The budget passed already, apparently:
Congressional Democrats overwhelmingly embraced President Obama’s ambitious and expensive agenda for the nation yesterday, endorsing a $3.5 trillion spending plan that sets the stage for the president to pursue his most far-reaching priorities.
Voting along party lines, the House and Senate approved budget blueprints that would trim Obama’s spending proposals for the fiscal year that begins in October and curtail his plans to cut taxes. The blueprints, however, would permit work to begin on the central goals of Obama’s presidency: an expansion of health-care coverage for the uninsured, more money for college loans and a cap-and-trade system to reduce gases that contribute to global warming.
And the Senate:
The Senate easily passed a $3.55 trillion federal budget late Thursday night to kick off a two-week recess, giving President Obama most of what he wanted in his first spending plan in office.
Senators voted 55-43 for a plan that was championed by the White House and congressional Democrats as key to reviving the nation’s economy and panned by Republicans as too expensive to adopt.
Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he was “delighted” with the budget. “We’ve done a good job of preserving the president’s key priorities, reducing our dependence on foreign energy, focusing on excellence in education carrying out healthcare reform and all while reducing the deficit by two-thirds,” he said.
Democrats Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Evan Bayh of Indiana crossed the aisle to oppose the budget.
Is it just me, or was this faster than usual? Shouldn’t spending this much money be harder? And to turn the favorite idiotic talking point of late on its head, how many Republicans actually read the budget before voting against it?
djork
I bummed about the sunset provision on the "making Work Pay" (or whatever it’s called) tax cut. I was enjoying the extra 20 a paycheck. Seriously. That’s a ton of PBR, allowing me at least two more evenings of drinking per pay period.
Robin G.
Now the House version and the Senate version have to be made to match. If you’re looking for time-consuming contention, fear not, it’ll be here shortly.
valdivia
I got my first paycheck with stim money yesterday and it does make a difference. so that will be gone now?
guest omen
they were in a hurry to kick off spring break?
the house and senate votes:
http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2009&rollnumber=192
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00154
Redhand
FWIW I saw John Boehner on PBS’s Newshour last night railing against the Obama budget and talking trash about tax cuts and less spending. The questioner server him softball questions, and should have grilled him on why the upper classes need tax cuts. There was passing reference to it, but Boehner was allowed to get away with some bullshit about how "tax cuts" will stimulate investment.
And, I’ll scream if I hear one more recycled talking point about "mortgaging our kids and grand kids’ futures." Not a single friggin’ word about the current economic crisis and alleviating the suffering of Americans now.
The Repubs are hopeless, utterly hopeless.
Karmakin
There. Is. Already. Too. Much. Investment. Money. Chasing. Too. Little. Value.
That is what creates inflation and therefore, bubbles.
jibeaux
@valdivia:
Hrm. I don’t know. Mine was an extra $130 a month. They told the hubbie he’d see his bump next month. I don’t think it was supposed to sunset before it got started…
sgwhiteinfla
@valdiva
No the sunset is for 2 years from now. President Obama wanted to make the "Make Work Pay" tax cuts permanent but he wanted to pay for it with by lowering the tax exemptions for charitable giving by the wealthy. And of course Congress didn’t want the richest among us to stop giving because they weren’t getting a tax break. Still they will have a chance to extend them at a later date as long as President Obama finds a way to pay for them that doesn’t involve "soaking the rich". /snark
Carnacki
If I’m not mistaken, one of the reasons it looks so huge compared to before is the Iraq and Afghanistan war costs are no longer in a supplemental but in the actual budget.
valdivia
@jibeaux:
well I hope to see that money for a few more months.
CalD
Last time I saw anything move through congress this fast it was Republicans steam-rolling all the tax cuts through that got us into this mess in the first place.
Rod Hoffman
Hey, they had to pass something so they could leave on break…
GSD
I can’t think of a bigger, more mealy mouthed, unprinicipled centrist hack, than Evan Bayh.
The guy looks like he’s made of cream of wheat.
