Half-baked ‘low-tax socialism’ is getting us a whole progressive hell

Half-baked ‘low-tax socialism’ is getting us a whole progressive hell

November 30, 2018

Daniel Horowitz


It feels like only yesterday that I was writing policy statements for candidates running in the “tea party year” of 2010 stating the shocking fact that we had reached $13 trillion in debt as a nation so quickly. Republicans indeed succeeded in winning back the House at the end of the year, they won back the Senate in 2014, and they controlled the trifecta for the past two years. Now, the debt stands at $21.8 trillion, an increase of over $8 trillion in just eight years, and the trajectory is about to explode. Isn’t it time we finally ask what Republicans actually stand for other than low-tax socialism?


Not only do Republicans have a big decision to make on immigration in the final budget with control of the House, they also must confront the debt crisis they made worse rather than helped. The debt has grown $8 trillion since they took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control. Most of the growth (roughly 88 percent) in debt has come from the public share of the debt, not the so-called debt we owe ourselves. President Trump’s Office of Management and Budget introduced budgets cutting billions in spending, yet Congress went in reverse and increased spending in every category the president promised to cut. Sadly, the president’s veto pen is gathering dust.


Just for the first month of this fiscal year, the deficit topped $100 billion, on pace to easily bring back the trillion-dollar deficits of Obama’s first term. And to be fair, that was during a great recession. Now we have the most robust job growth since the late ’60s. Where’s the deficit coming from? Revenues were actually up $17 billion relative to last October. However, spending increased by $55 billion this October relative to October 2017. Annually, Republicans increased spending by $136 billion in FY 2017 over Obama’s last year in office and another $127 billion on top of that in FY 2018.


While the tax cuts obviously reduced some revenue that we would have received had rates remained the same, given the growth in the economy, we still took in more money last year than the year before. Even if you isolate the 10-month period since enactment of the tax cuts – January 2018 through October 2018 – and compare it to the equivalent 10-month period in calendar year 2017, we are actually $2 billion ahead on the revenue side. Again, revenues would have been higher on the corporate side if not for the tax cuts, but there is evidence that much of the increase in payroll tax revenue was due to job growth, which was fueled, in part, by the tax cuts themselves. The culprit is the spending, which has increased by $138 billion over the past 10 months.


We are now at the point where despite robust economic growth, the current dollar GDP of our entire economy is $20.66 trillion, almost $1.2 trillion smaller than the size our debt! Our debt will remain larger than our entire economy in perpetuity. According to some estimates, in 30 years from now, the debt will be over 175 percent of GDP, which is where Greece is now.


Yet rather than discuss any plan to cut spending and actually reduce the harmful footprint of government in the private economy, Republicans are talking about another tax package and more spending, totaling $54.7 billion. Tax cuts are good, but at some point, we’ve crossed the Rubicon where, if all Republicans do when in power is cut taxes, but at the same time they increase spending rather than cutting it, the tax cuts become counterproductive in many ways. Like many things in life, you can’t half-ass free market doctrine by having low taxes but keeping socialist programs and market interventions in place, because the mix of the two breeds crony capitalism/venture socialism at the corporate level and creates dependency among individuals without exposing them to the pain of higher taxes that are endemic of European socialism.


Until now, the low tax doctrine has been worthwhile, but any continued effort to only cut taxes while continuing to increase spending is counterproductive both policy-wise and politically.


In terms of policy, the debt is reaching a tipping point, because next year we will spend as much money just on interest as we spend on Medicaid. In five years, it will surpass military spending. The dead weight and misallocation of investment in the debt and treasury bonds is crowding out private investment and is ensuring that, despite the job growth, we are not realizing economic growth commensurate with the job market like we saw in the late 1990s and late 1960s. The more we are desperate to service the debt, the higher the interest rates will rise, which will attract even more investments into treasury bonds and away from private investment, creating a perpetual death spiral of more debt, higher interest rates, increased debt payments, and less private investment.


