Congressional Progressive Caucus introduces FY2013 budget

[greenforest32]

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=61&sectiontree=5,61&itemid=553

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One-page summary:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Torie]

To find any kind of detail of the array of new revenue streams that are supposed to pay for this all, is like trying to find what is severable in the Obamacare Act. Despite wandering through several pages, the only information that I was able to gather is that loopholes for the fat cats will be eliminated, the Bush tax cuts for the rich are gone (yawn), some other chatter which does not seem to have much to do with revenue, and the institution of the Buffet rule, which I guess is a new 30% alternative minimum tax (does it pick up municipal bond income too, or does that loophole remain?), but that is not explained either, and nothing has any numbers, either on the spending side or revenue side. The site appears designed for dumbs. I will exercise self restraint, and not characterize its authors.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I'd probably tweak some stuff (some is stupid, some doesn't go far enough), but overall it's far better than the Rethuglicans have.

[perdedor]

It would be a step in the right direction, but largely this is too progressive for the Democratic Party at large.

[Purch]

Doesn't this budget like the Paul Ryan one eventually leave us in more debt rather than less?

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

The difference is that the Congressional Progressive Caucus, unlike Paul Ryan, does not present itself to the media and the public as concerned with the subject of debt to the exclusion of all else.

[Purch]

The difference is that the Congressional Progressive Caucus, unlike Paul Ryan, does not present itself to the media and the public as concerned with the subject of debt to the exclusion of all else.

So neither of them address the problem that's gonna be passed onto the next generation. That's cool. Add the slashing of the military budget from this plan to Paul Ryan's plan and maybe we'll have a template as to the route we have to take to get rid of this debt by cutting both domestic programs and foreign spending.

[LastVoter]

The difference is that the Congressional Progressive Caucus, unlike Paul Ryan, does not present itself to the media and the public as concerned with the subject of debt to the exclusion of all else.

So neither of them address the problem that's gonna be passed onto the next generation. That's cool. Add the slashing of the military budget from this plan to Paul Ryan's plan and maybe we'll have a template as to the route we have to take to get rid of this debt by cutting both domestic programs and foreign spending.

Improved infrastructure... Improved productivity...  Make it easier to pay off the debt in the future....

[greenforest32]

To find any kind of detail of the array of new revenue streams that are supposed to pay for this all, is like trying to find what is severable in the Obamacare Act. Despite wandering through several pages, the only information that I was able to gather is that loopholes for the fat cats will be eliminated, the Bush tax cuts for the rich are gone (yawn), some other chatter which does not seem to have much to do with revenue, and the institution of the Buffet rule, which I guess is a new 30% alternative minimum tax (does it pick up municipal bond income too, or does that loophole remain?), but that is not explained either, and nothing has any numbers, either on the spending side or revenue side. The site appears designed for dumbs. I will exercise self restraint, and not characterize its authors.

Really? Did you even look at pages 17-20 of the executive summary? It's where all the figures are.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is absolutely no way the word responsible can be attached to this trash.

[Purch]

The difference is that the Congressional Progressive Caucus, unlike Paul Ryan, does not present itself to the media and the public as concerned with the subject of debt to the exclusion of all else.

So neither of them address the problem that's gonna be passed onto the next generation. That's cool. Add the slashing of the military budget from this plan to Paul Ryan's plan and maybe we'll have a template as to the route we have to take to get rid of this debt by cutting both domestic programs and foreign spending.

Improved infrastructure... Improved productivity...  Make it easier to pay off the debt in the future....

Everyone keeps putting this off until the future but if we don't start making major cuts to take care of the debt NOW the future's gonna look very bleak for us... especilly if we end up getting involved in a hypothetical war with Iran

[Pingvin]

There is absolutely no way the word responsible can be attached to this trash.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

There is absolutely no way the word responsible can be attached to this trash.

[greenforest32]

House votes on the CPC FY2013 budget as introduced by Mike Honda (CA-15): http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll148.xml

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[memphis]

My Representative voted for it. Good for him!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

House votes on the CPC FY2013 budget as introduced by Mike Honda (CA-15): http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll148.xml

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow, it didn't even get half of the Democrats? Well, I suppose we already knew that most Democrats suck.

[7,052,770]

As long as it vigorously funds NASA, then yes. Ending the space shuttle without a replacement on the horizon is a national disgrace and the only major mistake Obama has made