Rand Offers Alternative to Biden-McCarthy Debt Deal

[Matt Collins]

Dr. Rand Paul Announces Conservative Alternative to Biden-McCarthy Debt Deal

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) announced his conservative alternative to the Biden-McCarthy debt deal. This alternative will be offered as an amendment to the so-called “Fiscal Responsibility Act” deal and would replace existing language with responsible reforms and necessary cuts.

“Sixty percent of Americans say Congress should only raise the nation’s debt ceiling if it cuts spending at the same time. I would guess the Americans answering that poll meant real cuts in spending, not an annual increase of one percent above already bloated levels of COVID-19 spending,” said Dr. Paul. “Bold actions must be taken to defeat our mounting national debt, and my conservative alternative to the Biden-McCarthy deal gives us a real opportunity to get our fiscal house in order.”

Dr. Paul’s amendment would replace the existing language of the Biden-McCarthy “Fiscal Responsibility Act” (FRA) with the following measures:

• Replaces the blanket 2-year suspension on the debt ceiling with a $500 billion hike forcing Congress to come back to the table to do their job and figure out solutions to the cascading debt issue highlighted by the debt ceiling.
• Replaces the caps on discretionary spending with caps on total spending (the sum of discretionary and mandatory spending) that cuts five percent spent each year.
  
  • If the government continues to spend at current rates, this plan would trigger an automatic $302 billion cut in FY24 and another $241 billion cut in FY25 for a total of $545 billion in the two-year period.
  • If the government adhered to these caps for five years, by FY28 the federal government would have the first balanced budget since 2001.
  
  
• Creates a mandate that growth in federal outlays may at no point exceed the growth in revenue from the previous fiscal year.

The table below outlines the caps Dr. Paul’s amendment would set and the total cuts by year from FY23 enacted levels.

Total Spending Caps (in billions)
Fiscal Year	Paul Amendment Caps	Cumulative Cuts (from FY23)
FY24	$4,839	-$303
FY25	$4,597	-$545
FY26	$4,367	-$775
FY27	$4,149	-$993
FY28	$3,942	-$1,201

[TheCount]

What really needs to happen is force Congress to deal with the debt limit as part of the budget process. Make them own it so that they can't play one side during budget discussion and then take the opposite side later in the same year for the debt limit discussion.

I don't necessarily think that means lifting the debt limit completely, but rather the debt limit should be an explicit line, preferably the first line, of the budget.

[Snowball]

"migrants" need permanent welfare and warmongers need bombs.

we lose and Rand lose

again.

[unknown]

Has Rand been working behind the scenes?

I feel like he's been kinda quiet over the last couple of years after completely owning Fauci.

[Matt Collins]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNpiUY00PmI

[Anti Globalist]

Too bad the majority of people in Washington aren't going to back this alternative.

[Brian4Liberty]

Dr. Rand Paul Discusses the Biden-McCarthy Debt Deal and His Conservative Alternative

Rand Paul proposes budget caps and a penny plan to balance the budget. They also discuss US money being sent to China for biological research, and the COVID cover-up.

[Matt Collins]

https://twitter.com/repthomasmassie/...42732701925376

[PAF]

Tom and Rand are grasping at whatever straws they can. I hope they can accomplish what they set out to do. But, government always grows, it never shrinks. The only way to shrink government/debt, or balance for that matter, is for people to stop relying on it.

[acptulsa]

Tom and Rand are grasping at whatever straws they can.

Stopping omnibus spending bills alone is a pretty damned tempting straw, considering budgets during Pelosi were, like, vote for every penny of pork or get accused of throwing little orphans out in the snow.

Yeah, that would be a major improvement.

[TheTexan]

Tom and Rand are grasping at whatever straws they can. I hope they can accomplish what they set out to do. But, government always grows, it never shrinks. The only way to shrink government/debt, or balance for that matter, is for people to stop relying on it.

Yea seems like a waste of time. It also seems like rearranging deck chairs.

Hopefully they figure out soon that their time would be better spent planning and preaching secession.

$#@!, if Rand came out one day, and was like going forward secession is my top priority, that would be big $#@!in news. Big enough possibly to get the general secession ball rolling.