Which brings us to the political problems. Republicans are planning to lock in the spending levels of the FY 2018 omnibus, pass a massive $900 billion farm bill that has Obamacare-style market distortions of land and crop use and food stamps and more extra money on disaster spending – but all mixed together with a “tax extenders” package full of special interest credits for big businesses. This pattern of low-tax, high-spending socialism is creating the perfect climate for corporate bosses to use low taxes as their nourishment to then turn around and serve as the enforcers of cultural and economic Marxism for the Left on every other issue. The moral of the story is that you can’t half-bake free markets. It’s time to force Republicans to pick sides – either they support all of Coolidge’s free-market policies, or we will give them the full Bernie Sanders.


Corporate America has become the number one enforcer – even more effective than the media and academia – in promoting open borders, endless Middle East migration, weak-on-crime laws, anti-religious liberty policies, mindless multiculturalism, and the transgender agenda. Even on fiscal issues, they support the welfare state, Obamacare, and all the regulations that help them shut out competition. The one missing component from the Democrat portfolio is the tax issue. If the corporations empowered Democrats on that issue too, they couldn’t survive. Thus, they feast off the Republican lifeline against Democrats raising taxes so that they can promote the rest of the progressive agenda. And remember, government-run health care is the single biggest driver of our debt, and that is being fueled by big business.


The package of tax extenders Republicans plan to pass costs $54.7 billion together with more disaster spending. There are a number of handouts, such as the biofuels blending credit and handouts for electric cars, Big Wind, and NASCAR in the bill. Then there is the farm bill, which is the Obamacare of agriculture.


It’s time we promote free market reduction of government market interventions along with the tax cuts or no tax cuts at all. Trump needs to use his veto to enforce his budget proposals in addition to his immigration agenda. We need to plow forward with a holistic view of conservatism – fiscal, cultural, and security – as one unit. Split-the-baby conservatism leads to nothing but a perfect, holistic progressive hell.


https://www.conservativereview.com/news/half-baked-low-tax-socialism-is-getting-us-a-whole-progressive-hell/

"Plow forward"?? With what? Republicans no longer have a plow. Republicans just lost control of the US House of Representatives which means we lost control of everything related to passing bills, spending or otherwise. I swear, these conservatives act and write like they're living in a bubble somewhere and don't understand what losing elections means. It means we can't start anything, all we can do is stop stuff, i. e. gridlock which means nothing good can or will happen now through Congress. The good stuff now is whatever Trump can and will do on his own, which could still be a lot, it just could have been so much more for our country and citizens if Republicans had won the mid-terms and won them big.

A real shame.

So Daniel, you'll need to go beat up on the people in charge now, which are the DemoQuacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeorgiaPeach

Not only do Republicans have a big decision to make on immigration in the final budget with control of the House, they also must confront the debt crisis they made worse rather than helped. The debt has grown $8 trillion since they took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control.

---

Another great article by Daniel Horowitz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

"Plow forward"?? With what? Republicans no longer have a plow. Republicans just lost control of the US House of Representatives which means we lost control of everything related to passing bills, spending or otherwise. I swear, these conservatives act and write like they're living in a bubble somewhere and don't understand what losing elections means.

---

Daniel is pointing out the R's had the plow and used that plow to dig us deeper in debt.

Daniel is wrong about that. It wasn't Republicans who pushed us further into debt, it was the DemoQuacks. So his article is a gross misrepresentation of the truth and the facts, even though he includes some of the facts and data that proves the inaccuracy of his article right in the article. It's like reading Wack-O-Doodle News.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoptheinvaders

Daniel is pointing out the R's had the plow and used that plow to dig us deeper in debt.

---

Yes they have. Very disappointing, to say the least.

What did Republicans do to plow us deeper into debt?

Remember When Republican Leaders Thought the National Debt Would Cause the Apocalypse?

Now that they put us on the path towards $33 trillion in federal debt within the decade.


BY JACK HOLMES

APR 9, 2018

It's a fool's errand to point out the Republican Party under Donald Trump is capable of gobsmacking hypocrisy. Yet the latest report from the Congressional Budget Office, via The New York Times, on the national debt cannot go unremarked upon. The Party of Fiscal Responsibility has overseen a legislative agenda since taking control of both Houses of Congress and the White House that will balloon the debt and deficit to new levels.

