PDA

View Full Version : [Update: Rejected by GOP] Rand Paul offers his own balanced budget plan




CaseyJones
01-10-2017, 11:59 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/09/rand-paul-offers-his-own-budget-plan-that-will-balance-it-in-just-five-years/


Earlier this month, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul took to the floor to give a blistering message about the Republican’s latest budget plan that wouldn’t balance, but would in fact add nearly $10 trillion to our already mounting debt.

The 20 minute presentation he gave detailed how Republicans put forth the budget, not as a budget, but as the “vehicle to repeal Obamacare.” Paul was not having this, and with some visual aids, showed his fellow Republicans the mistake they were making.

The speech itself was popular, especially among libertarian and conservative groups, but few people have time to watch a 20 minute speech. So Paul decided to make a shorter, more concise version in a new YouTube video. During it, he highlights the important points of his 20 minute speech, including the fact that he’s willing to scrap the budget that will ad $9.7 trillion to our debt, and offer one that will actually work.

“We are in such a hurry to repeal Obamacare,” says Paul. “Look, I’m all for it. As a physician, nobody thinks that Obamacare has been worse for the country. Nobody thinks it’s a worse piece of legislation than I do. And yet, do we have to add nearly $10 trillion in debt to get at it.

“So as this moves forward, I will offer a replacement,” said Paul. “I will offer my own budget. I will offer to strike and remove $10 trillion worth of debt, and I will offer my own budget that balances within five years.”

Paul’s plan to balance the budget is simple, and all he plans to do is freeze spending on the budget. He says doing so will cause the budget to balance itself out in just over five years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjNTOZqn0Oc

GunnyFreedom
01-10-2017, 12:13 PM
Aaaand the spendthrift GOP utterly rejected it. I think what, only five or eight Republicans in the Senate were okay with balancing the budget?

timosman
01-10-2017, 12:30 PM
Aaaand the spendthrift GOP utterly rejected it. I think what, only five or eight Republicans in the Senate were okay with balancing the budget?

Now WE get to spend the money! Make it rain!

jllundqu
01-10-2017, 12:34 PM
I hope Rand continues to hold a mirror up to the GOP pussies and continues to be the Honey Badger of the Senate

timosman
01-10-2017, 12:37 PM
http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/988590/27168975/1469679022633/Helicopter+money+28+July+2016.JPG

Valli6
01-10-2017, 12:48 PM
Voted down 14-83. :mad:
These are the 14 Senators who supported a balanced budget:

Mike Crapo
Ted Cruz
Steve Daines
Jeff Flake
John Kennedy
James Lankford
Mike Lee
Jerry Moran
James Risch
Marco Rubio
Ben Sasse
Tim Scott,
Pat Toomey
Rand Paul


...The measure would have balanced the budget over roughly five years but retain the guidelines for nixing the Affordable Care Act.

Paul pitched his spending measure ahead of the vote as a "conservative budget" that could still appeal to senators in both parties.

"I think there's something in my version of a budget for both Republicans and Democrats because mine calls for a freeze in spending, but would allow the different appropriations committees to decide where the spending would be cut," he said.

The Senate is expected to pass the shell budget this week, which includes repeal instructions, with a marathon voting session tentatively expected for Wednesday.

Republicans need 50 votes to clear the resolution. With Paul expected to vote against, it they can only afford to lose one additional GOP senator...
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/313423-senate-rejects-pauls-balanced-budget*
Hmmm. Just one two more senators needed to block it. :cool:

CaptUSA
01-10-2017, 01:01 PM
Rand Paul just removed any pretense that those GOP politicians care about balancing the budget. Kudos again to Rand. And kudos for the other 13 that supported it.

jllundqu
01-10-2017, 01:54 PM
https://i.imgflip.com/1hf2aq.jpg

helmuth_hubener
01-10-2017, 02:54 PM
I have a plan that does it in one year.

Brian4Liberty
01-10-2017, 03:43 PM
818936017617096710
https://twitter.com/USAB4L/status/818936017617096710

Brian4Liberty
01-10-2017, 03:49 PM
818937556452704260
https://twitter.com/USAB4L/status/818937556452704260

Matt Collins
01-10-2017, 05:32 PM
Republicans acting like Democrats, as usual...

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/313423-senate-rejects-pauls-balanced-budget

Zippyjuan
01-10-2017, 05:46 PM
They are for it unless they actually have to vote on one and make the hard choices necessary to achieve one. They can't blame it on the Democrats for blocking one now.

I haven't seen recent figures from Rand on this but his previous proposal relied on tax revenues rising by 25% along with cuts to achieve the target of balancing it. With Trump and his Big Ideas I doubt spending reduction is going to be very fashionable in Congress.

PierzStyx
01-10-2017, 05:50 PM
The Republicans were the original big spending party. Of course they aren't going to cut anything. They aren't even going to spend less.

Zippyjuan
01-10-2017, 06:06 PM
They both love to spend. It is intended to woo voters by giving money to their favorite programs. They just have different priorities. For the Republicans it is usually aid to business and military spending. For Democrats it is is more aid directly to individuals.

TheCount
01-10-2017, 06:26 PM
This is my surprised face.

Rudeman
01-10-2017, 06:39 PM
He should expand the time frame and see if any of these Republicans budge. Say a 10 year balanced budget plan. That way they can't weasel and claim it was "too extreme".

Brian4Liberty
01-10-2017, 06:45 PM
They both love to spend. It is intended to woo voters by giving money to their favorite programs. They just have different priorities. For the Republicans it is usually aid to business and military spending. For Democrats it is is more aid directly to individuals.

