatly expanded the scope and reach of the regulatory state. Incidentally; he was also a rapidly racist democrat (but I repeat myself).
We can also “thank” him for the income tax, Federal Reserve, and that precursor of the UN, the League of Nations.
Wilson basically started the descent of the US citizen into state controlled serfdom.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HammondB3Vol
#25,537
#25,537
utvolpj said:
Partly but a potus who disagrees can refuse to sign for their spending. When they do sign they own it.
Click to expand...
I am not entirely certain I agree with this. On it's face, I do, but when breaking it down, I am not so sure.

The Constitution gives Congress the authority to fund a budget. The Executive Branch is part of the budget. When Congress can't pass a budget, government "shuts down." Part of that shut down involves the Executive. So if Congress can't do their job and pass a budget, the Executive is punished without recourse. The only way the Executive can function the way it wants to is by rewarding the Congress that fails to function as it should.

It is kind of like telling a patient on life support, "Your doctors can't decide on a course of treatment, do you want us to continue to pay for life support until they do? Alternatively, we can turn off these machines and let you code, then they will have to do something!"

utvolpj said:
That just comes with the job. Not too many on the right making that argument for Biden
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree that the President becomes the target point for any argument over blame. But they have an interest in preserving their own. I think one reason Biden, Trump, or whoever is Executive signs off on CRs is because they are afraid some of "theirs" will be what ultimately gets cut. Checks and Balances and all.

utvolpj said:
Besides, the gop holds 2, and likely 3, branches of govt. Is it possible that they just aren't serious about cutting spending unless they're in the minority?
Click to expand...
It is not only possible, it is probable. Regardless, Congress is given the Constitutional authority over the budget. It is their job, not the other branches of government.
While Congress is given power of the purse, Congress devised the Continuing Resolution process specifically to address their consistent failure to do what they are elected to do. But politicians get elected more off what they give than what they take. If the electorate is too simple minded to put long term over short term, we get what we deserve. Making the President, this one or the last one, the last line of defense for the people has proven not to work, why do we keep doing it?

The only person we trust to stop Congress is the person who 1) stands to lose from stopping Congress and 2) gains from not stopping Congress. We are blaming the patient for the high cost of the life support, rather than the doctors who refused to provide a cure.

It is absurd how much leeway we give Congress because we are so busy pointing fingers at the President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and whodeycin85
#25,539
#25,539
Ritzwatch said:
I am not entirely certain I agree with this. On it's face, I do, but when breaking it down, I am not so sure.

The Constitution gives Congress the authority to fund a budget. The Executive Branch is part of the budget. When Congress can't pass a budget, government "shuts down." Part of that shut down involves the Executive. So if Congress can't do their job and pass a budget, the Executive is punished without recourse. The only way the Executive can function the way it wants to is by rewarding the Congress that fails to function as it should.

It is kind of like telling a patient on life support, "Your doctors can't decide on a course of treatment, do you want us to continue to pay for life support until they do? Alternatively, we can turn off these machines and let you code, then they will have to do something!"


I absolutely agree that the President becomes the target point for any argument over blame. But they have an interest in preserving their own. I think one reason Biden, Trump, or whoever is Executive signs off on CRs is because they are afraid some of "theirs" will be what ultimately gets cut. Checks and Balances and all.


It is not only possible, it is probable. Regardless, Congress is given the Constitutional authority over the budget. It is their job, not the other branches of government.
While Congress is given power of the purse, Congress devised the Continuing Resolution process specifically to address their consistent failure to do what they are elected to do. But politicians get elected more off what they give than what they take. If the electorate is too simple minded to put long term over short term, we get what we deserve. Making the President, this one or the last one, the last line of defense for the people has proven not to work, why do we keep doing it?

The only person we trust to stop Congress is the person who 1) stands to lose from stopping Congress and 2) gains from not stopping Congress. We are blaming the patient for the high cost of the life support, rather than the doctors who refused to provide a cure.

It is absurd how much leeway we give Congress because we are so busy pointing fingers at the President.
Click to expand...
How is it all on congress when the potus is (yet again) threatening anyone who dares call out his spending? He wants this spending and is very vocal about that. He is the head of the party and can easily let them know what he will or will not sign before they even start.

I give no passes to the useless idiots in Congress. There's about a single hand full who are serious about what they claim. However when they've pledged allegiance to the maga cult then they admit it's his control.
 
#25,540
#25,540
dovervolz said:
I noticed you weren’t crying like a little bit&& when biden pardoned over 8000 felons, drug dealers, murders, swindlers, family members, and friends. At least trump isn’t allowing staffers to use an auto pen to extort money for pardons
Click to expand...
And you know that happened? How?
 
#25,541
#25,541
utvolpj said:
How is it all on congress when the potus is (yet again) threatening anyone who dares call out his spending? He wants this spending and is very vocal about that. He is the head of the party and can easily let them know what he will or will not sign before they even start.

I give no passes to the useless idiots in Congress. There's about a single hand full who are serious about what they claim. However when they've pledged allegiance to the maga cult then they admit it's his control.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, that seems perilously close to advocating that it is ok for Congress to take a victim mentality. Telling Congress it is ok for them to not do their job because the President will be mean to them or because they might then lose that job if it is done correctly can not be acceptable to us, their constituents.

Of course Trump wants "his" spending. He also wants to cut "their" spending (DEI programs, Harvard funds). He is going to try to bully Congress into going along with him, the same way the opposition party in Congress tries to bully Trump with whatever rhetoric they use on a given issue.

Trump controls no one in Congress excepting those who give him control. He is not, despite claims to the contrary, a dictator. He can not become one unless Congress lets him by abdicating their independent decision making responsibilities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and Vol since 77
#25,544
#25,544
Majors said:
Do we need to revisit the Biden 50 year legacy of politics, if we want to discuss con men. Save us with the liberal media rage you fell for.
Click to expand...


Whataboutism #8,945,622 here on VN. It grows tiresome and is not a legitimate response. Especially when Trump is magnitudes worse than all before him, combined.
 
#25,550
#25,550
Buddy’s Bandit said:
No question, far worse than Watergate and maybe the worse ever.



Democracy at work for the Dems. Unelected Cabal running our country.

SHANNON BREAM: You quote a long-time Biden aide basically admitting he shouldn’t be running again. They said to you on page 85, ‘He just had to win, and then he could disappear for four years. He’d only have to show proof of life every once in a while. His aides could pick up the slack.’ Who would have been running the White House in a second Biden term?

ALEX THOMPSON: Well, this person went on to say that when you’re voting for a president, you’re voting for the aides around him. But these aides were not even Senate-confirmed aides. These are White House aides. These were unelected people. And one of the things that really I think comes out in our reporting here is that if you believe — and I think a lot of these people do sincerely believe that Donald Trump was and is an existential threat to democracy — you can rationalize anything, including sometimes doing undemocratic things, which I think is what this person is talking about.
Click to expand...

Why the **** does Jake Tapper have any kind of platform on which to speak? That jackass was in the cover up all the way to his hairline. But I guess he has a book to sell and his buddies are doing his advertising for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol423
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top