The Republican tax "reform" bill drastically cut revenue, primarily to benefit corporations and the rich. That will mean $1.9 trillion less flowing into the Treasury's coffers over the next 11 years. The subsequent $1.3 trillion spending bill drastically increased both military and non-military outlays. The result is not pretty:

The national debt, which has topped $21 trillion, is expected to soar to more than $33 trillion in 2028. By then, debt held by the public will almost match the size of the nation’s economy, reaching 96 percent of gross domestic product, a higher level than any point since just after World War II and well past the level that economists say could court a crisis...

[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/laugh2-1523304495.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=480: *[/IMG]

Getty Images

...This fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, the budget deficit is expected to total $804 billion, up from $665 billion last fiscal year, according to the C.B.O. projections. In a decade, the red ink is expected to reach $1.5 trillion.

The pieces here are not hard to put together: when you take less money in and spend more, you're going to have bigger problems. The Democrats went along with the spending bill, so they'll have to share some portion of the blame if and when the debt level reaches 96 percent of our gross domestic product (GDP)—that is, when the debt is basically the size of our entire economy.

But it's Republicans who spent the eight years before the Rise of Trump discussing debt in apocalyptic terms. They even opposed a stimulus bill at the height of the Great Recession in 2009 on the basis it was too lavish. To refresh your memory, here are some of the Republican Party's leaders proudly preaching Fiscal Responsibility.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/mcconnell-1523304545.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=480: *[/IMG]

Getty Images

“Yesterday the Senate cast one of the most expensive votes in history,” Senator Mitch McConnell said about the 2009 stimulus. “Americans are wondering how we’re going to pay for all this.”

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan

Via the L.A. Times:

The "red tidal wave of debt," he told Sean Hannity back in 2012, would trigger what he called the "most predictable economic crisis we have ever had in this country." Debt would mean nothing less than the "end of the American dream."

In 2012, the debt stood at $15 trillion, and the exploding costs of entitlements, Ryan said, meant that "by the time my grandkids are raising their grandkids, we are taking 80 cents out of every dollar just to pay for this federal government at that time."

President Donald Trump

[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/trump-1523304610.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=480: *[/IMG]

Getty Images

There's always a tweet, part infinity:

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...00m_normal.jpgDonald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump


Our $17T national debt and $1T yearly budget deficits are a national security risk of the highest order.

288
2:12 PM - Nov 13, 2012
Twitter Ads info and privacy

793 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy

From a statement in 2012:

Today, America has reached a historic milestone which no American will celebrate – the national debt has surpassed $16 trillion...Americans are tired of broken promises and empty rhetoric, and they can no longer afford to languish in the malaise of the Obama economy. Unlike the President, House Republicans have put forth a serious budget that reduces our debt over time and focuses on pro-growth economic policies that will get Americans back to work. We have a responsibility to our children and grandchildren to leave them a country better than the one we inherited.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise

From a 2016 statement:

“By proposing $2.1 trillion in tax hikes and $2.4 trillion in additional Washington spending over 10 years, President Obama’s latest budget serves as a punch to the gut of hard-working taxpayers who are still struggling from stagnant wages and higher costs caused by this failed, Washington-knows-best agenda. Washington needs to start tightening its belt and stop spending money it doesn’t have instead of the $8.5 trillion increase in the national debt proposed by the President.

Notice that proposal included tax hikes to help pay for increased spending—the opposite of the Republican legislative platform now.

[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/repobama-1523304679.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=480: *[/IMG]

Getty Images

But this whole conversation presupposes that Republicans genuinely care about the debt. They don't—at least when a Republican is president. A line in today's Times piece gets at that:

The figures are sobering, even in a political climate where deficit concerns appear to be receding.

The debt and deficit have steadily increased since Obama left office. Trump did run on a platform of increased infrastructure and military spending—as far as anything the president says counts for anything—but what really changed is that the Republicans are in power. If the conservative movement ever was tethered to certain beliefs, it is completely unchained now in the Age of Trump. The Party of Family Values? Step right up, Mr. Roy Moore. The Party of Fiscal Responsibility? Only, it seems, in an election yea, and after the donors get their tax cut.

But in a sign that Republicans are growing concerned about the political liability of soaring deficits, the House will vote Thursday on a constitutional amendment to require balanced budgets. Since such constitutional amendments require two-thirds of the House and Senate to agree, it is unlikely to pass Congress, let alone be ratified by the states.