-GSD
Napoleon
@djork:
I am for the second reason that the government really needs to do something about income inequality and the tax cut was a start.
guest omen
@Karmakin:
inflation occurs when when excess currency gets circulated. but banks are sucking up the money and not recirculating it. krugman and others are predicting deflation, not inflation.
someguy
Oh please. You sound like a Republican. The fact is this money is going out too late, and it isn’t enough to pull us out of the recession. They need to get after TARP II and Stimulus II if they intend to do anything meaningful this year.
The Moar You Know
From the way they deal with most issues these days, I am fairly sure that Republicans do not read.
John S.
I think Evan Bayh is the
unofficial leader of the PUMA party.Zifnab
I think DKos does a good job of putting it all in perspective:
"– In today’s vote on the fiscal year 2010 budget, 20 Democrats voted no but not a single ‘publican voted yes.
A different story last year when, even though an identical number of Democrats voted no, 16 R’s got a "yes" next to their names. Last year’s budget then sailed through the Senate on a voice vote, and was promptly signed by George W. Bush.
Of course, that was a completely different budget. Completely. That 2009 budget was for a mere $3.1 trillion and hid the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan in supplementals to be specified later.
Today’s 2010 vote was for $3.6 trillion budget, including the cost of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
See the enormous difference? –"
~ link
This budget has been very long in the crafting. People have been arguing about cap’n’trade, health care, student loans, and taxes since well into the Bush Administration. The Democrats have the numbers and now they’re getting their way. There wasn’t a whole lot of doubt as to where the votes would end up, so they didn’t waste too much time arguing about it.
Zifnab
@guest omen: That’s true right until we go into recovery. Then the flood gates open and all the money banks have been hording rushes back out into the market again.
So there are inflationary concerns. They just aren’t relevant at the moment. It also doesn’t help that the last few bailouts have followed a "feed the rich" model. Inflation happens when you’ve got too many dollars chasing too few goods. But if you take the top 1% of income earners and double their income, it’s not like they’re going to run out and double their purchases of pork and beans or linoleum tile floors. Until actual wages go up and unemployment comes down, inflation isn’t much of a threat at all.
les
There’s plenty of time for stupid and vicious fighting. When break’s over, we’ll get conference committee and revotes, with plenty of chances for wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then there has to be legislation implementing/spending the budgeted amounts for cap and trade, health care, education, etc. Lots of fun there. Plus, they can’t filibuster the budget bill, so the edge is off the obstructionist fun.
Rainy
All he needed was 50 votes and a budget cannot be filibustered. The Dems were just trying make themselves the gateway to get things done. But people were calling Evan Bayh and all the conservadems who were threatening not to vote for it. I don’t think some of the Dems voted for it though.
Rainy
valdivia
That tax cuts were in the stimulus bill and they last for two years. The provision in the budget was to make them permanent, but they didn’t want to do that. Obama said he will push for it to be made permanent when the Bush tax cuts expire or before that. Congress gets on my nerves. I really hope they didn’t take out the provision that would take the middle man out of the student loan process.
ChrisNBama
Um, this was a budget resolution–a blueprint and not the budget itself. The "budget" is twelve appropriation bills (yet to be debated).
What was passed is a non-binding blueprint.
And the reason the costs are so high is that the Afghan and Iraq war spending is included, as well as funds set aside to reform health care.
This is a fiscally responsible budget blueprint.
Llelldorin
I think the relative ease this time simply reflects the fact that bipartisanship is much easier when the two parties are are progressive caucus and the blue dog caucus. Frankly, if you’re looking for conservatives negotiating in good faith, the blue dogs are a better bet than the Republicans.
Poopyman
Shock Doctrine, baby!
And I assume that the question
was rhetorical. The bill was created and introduced by Democrats, right? That is their only criteria.
