It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


House Passes Sweeping Budget Cut Bill

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 04:37 AM
The Republican Party won a vote to [attempt to] cut the deficit by $50billion by the end of the decade. The Bill was won 217-to-215 and was part of the Republican Parties promise at the last election.
House Republicans sweated out a victory on a major budget cut bill in the wee hours Friday, salvaging a major pillar of their agenda despite divisions within the party and nervousness among moderates that the vote could cost them in next year's elections.

The bill, passed 217-215 after a 25-minute-long roll call, makes modest but politically painful cuts across an array of programs for the poor, students and farmers.

The victory on the deficit-control bill came hours after an embarrassing and rare defeat on a $602 billion spending bill for education, health care and job training programs this year. The earlier 224-209 vote halted what had been a steady drive to complete annual appropriations bills freezing many agency budgets.

The broader budget bill would slice almost $50 billion from the deficit by the end of the decade by curbing rapidly growing benefit programs such as Medicaid, food stamps and student loan subsidies. Republicans said reining in such programs whose costs spiral upward each year automatically s the first step to restoring fiscal discipline.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

At first glance this is fantastic news, however when I spent some time reading over and over it, it really began to bother me. Instead of the United State's spending less money on their military which takes up a large proportion of the budget. Instead they have spent time to cut things which will only harm the poor.

It is the Working Class and Under-Class of Society who need things like Medicaid, food stamps and student loans. If the Government takes it from them it will result in the spiral of poverty sticking. They can't afford to eat, insure their family or to go back to College/University to get a better life.

As per-normal, a quick fix solution will turn into a much larger problem a few decades from now.

[edit on 21-11-2005 by asala]

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 07:23 AM
Instead of "curbing" budgets for stuff like food stamps, medicare, and student loans, they need to strengthen the means by which these programs are acquired by those who use them.

For example, I knew of a family that was doing pretty well (both the mother and father were working, and the father was making around $40k a year) but they were able to get food stamps. And some people literally live on welfare even though they are very capable of getting jobs.

So, like medication doled out by drug companies, the actions take by Congress in these "budget cuts" only "mask the symptoms" but never "cure the disease".

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 11:01 AM

Lack of health insurance coverage causes 18,000 unnecessary American deaths a year. (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005.)

This is one of the main reasons as to why I published this ATSNN article. Already 18,000 people per-year die because of having no Health Insurance. Which is more [ I do believe] than are in fact murdered [by guns] in the United State's.

Out of these 18,000 it will be the young, old and poor who die. It won't be the Elite who run the Government and again show they have no care for the population as a whole.

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 11:04 AM
maybe there should be some stae run hospitals ?

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 11:58 AM
It's a sad state of affairs for sure. That we would take from the needy should tell everyone something about the current leaders. They needed to be gone long ago, but I really hope people wake up and see them as they really are and vote them OUT.

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 12:52 PM
Wow I am actually in shock. This is insane and makes no logical sense to me. We are sadly no longer a compassionate nation. The priorities of our politicians are not even remotely in line with good christian values. That is regardless of what these people say during elections. Incentives for oil companies and cuts to food for children.

Below is from an attached article on the effect this will have:

Under the House plan, roughly 165,000 people who now automatically are enrolled in food stamps when they get assistance from welfare programs would lose their food stamps. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said the affected people were mostly working families with children.

States would have the option to continue offering free school lunches to families cut off of food stamps. The Center on Budget said it was unlikely all states would do so.

US NEWS Article

Why must we target the poor? I know there are people who abuse the system but it cannot be the majority. Why don't we do a better job finding out who is cheating? We should always error on the side of life and take care of those in need. Oh wait, isn't that supposed to be the republican line?

I always think the discussions of an American Civil War are a bit crazy. Now, I think this experiment in democracy is clearly failing and if we do not radically change those people in power, we must remove them by any means necessary.

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 03:10 PM
Like I stated earlier, the budget cuts are only "masking the symptoms", they're not "curing the disease".

For example, if you lose your job, you can collect unemployment...for 26 weeks. 26 weeks is nearly seven months. If you can't find a job in THREE months, then you need to look for another profession or accept a job that will at least pay you, even though you may not enjoy it.

Welfare is abused beyond belief. And, again, they are just throwing money at the problem and not doing much to fix it. If you are able to work, then you shouldn't be on welfare, period. There should be a cap on how much welfare you can get, whether you have one kid or 100 kids. If you are already on welfare and have more kids while you're on welfare, then that's your problem. Why should we give you more money because you had another kid? Do companies give you a raise when you have more kids?

Medicare is so high because medical costs are so high. Why is it that I have to pay $10 for a pill in the United States that I can get for $1 in Mexico or Canada? I had to pick up five pills the other the cost of $50....and that's WITH insurance. I hate to think of what the cost would have been without it. And, on top of that, just for my wife and myself, we pay nearly $300 a month for insurance.

The "disease" that I spoke of earlier is the fact that people that don't need to be on welfare are or that people are living off of unemployment for 26 weeks instead of looking for a job, esentially being lazy. The disease is over-inflated medical costs. The disease is the fact that, like I said earlier, the current programs only "mask the symptoms", they don't fix the problems. It's like they are trying to put a band-aid on a cut artery. Sure, cutting the budget will affect those that are "sucking up" money, but it also affects those that absolutely need it.

Our representatives need to sit down and come up with REAL solutions, not band-aids.

new topics

top topics


log in