So they'll solve the supposed crisis by voting on a bill that will never pass that would enact a policy that will never work. All so they can go home to the folks and talk about how they want a Balanced Budget after they all but ensured it won't be balanced for a decade. It's almost like the only thing the Republican Party cares about anymore is staying in power.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...llion-deficit/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Daniel is wrong about that. It wasn't Republicans who pushed us further into debt, it was the DemoQuacks. So his article is a gross misrepresentation of the truth and the facts, even though he includes some of the facts and data that proves the inaccuracy of his article right in the article. It's like reading Wack-O-Doodle News.

---

The debt has grown $8 trillion since they (Republicans) took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control.

How did he misrepresent the truth and the facts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

What did Republicans do to plow us deeper into debt?

---

The debt has grown $8 trillion since they (Republicans) took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control.

LOL!! Out-dated uninformed DemoQuackery articles are not good sources of information. I thought whoever was saying "Republicans plowed us further into debt" actually had some facts to base their claim on.

Apparently ..... NOT.

Less than a year into the Trump and Republicans tax cut program, the largest tax cut in US history they say, the US government is already collecting more revenue than it did before the tax cuts. So Republicans did not plow us further into debt because of the wonderful tax cuts that not only are already delivering more tax revenue, they've helped increase GDP, they've kept industry in the US, they've brought new industry back into the US, they've created good jobs, they've increased the net expendable income of hundreds of millions of Americans whether working or retired, made if much easier for business to expand, both large and small businesses, and have been a wonderful thing for the American People. We still need to make the personal income tax cuts permanent and continue to work on getting rid of some more taxes like capital gains and the whole estate tax, but we don't have the votes for it now and won't for a long time, so we did what we could do and it was a good thing, not a bad thing.

Hey, if anyone out there knows what Republicans did to "plow us further into debt", please do let us know.

Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

• 
  
  

By KATHRYN WATSON CBS NEWS March 17, 2018, 10:41 AM

About a year ago, President Trump pledged to eliminate the national debt "over a period of eight years." But for the first time in history, the national debt surpassed $21 trillion this week, according to the U.S. Treasury.

The landmark comes shortly after Congress passed, and Mr. Trump signed, a suspension on the federal debt limit last month, allowing the government to borrow an unlimited amount of money until March 1, 2019.

When Mr. Trump took office on Jan. 20, 2017, the national debt was $19.9 trillion, according to U.S. Treasury data. Since then, the GOP-led Congress has passed a $1.5 trillion tax cut bill and a two-year spending deal which, together, are expected to drive the deficit and debt further upward. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates annual deficits could top $2.1 trillion per year in the next decade, which would send the national debt soaring even higher.

• Is fiscal conservatism dead?
• 
  

Republicans railed against the national debt level under the Obama administration, when it jumped from $10.6 trillion to $19.9 trillion, nearly doubling, but few have been as outspoken about the situation with Republicans controlling Capitol Hill and the White House. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, held up the spending bill last month on the Senate floor, blistering Republicans for doing exactly what they had criticized the Obama administration for doing.

"I ran for office because I was critical of President Obama's trillion-dollar deficits," Paul said at the time. "Now we have Republicans hand-in-hand with Democrats offering us trillion-dollar deficits."
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, called the national debt the "greatest threat to our nation" when it exceeded $20 trillion for the first time in September.

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...ulI_normal.jpgSenator Bob Corker
✔@SenBobCorker


Greatest threat to our nation is our inability to get our fiscal house in order. My statement on the national debt: http://bit.ly/2xXmjvF .
National Debt Tweets
✔@NationalDebt


$20,162,176,797,904.13 (+) #NationalDebt

107
10:45 AM - Sep 12, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy

199 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

But the ever-increasing national debt isn't a frequent topic for Mr. Trump, and when it does come up, he doesn't seem too concerned. He's said he's open to eliminating the debt ceiling entirely.


© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/under-d...rst-time-ever/

Trump is not a fiscal conservative. That's just a fact that can't be denied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoptheinvaders

The debt has grown $8 trillion since they (Republicans) took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control.