[Matt Collins]

Hopefully they figure out soon that their time would be better spent planning and preaching secession.

$#@!, if Rand came out one day, and was like going forward secession is my top priority, that would be big $#@!in news. Big enough possibly to get the general secession ball rolling.

The federal government will never let that happen... ever. The only way secession is possible is if the federal government collapses (think currency crisis) or becomes completely impotent (think currency crisis).

Therefore it is a complete waste of time and energy to delve into that issue if you're a Senator when there are more productive things a Senator can do.

Now that being said, reference MTG's "National Divorce" comments a few months back. The reaction was indeed intriguing. But secession is pretty much impossible, not only because the feds won't let it happen, but because the geographic lines are urban vs non-urban. Yeah Texas could secede, but then Austin would do what? Georgia could decede, but Atlanta would then do what? Minnesota could secede, but the Twin Cities would then do what? Makes no sense.

[PAF]

The federal government will never let that happen... ever. The only way secession is possible is if the federal government collapses (think currency crisis) or becomes completely impotent (think currency crisis).

Therefore it is a complete waste of time and energy to delve into that issue if you're a Senator when there are more productive things a Senator can do.

Now that being said, reference MTG's "National Divorce" comments a few months back. The reaction was indeed intriguing. But secession is pretty much impossible, not only because the feds won't let it happen, but because the geographic lines are urban vs non-urban. Yeah Texas could secede, but then Austin would do what? Georgia could decede, but Atlanta would then do what? Minnesota could secede, but the Twin Cities would then do what? Makes no sense.

I am so at the point that MTG, Tom, Rand (as good as they are), are doing nothing but keeping the final thread from snapping. The few who still have hope continue to cling to the corrupt system that we have. The rest, who either don't know, don't care, or want to take advantage, are mere leaches.

All empires must come to an end. Enough already.

The only way I see out of this stinking mess is to let the house of cards totally collapse, people forced to start at ground zero and learn to be self/small community reliant again - even if it does Pete Repeat like it always has throughout history.

[Matt Collins]

All empires must come to an end. Enough already.

The only way I see out of this stinking mess is to let the house of cards totally collapse, people forced to start at ground zero and learn to be self/small community reliant again - even if it does Pete Repeat like it always has throughout history.

Except that's not how all empires have ended. Some have ended slowly over dozens or hundreds of years.

But yeah, I agree, ultimately the federal government isn't able to be reformed in any significant amount. That's why focusing on state level legislatures is so much more productive.

[PAF]

Except that's not how all empires have ended. Some have ended slowly over dozens or hundreds of years.

But yeah, I agree, ultimately the federal government isn't able to be reformed in any significant amount. That's why focusing on state level legislatures is so much more productive.

Respectfully, I reiterate:

start at ground zero and learn to be self/small community reliant again

State is every bit as bad Federal, especially in Common Wealth states where the majority are left/democrat/socialists. And where businesses grease the politicians hands, after what was a good/promising candidate got elected and then turned bad. It is the mindset of the people. State, Federal, it is all representative, which is why we are where we are.

[acptulsa]

Hopefully they figure out soon that their time would be better spent planning and preaching secession.

Um, didn't he essentially run for federal office on the promise that he would try to make it unnecessary? Nothing like announcing, sorry, I'm useless.

Why can't a state senator do it? Because they're less famous than federal senators?

The federal government will never let that happen... ever.

After the federal government gets both fists and at least one foot stuck in the Tar Baby named Russia, what happens to your never ever? They're not going to have any Marines to spare. They're going to need more than 87,000 IRS agents.

[PAF]

Um, didn't he essentially run for federal office on the promise that he would try to make it unnecessary? Nothing like announcing, sorry, I'm useless.

Why can't a state senator do it? Because they're less famous than federal senators?



After the federal government gets both fists and at least one foot stuck in the Tar Baby named Russia, what happens to your never ever? They're not going to have any Marines to spare. They're going to need more than 87,000 IRS agents.