Tsulagi
Wait a minute, what happened to the alternative Republican budget that was promised this week? Surely that chart from Ryan showing the Democratic line having an erection for 70 years as opposed to the limp Republican wasn’t the sum total of their collective brain trust was it?
ksmiami
Because the only entity capable of stimulating demand in a depressed economy is the Federal Government. Jeesus, Keynes has been proven right again and again…
anonevent
In October I took a loan to spend $3500. It about gave me a hard attack, and it took me a couple of hours to decide to spend it, but I did have to act quickly: my fridge at home was going out and I needed to replace it.
$3500 for a fridge? Yes, because I bought a Samsung fridge that had 28.8cuft of space inside while taking up the same amount of outside volume as my 26cuft fridge, and a warranty. The reviews on it were pretty good. Plus it has really cool LEDs inside and makes some neat sounds when you push the buttons on it. And it tells me when the water filter goes out. And did it mention LEDs.
Hopefully they are having heart attacks as they work on the bill, but sometimes it just has to be done.
Church Lady
Note the hypocrisy shorthand here:
I just got my tax cut, but now it looks like they are going to sunset it. That’s not fair. I want to keep that extra money. Obama promised. Those upper income earners are supposed to pay even more so I can pay less. Whaa, whaa, whaa. And yet you continue to bitch about the "wealthy" not wanting to pay more in taxes. Well, guess what – it looks like you don’t want to either.
If you want a bigger safety net, like more federal dollars for education, healthcare, unemployment, food stamps, etc., you have to help pay for it too. The upper 5% or 10% can’t carry the entire load for these improvements. Either be willing to chip in a proportionately fair amount for these things, or give it up.
Now that I’ve managed to stir up the hornet’s nest, I’m off to attend a foodbank fundraiser. I’ll check back later to see just how much I’ve pissed the hoi polloi off.
D-Chance.
We can now begin proclaim this "Obama’s economy". The Bower-in-Chief just got his blank check.
djork
Please point out where I said it wasn’t fair? Hell, please point out where I said any of the things you’re ascribing to me?
TIA.
Quaker in a Basement
All of them, silly. As long as you count "Rush read it to them."
liberal
@ChrisNBama:
Exactly what I was thinking.
jerry 101
so…wait.
you can pass a bill in the Senate with fewer than 60 votes?
Weird. The way the media reports things, you’d think this to be impossible.
Seriously though, this proves that one can both vote for a bill and vote against it.
Vote for Cloture, then vote against it. The final vote is the one the traditional media cares about. The activists, lobbyists, and other people with at least 2 brain cells between their ears care about the cloture vote.
Those 5 get to make Obama and some lobbyists happy while knowing that the conservative dumbass media will trumpet their resolve in opposing Obama’s budget.
JK
They haven’t spent any money. They passed a budget. The legislation to spend money are called appropriations bills. The last one that passed was the $410B Omnibus which should have passed before October 2008.
Martin
They’re going to make Obama own the budget plan, which is why it went through quickly, but fight on the appropriations.
The only plan the GOP has is to make Obama own every plan/problem/solution, but say no to absolutely every request in the hopes that later there will be some failure that they can point back to and say ‘This was his, and we said no, and then it blew up after we were outvoted. Vote for us’. With no ideas, your only plan is to pray the other guys ideas suck.
iluvsummr
Were you aware that last year’s budget was $3.1 trillion without including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (estimated to cost $100 billion a year on average)? Were you equally alarmed at the level of spending then, or has the increased media scrutiny of Obama heightened your alarm? I’m genuinely curious not trying to be sarcastic or anything.
And for the record, I believe spending this much money should *always* be well-though out and appropriately justified, regardless of who’s in power, and that the costs of war should *always* be reflected in the budget and not hidden from taxpayer view.
Edit: Just realized the $100 billion estimate is for Iraq only, doesn’t include Afghanistan.
aimai
Church Lady,
YOu have radically misunderstood the nature and point of the middle class tax cut–it was a *stimulus* measure, not a right wing talking point measure. The tax break for the middle class was aimed at pumping money *back into the economy* on the theory that the middle class, like the working poor, at this point can do nothing else with a small amount of money than spend it on necessities. They can’t save it and withdraw it from the demand cycle.