---

What did Republicans do to cause that? Please be specific.

duplicate.

duplicate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Trump is not a fiscal conservative. That's just a fact that can't be denied.

---

What did Trump do to plow us further into debt? Please be specific.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

LOL!! Out-dated uninformed DemoQuackery articles are not good sources of information. I thought whoever was saying "Republicans plowed us further into debt" actually had some facts to base their claim on.

Apparently ..... NOT.

Less than a year into the Trump and Republicans tax cut program, the largest tax cut in US history they say, the US government is already collecting more revenue than it did before the tax cuts. So Republicans did not plow us further into debt because of the wonderful tax cuts that not only are already delivering more tax revenue, they've helped increase GDP, they've kept industry in the US, they've brought new industry back into the US, they've created good jobs, they've increased the net expendable income of hundreds of millions of Americans whether working or retired, made if much easier for business to expand, both large and small businesses, and have been a wonderful thing for the American People. We still need to make the personal income tax cuts permanent and continue to work on getting rid of some more taxes like capital gains and the whole estate tax, but we don't have the votes for it now and won't for a long time, so we did what we could do and it was a good thing, not a bad thing.

Hey, if anyone out there knows what Republicans did to "plow us further into debt", please do let us know.

---

The debt has grown $8 trillion since they (Republicans) took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control.

Okay, I'll go slow.

What

did

Republicans or Trump

do

to

cause

the

growth

in

deficits/national debt?

Please

be

specific.

If you don't know, because it's not in the talking points memo, it's okay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Okay, I'll go slow.

What

did

Republicans or Trump

do

to

cause

the

growth

in

deficits/national debt?

Please

be

specific.

If you don't know, because it's not in the talking points memo, it's okay.

---

Simple answer, I believe most 3rd graders could understand.....
They spent more than they took in

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoptheinvaders

Simple answer, I believe most 3rd graders could understand.....
They spent more than they took in

---

No, the United States Congress spent more than it took in. What I'm asking you which I have to assume at this point, you don't know, is what did Republicans in Congress do to cause that? To my knowledge, Republicans passed tax cuts and STILL took in more revenue than before the tax cuts. So if Republicans through the Republicans-only tax cuts took in more than DemoQuacks had in previous administrations before the tax cuts, what did Republicans do to cause Congress to spend more than it took in?

If you don't know, it's okay. Don't worry about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

No, the United States Congress spent more than it took in. What I'm asking you which I have to assume at this point, you don't know, is what did Republicans in Congress do to cause that? To my knowledge, Republicans passed tax cuts and STILL took in more revenue than before the tax cuts. So if Republicans through the Republicans-only tax cuts took in more than DemoQuacks had in previous administrations before the tax cuts, what did Republicans do to cause Congress to spend more than it took in?

If you don't know, it's okay. Don't worry about it.

---

Yes, the Congress spent more than it took in, and the R's had the majority in the Senate and the House.


The Republicans caused it because they voted to spend, spend, spend---spend more than they took in.

Oh I see, so you think because Republicans had the majority that they voted to spend, spend, spend. Well, actually that is wrong, but I'm not going to waste my time explaining Congressional appropriation processes and voting math to you. Instead I prefer you just enjoy your election victory and all it brings to you and yours. We have elections for a reason.

Trump goes silent on national debt while racking up $1 trillion in 14 months


https://twt-thumbs.washtimes.com/med...e07da26e303334
President Trump at this time last year was crowing over the debt, which stood at $19.947 trillion and quickly dipped after his inauguration. He took to Twitter to demand credit. (Associated Press) more >


By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Thursday, March 15, 2018

President Trump has now amassed his first $1 trillion in debt, crossing that ignominious mark late last week — and analysts said it’s just a taste of what’s to come after the tax-cuts and spending spree of recent months.

Indeed, his next $1 trillion could come within a year, and one analyst said he could soon be staring at $3 trillion annual deficits if things go particularly badly in interest rates.

It’s a major reversal for a president who during the campaign had said given eight years he could eliminate the debt entirely, but is instead looking at setting records for red ink.