My concern is, people keep applying for government jobs. And if they get to carry, along with a badge, they won't be so anti-2nd anymore. lol

[Matt Collins]

State is every bit as bad Federal

No because state governments cant print money out of thin air. That's the biggest difference. Also states have to have some semblance of competition because one can move across state lines in most cases with ease. Changing your country however is much more difficult.

[PAF]

No because state governments cant print money out of thin air. That's the biggest difference. Also states have to have some semblance of competition because one can move across state lines in most cases with ease. Changing your country however is much more difficult.

California/Massachusetts resident: "Texas here I come! And when enough of us get there...!"

Well, "let it not be said" and all that. I'm still trying, but the sooner, the better...

[Occam's Banana]

The federal government will never let [secession] happen... ever. The only way secession is possible is if the federal government collapses (think currency crisis) or becomes completely impotent (think currency crisis).

Such broad and sweeping assertions as "the federal government will never let secession happen ... ever" are unwarranted. In any particular case, the feds might not want to permit secession, and they might succeed in preventing it (by reconciliation or coercion) - but neither (especially the latter) is such an automatically foregone conclusion as you are trying to make it out to be. They are not omnipotent - and thus, it is not a matter of their mere desire to disallow it. In the event of an attempted secession, it is a matter of whether they would possess both the will and the wherewithal to actually pay the (possibly enormous) costs necessary to forcibly prevent the attempt from occurring or succeeding. Contrary to your assertion, it is not at all evident (let alone absolutely certain) that they would in every scenario. (And exactly the same kinds of considerations confront the secessionists.)

[S]ecession is pretty much impossible [...] because the geographic lines are urban vs non-urban. Yeah Texas could secede, but then Austin would do what? Georgia could decede, but Atlanta would then do what? Minnesota could secede, but the Twin Cities would then do what? Makes no sense.

There is no real mystery here - certainly not one that "makes no sense".

There is nothing particularly problematic about this "urban vs. rural" thing.

In the event of secession by Texas, it would be a matter for Austin [1] to assess and decide the following:

- Do we want to resist it?
- If we want to resist it, do we have the ability to do so?
- If we have the ability to do so, what is the price of resistance likely to be?
- Are we willing to pay that price? (IOW: Is it even worth it?)

If the answer to any of those questions [2] is "no" (and it is not at all clear that it "never ... ever" would be) - then there is no significant problem.

Blanket statements to the effect of "well, the feds (or Austin) don't want it to happen, therefore it's just 'never ... ever' gonna happen" are not to be taken seriously (except for the purpose of pointing out why they are not to be taken seriously).



[1] And not just Austin, but every locality within Texas, urban and rural.

[2] And not just those questions, but others as well - such as "Is some kind of negotiated mutually-acceptable reconciliation impossible?"

[acptulsa]

Such broad and sweeping assertions as "the federal government will never let secession happen ... ever" are unwarranted.

At this point, they're also naive to the point of blindness. The powers that be have been deliberately wrecking the currency and the country. They've driven every wedge they can think of. And the mainstream media has run quite a number of trial balloons along those very lines. We may frustrate what appears to be their plan, in fact, by not splintering into enough small, easily controlled little countries to play off against each other properly.

The Psyop counts on people who refuse to believe anything is possible but business as usual. The Psyop could be defeated by people who could anticipate it. If anyone has the imagination, enough sense to see what's right under their nose, and isn't so hidebound that they say silly things like never ever, it could be defeated. The federal government and mainstream media has done so many things it would never, ever do the last few years that I can't count them all. And yet...

[TheTexan]

Um, didn't he essentially run for federal office on the promise that he would try to make it unnecessary? Nothing like announcing, sorry, I'm useless.

Well, I hate to break it to ya...

Why can't a state senator do it? Because they're less famous than federal senators?

Short answer: Yes. Pretty much.

Less short answer: Federal senators have a role to play in secessions as well. Secession isn't unilateral, as it does require some amount of negotiation with the federal government. This is where federal representation is helpful.

[Matt Collins]

California/Massachusetts resident: "Texas here I come! And when enough of us get there...!"

Yep, that is a problem for sure. And I don't know any way to deal with it :-(

Ron DeSantis did a good job virtue signaling conservative values which did prevent a lot of these locusts from moving down to FL. They were so turned off by him that they decided not to move.