The rich, on the other hand, are refusing to pay their "fair share" of all other costs. There are a lot of different kinds of taxes at issue here but, basically:
a) the costs of SS and FICA and all that shit are disproportionatly paid by people whose main source of income is, well, income, because those taxes are capped and earners over a certain high mark pay the same as people lower down the income scale.
b) The taxes on other kinds of wealth are tilted heavily in favor of the wealthy. See, e.g. the exception for taxes on hedge fund manager income which makes it less taxable than regular income, cuts in estate taxes, tax havens, depreciation etc…etc…etc…
To make a long story short you can think of it as "operating expenses taxation" and "stimulus cost rebates." They are really different discussions and different attitudes are important, not evidence of hypocrisy.
aimai
John Casey
BTW, the budget process is not concluded: the House and Senate resolutions differ, and those differences will have to be resolved in conference. After which, both houses will have to vote again to accept the conference report.
For the commenter who wondered how this thing passed the Senate with less than 60 votes, the budget resolution is considered under special rules that limit debate to 50 hours. Thus, no need for cloture, and no need for 60 votes to get it.
JC
Jinchi
Well considering that last year’s budget only got passed 3 weeks ago; yeah that was pretty quick.
asiangrrlMN
I thought it was awfully fast as well. Suspiciously fast after all the bickering and posturing that had occurred before. I await the final results, and I am not convinced this is going to be smooth-sailing.
TenguPhule
Given that they own 80%+ of the wealth, Yes they can.
The alternative features baskets and poles.
Pick one.
TenguPhule
Then fucking raise our wages, douchebags.
Factoring inflation, the only people who’s income went up weren’t poor or middle class.
If you want to raise money from taxes, go to where the money is.
guest omen
@aimai:
The tax break for the middle class was aimed at pumping money back into the economy on the theory that the middle class, like the working poor, at this point can do nothing else with a small amount of money than spend it on necessities. They can’t save it and withdraw it from the demand cycle.
but look at this bar graph: tax cuts produced a smaller bang for the buck, stimulus wise. depending on what kind it is, tax cuts could even end up having a negative effect. money dedicated to infrastructure repair, food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits are much much more stimulative:
http://www.motherjones.com/files/legacy/news/feature/2009/01/bang-for-the-buck.jpg
via
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/12/stimulus-suckers
mcc
It did seem a bit fast after all the buildup. After the way they built up the epic struggle between good and evil that the budget process was supposed to be I was expecting this would be tying up Congress all summer. Also kind of weird that we heard all this stuff about conflict over whether various things were going to be in the budget (health care funding, cap and trade, etc) and then in the articles about the budget passing you can barely find anything about which of that stuff made it in.
So what’s next on Congress’s agenda? I mean, a two week recess. But after that? Now that the stimulus and budget are passed can some of the more ideologically contentious items on Obama’s policy agenda come up?
Rosa
I think the President has wisely given up his misguided "why can’t we all get along" quest for bipartisanship as the votes for the budget resolution show : http://www.newsy.com/videos/budget_battle/
Cooperation isn’t something Legislators are willing to embrace.
guest omen
@Rosa:
his bipartisan rhetoric worked in that it got non-politician republicans to vote for him.
John Cole
I guess I am an old fart, but I think 3.1 trillion is massive.
publius
Someone mentioned above – but this is only the nonbinding resolution which sets up framework for battles to come — nasty battles I should say
cleek
@jerry 101:
if it’s a budget bill, yes. filibusters aren’t allowed on budget bills.
tam1MI
Well, somebody’s gotta sacrifice so AIG can continue to dole out multi-million dollar bonuses with our money.
JenJen
If Mark Halperin wasn’t a lazy hack, he’d probably consider Barack Obama’s passage of the largest budget in American History to be The Greatest Political Achievement Ever Ever Ever.
h/t DougJ, of course.