“We are in for a rude awakening,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

Her organization calculated that with December’s tax cuts and January’s budget-busting spending deal, Mr. Trump has already signed legislation that will add at least $2.4 trillion to the debt in the next decade and, should Congress make those policies permanent, could add as much as $6 trillion.

At that rate, the government will be paying $1 trillion a year in interest payments alone.

Mr. Trump at this time last year was crowing over the debt, which stood at $19.947 trillion and quickly dipped after his inauguration. He took to Twitter to demand credit.

“The media has not reported that the National Debt in my first month went down by $12 billion vs a $200 billion increase in Obama first mo.,” he wrote.

But the tally hit $20.957 late last week and stood at $20.958 trillion as of Wednesday — the latest numbers available from the Treasury Department.

He’s not the fastest to add his first $1 trillion. That would be President Obama, who did it in little more than six months, after inheriting a recession and the Wall Street bailout from his predecessor.

But Mr. Trump’s nearly 14-month span is worse than Presidents Clinton, George W. Bush, and all who came before them.

After touting his early successes Mr. Trump has gone silent this year.

He’s mentioned the debt just once, in passing and in relation to the country’s trade deficits, in his public appearances.

The White House budget office also didn’t respond to requests for comment Thursday about the increase or the worrying trajectory.

Analysts said presidents inherit the economy and policies of their predecessors — in Mr. Obama’s case, a recession and the ongoing Wall Street bailout — so the early debt figures don’t necessarily reflect the new administration.

But they also said Mr. Trump’s comments last year leave him open to the examination.

“The fact that we have now hit $1 trillion in additions to the total debt isn’t something he should be entirely accountable for, but it is a standard he put out there,” Ms. MacGuineas said.

What the president will have to answer for, she and other analysts said, is December’s tax cuts and January’s budget deal, which will combine for a hole trillions of dollars deeper than it would have been otherwise.

Brian Riedl, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, said the tax and spending bills will add about $3 trillion to the debt, in addition to $10 trillion already baked in from previous government spending patterns.

“I project the budget deficit will top $1 trillion by next year, and reach $2 trillion within a decade – or even approach a staggering $3 trillion if interest rates rise back to 1990s levels,” he said.

There’s little sense that anything will change.

Mr. Trump’s budget director has said the president won’t consider changes to Social Security or Medicare. And when House Speaker Paul D. Ryan suggested in December that the GOP would use the fast-track budget process to attempt those changes, his idea was quickly batted down by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Yet the consequences of inaction could be serious.

In an open Senate hearing last month about the security challenges facing the U.S., Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats called exploding red ink a “dire threat” to the country. That put it on par with problems such as international terrorism and cyber warfare.

The Congressional Budget Office regularly issues warning to Congress that debt will eventually begin to crowd out private investment and there could come a point at which others become reluctant to purchase U.S. government debt.

But new Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress last month that’s “not this time, by a long shot.”

“There could come a time where the public, the global debt buying public would come to the view that we either weren’t prepared to honor our debts or we couldn’t service them. But we’re a long way from that,” he said.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/15/donald-trump-adds-1-trillion-national-debt-14-mont/

National debt jumps $1.2 trillion in fiscal year 2018

by Pete Kasperowicz
October 01, 2018 04:22 PM

https://i.connatix.com/s3/connatix-u...=433&width=770


The national debt rose more than $1.2 trillion in the fiscal year that just concluded on Sept. 30, according to a government website that tracks the debt.

The total national debt was $20.245 trillion on the last business day of fiscal year 2017.

On the last business day of fiscal year 2018, which was Friday, Sept. 28, the total debt had grown to $21.516 trillion. Friday was the first day in history the national debt rose above $21.5 trillion.

The increase is just the latest sign that borrowing is on the rise.

Last month, the Congressional Budget Office said federal borrowing through the first 11 months of fiscal year 2018 hit $895 billion, $222 billion higher than the first 11 months of the prior year.

The budget deficit alone is set to soar above $1 trillion by 2020, as they did during President Obama's first term. But the federal borrowing also takes place outside its formal budget, including for various loan programs, and the pace of growth in the debt has already exceeded $1 trillion per year at times.

In addition to the $1.2 trillion increase in the national debt in the last fiscal year, it took a little more than six months for the debt to rise from $20 trillion to $21 trillion.