LOL. Who do you think you are fooling? Crony socialism is just the same as crony corporatism. Eventually some money trickles down to average individuals, but the crony establishment and middle men takes big cuts at every stage.

TheCount
01-10-2017, 06:46 PM
He should expand the time frame and see if any of these Republicans budge. Say a 10 year balanced budget plan. That way they can't weasel and claim it was "too extreme".

It's not a matter of time or extremity. With the results of the election, the Republicans are going into the looting phase of the political process.

phill4paul
01-10-2017, 06:49 PM
We will never get the numbers to affect change. Not in my lifetime.

eleganz
01-10-2017, 06:59 PM
Is Trump not giving the Senate a mandate to balance the budget?

Zippyjuan
01-10-2017, 08:21 PM
Is Trump not giving the Senate a mandate to balance the budget?

He has promised everything. $trillions to rebuild infrastructure- new roads, bridges, dame. Hundreds of $billions to build his wall. $trillions more added to defense spending. $trillions in tax cuts. And yet to balance the budget in eight years. Something will have to give.

http://2016.presidential-candidates.org/Trump/?on=federal-budget


SEAN HANNiTY: “Would you insist on a balanced budget as president?”

DONALD TRUMP: “I would insist on it relatively soon. Right now we're so under, we're so far under that you can't go too quickly. But I would absolutely insist on it relatively soon.”

If Congress agrees with his proposals, it will break the budget- not balance it.

CPUd
01-10-2017, 08:43 PM
Voted down 14-83. :mad:
These are the 14 Senators who supported a balanced budget:

Mike Crapo
Ted Cruz
Steve Daines
Jeff Flake
John Kennedy
James Lankford
Mike Lee
Jerry Moran
James Risch
Marco Rubio
Ben Sasse
Tim Scott,
Pat Toomey
Rand Paul


Hmmm. Just one two more senators needed to block it. :cool:

I think he's got 2 more who will vote against it because of the Obamacare stuff mixed in. At least he did last week.

nobody's_hero
01-10-2017, 09:59 PM
It's an interesting situation. Kind of puts Rand's support from Trump on the matter to the forefront. Trump could veto this plan, which would put him at odds with the Congress right from the get-go.

And, if there's a throw-down between Trump and Congress, I think Trump is viewed more favorably by the public. He could probably go on his Twitter account and tell people to call their Senators and tell them to stop f'king around and half of them would have their own piss running down their legs before Congress voted again.

Like it or not, Trump has a lot of influence right now.

He could do a lot of good.

He could do a lot of bad.

Not expecting much, but that's just the situation as I see it.

eleganz
01-11-2017, 01:20 AM
It's an interesting situation. Kind of puts Rand's support from Trump on the matter to the forefront. Trump could veto this plan, which would put him at odds with the Congress right from the get-go.

And, if there's a throw-down between Trump and Congress, I think Trump is viewed more favorably by the public. He could probably go on his Twitter account and tell people to call their Senators and tell them to stop f'king around and half of them would have their own piss running down their legs before Congress voted again.

Like it or not, Trump has a lot of influence right now.

He could do a lot of good.

He could do a lot of bad.

Not expecting much, but that's just the situation as I see it.


Congress is Trump's bitch right now, even more so than traditionally, even more so than when Obama was in charge.

Everyone in DC knows Trump is nearly invincible, anyone that picks a fight with him loses. He is hard to plan against politically because anything that he does has unpredictable outcomes.

Rand (and liberty movement) really caught a lucky break with Trump seeing him on TV and then phoning in his support. Wow.

helmuth_hubener
01-11-2017, 09:58 AM
$trillions ... Hundreds of $billions ... $trillions more... $trillions in tax cuts.

Great, another h. e. panqui. :rolleyes:

He's catching on, I'm telling you!

CPUd
01-12-2017, 06:09 PM
819537524540448768
https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/819537524540448768

CPUd
01-12-2017, 06:10 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2Al65BWgAEnELT.jpg:large

eleganz
01-12-2017, 06:19 PM
819537524540448768
https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/819537524540448768

The purists would've said Rand didn't do enough, if he was a true free market and human advocate, he would've introduced killing spending 100% and ending government across the board so we could all feel good about ourselves. :rolleyes:

Krugminator2
01-13-2017, 09:02 PM
820079149666615297
820080597154426880

820083495774994432

820087363657297922

820090189854871552

timosman
01-13-2017, 09:05 PM
The purists would've said Rand didn't do enough, if he was a true free market and human advocate, he would've introduced killing spending 100% and ending government across the board so we could all feel good about ourselves. :rolleyes:

This is why God invented marketing.:rolleyes:

CaseyJones
01-13-2017, 09:07 PM
yep the magic of a new administration
fuckers can get away with all sorts of shit

notsure
01-16-2017, 10:21 PM
Probably a win-win for establishment Republicans. They can increase spending and make Trump look bad by raising the debt.

phill4paul
01-16-2017, 10:55 PM
Might be a trade off for the Obamacare repeal and replace. The Machiavellian machinations are machiacle.

MallsRGood
01-18-2017, 12:25 AM
Yea, since he took office he's been calling for a cut of $500 billion straight up, i.e. not relative the planned increase, but in absolute terms.

Yea, fuck that guy, total sell out...

https://thumb1.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/2659924/396993907/stock-vector-man-hanging-from-a-cliff-396993907.jpg

Let's jump!