Conservatives in Congress have complained that spending remains unchecked, which will lead to only higher deficits in the years to come. But they could only watch in February when GOP leaders and President Trump reached a two-year spending deal that is set to boost federal spending by a total of $300 billion in fiscal years 2018 and 2019.

Under current law, the government is allowed to borrow as much as it wants through March 1, 2019. After that, the debt ceiling will take effect again, and prevent the government from borrowing anything above the level of debt on that date.

Congress in recent years has avoided this limit by suspending the debt ceiling again.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...scal-year-2018

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

National debt jumps $1.2 trillion in fiscal year 2018
The national debt rose more than $1.2 trillion in the fiscal year that just concluded on Sept. 30, according to a government website that tracks the debt.

The total national debt was $20.245 trillion on the last business day of fiscal year 2017.

On the last business day of fiscal year 2018, which was Friday, Sept. 28, the total debt had grown to $21.516 trillion. Friday was the first day in history the national debt rose above $21.5 trillion.

---

Now, 21.8 trillion

Quote:

---

But they could only watch in February when GOP leaders and President Trump reached a two-year spending deal that is set to boost federal spending by a total of $300 billion in fiscal years 2018 and 2019.

---

That was the military spending deal that increased military spending to $700 billion for 20 18 and $716 billion in 2019 to upgrade and modernize our military equipment and give our soldiers and military personnel the first raise they've had in 10 years. The President had spending cuts in his budget to pay for it, but the DemoQuacks blocked the spending cuts. The DemoQuacks also demanded a $1 for $1 match so if Trump wanted $150 billion a year in new military spending, DemoQuacks refused to approve it without a matching $150 billion for their pet domestic projects. There's been no reporting on what the DemoQuacks are spending the $150 billion on, which together is the $300 billion a year increase in spending with no spending cuts like Trump wanted and that were in his Budget he presented to Congress to offset the increased military spending because DemoQuacks refused to allow them. Several years ago Congress passed this law about matching funds for military spending.

The plan as I understand it is after the 2 years of high military spending for upgrades is up, then the DOD budget will go back to its normal levels possibly even be reduced a little through more efficiencies. Trump has asked Mattis for his 5% cut plan for 2020 like all departments have been asked to do.

But I'm sure now with DemoQuacks in charge of the US House of Representatives where all appropriation bills originate, they'll do a fine job solving deficit spending and reducing our national debt. DemoQuacks have always been known to be good fiscal managers, right?! I'm sure that's one of the reasons they won the mid-terms so bigly.

Happy Days for DemoQuacks Are Here Again! The American People have spoken. No more Republicans at the helm of the federal budget, because deficits matter!!

How many immigration or border security bills passed the U.S. House of Representatives during the Trump administration with Republicans holding the majority?

Yep, that's what I thought.

The US House of Representatives under the Trump Administration passed Kate's Law and the No Sanctuary for Criminals bills. There may be others, I just remember these two bills off the top of my head.

Quote:

---

On June 23, 2017, Representative Bob Goodlatte reintroduced two bills, Kate's Law (H.R. 3004) and No Sanctuary for Criminals, an anti-sanctuary city policy (H.R. 3003), into the House which passed on June 29 and proceeded to the Senate.[85][86]

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooti...e#Kate%27s_Law

Both bills are in the Senate. You need 60 votes to pass them, and we only have 51. And while McCain was alive but in Arizona, we only had 50. No DemoQuacks will vote with us, not even on these 2 bills. Ryan who isn't an immigration hawk isn't going to waste House floor time on bills that have no chance of passing in the Senate because Republicans don't have the votes in the Senate to pass a bill.

Republicans tried but they don't have the votes to do anything in Congress.

Nancy Pelosi is rearing to go, she's got the votes, she's promised a HUUUGE immigration bill out soon after the first of the year. She's a woman of action and she'll get it passed and Schumer and Dems will start passing it through the Senate. We probably won't like it, so Republicans will probably block it, but maybe not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

The US House of Representatives under the Trump Administration passed Kate's Law and the No Sanctuary for Criminals bills. There may be others, I just remember these two bills off the top of my head.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooti...e#Kate%27s_Law

Both bills are in the Senate. You need 60 votes to pass them, and we only have 51. And while McCain was alive but in Arizona, we only had 50. No DemoQuacks will vote with us, not even on these 2 bills. Ryan who isn't an immigration hawk isn't going to waste House floor time on bills that have no chance of passing in the Senate because Republicans don't have the votes in the Senate to pass a bill.

Republicans tried but they don't have the votes to do anything in Congress.

Nancy Pelosi is rearing to go, she's got the votes, she's promised a HUUUGE immigration bill out soon after the first of the year. She's a woman of action and she'll get it passed and Schumer and Dems will start passing it through the Senate. We probably won't like it, so Republicans will probably block it, but maybe not.

---

Yep, and the Democrats don't have the votes either unless Republicans help them! That's something you seem to have lost track of. If a bill doesn't appear on Trump's desk for signature, it may as well not have existed.

The 2013 Gang of 8 Bill originated in the Senate and passed the Senate, it was killed by House Republicans. Just pretend it's 2013 and the US House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats. That's where we are as of January 3, 2018.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

The 2013 Gang of 8 Bill originated in the Senate and passed the Senate, it was killed by House Republicans. Just pretend it's 2013 and the US House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats. That's where we are as of January 3, 2018.

---

Hmm, guess you don't have much confidence in a Trump veto, huh?

It will depend on the bill and what it does. What I expect Trump will do is negotiate with Pelosi to get his 70 point plan plus ending anchor baby citizenship (going forward) and asylum, refugee, UAC and TPS programs (as it is now), and make working in the US without permission a felony, into the bill.

I would expect he will keep the amnesty number as low as possible, charge huge fees comparable to what any green card person would spend to apply, exclude all newbies (recent arrivals in country for less than 10 years), criminals including misdemeanors, immigration violators (visa overstays, etc.) and public charges (using welfare) and deny a pathway to citizenship for at least 12 years that starts from the date of their LPR document, with the LPR requiring personal interviews and home inspection investigations by the FBI as part of the vetting process for the LPR.

Then after 12 years of satisfactory LPR status, they would be eligible to apply for a green card again subject to more huge fees and strong second vetting process including personal interview and home inspection investigations by the FBI, and this would be capped by numbers per year and part of the reduced green card allocation.

Then, after 5 or 6 additional years as a satisfactory permanent resident, they could potentially apply for citizenship.

He would also probably not agree for a start of the LPR program to begin until after the wall/fence and other enhanced border security and enforcement provisions have been completed and implemented including additional 5,000 border patrol agents, additional 10,000 ICE agents, authorization of state and local law enforcement to enforce US immigration law, 1,000 more immigration prosecutors, 500 more immigration judges, end to Catch and Release rulings, end to Sanctuary Cities and States, end to anyone in Executive Branch issuing work permits to illegal aliens without specific act of Congress (DACA, TPS, etc.), and requiring that any minor of 18 or under be returned to their home country within 24 hours of US custody including Consulate and Embassy locations within the US on condition that if they're released into the US instead of sent home by the Consulate/Embassy at their expense, the US will close the Consulate/Embassy and eject all diplomats working there, etc., etc., etc.

Trump will also probably want to amend the Posse Comitatus Act to authorize use of any Armed Service personnel to operate for border security to prevent illegal entry into the United States within 100 miles of any US Southern Border or Port as well as within our International Waters.

I don't know what Trump will do, but given the wholeness of his approach to solving this massive immigration problem for the American People and his efforts to try to negotiate with DemoQuacks last summer on the DACA deal, the complexity and fullness of both the Goodlatte bill in the House and the Grassley bill in the Senate, my feeling is he wants to solve the problem of illegal immigration and massive excess immigration into the US as soon as possible.

Not having a Republican controlled US House of Representatives makes an already extremely difficult and convoluted task much more difficult for his immigration agenda and other things he wants to do to fix our country, but he won't back down from it, he'll tackle it and make the best progress he can for US.

I don't think he'll see doing nothing as an option.

Just my opinion of how I think he'll see it given his campaign platform, his positions on the DACA deal, and where we are now with caravans of invaders at our borders and outside of economic sanctions (Judy's Plan B or some version thereof) no legal means to stop it.