House Passes One-Week U.S. Budget Extension; Obama Would Veto

April 7 (Bloomberg)

The U.S. House approved a stopgap spending bill to keep the government open through next week, although President Barack Obama said he would veto the measure and a shutdown still looms.

The measure, passed 247-181, would cut another $12 billion in spending this year and fund the Pentagon at current levels through Sept. 30. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, called the bill a “non-starter.”

Reid and House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, returned to the White House today to meet with Obama for talks to try to avert a shutdown at midnight tomorrow.

Leaders of both parties insist they don’t want a shutdown while they maneuver to avoid blame if one occurs.

An administration statement, in threatening a veto of the short-term House measure, said it would be a “distraction” from the budget talks. Reid said the one-week measure is a sure “way to close the government.”

Boehner called on the Senate to act on the bill.

“There is absolutely no policy reason for the Senate not to follow the House in taking these responsible steps to support our troops and keep our government open,” he said on the House floor.

Can anyone explain to me why ( if I understood this correctly ) Obama would veto the measure that was approved and would cut 12 billion in needless spending?

The U.S. House approved a stopgap spending bill to keep the government open through next week, although President Barack Obama said he would veto the measure and a shutdown still looms.

Why veto a cut back on spending?

The measure, passed 247-181, would cut another $12 billion in spending this year and fund the Pentagon at current levels through Sept. 30. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, called the bill a “non-starter.”

Harry Reid is suggesting that not spending 12 billion ( saving it in other words ) and maintaining the current funds for the Pentagon as a "non starter". Really?

Can anyone shed light on the logic behind this?


www.businessweek.com...

I think there is no logic with these guys... Logic isn't something they promote... Logic would mean doing something right. Remind when the last time was they did something right.

reply to post by Jepic


Well that much we agree on, but whats funny, regardless of Obama or Reid, you got douche bag Boehner over there suggesting:

Boehner called on the Senate to act on the bill.

Im all for saving money..especially tax payer money. Perhaps the bill was unclear to Obama? Perhaps there was non-sense ( that would come as no surprise ) pushed into the bill, maybe thats why Obama said he'd veto it?

They are just playing games for the public. Breads and Circuses. Just as the Romans acted just before they fell. We need to slash a TRILLION dollars, 1000 billion, not 50 billion.

The government needs to shut down to remind people that the we still exist without the government.

reply to post by TheRealJayZ


With all this talk about government shut down, I think it might do the people loads of good?

A bill that continues to make sure our troops get paid, and Obama calls it a "distraction"? Sounds about right.

Can't wait till we get an adult back in the White House. Trump is sounding better and better everyday. Even Palin would be an upgrade at this point.

reply to post by Carseller4


Don't vote Trump man... Vote RP! I think he is much more experienced.

Originally posted by Jepic
reply to post by Carseller4

 

Don't vote Trump man... Vote RP! I think he is much more experienced.

Ron Paul is older than McCain (dirt) and just as kooky......I'll pass on that one.

reply to post by Carseller4


you may want to research man? RP has a profound knowledge base when it comes to monetary policy, foreign policy and the Constitution. Hell, check out his voting record too~

www.votesmart.org...

reply to post by Whereweheaded


Didn't Rand Paul try pushing something related to abortion when it comes to this shutdown?

Both parties need to understand that this is not the time for partisan grand-standing. This means that such frivolous measures should not be included in any bill to avert a shutdown.

I wonder if that $12 billion includes social programs? If so, then these morons still don't GET IT. If they were willing to shave some money out of the defense budget, there would be no need to cut social programs.

reply to post by Carseller4


But you'd vote for a marginal hotel owning "businessman" with a track record of layoffs and bankruptcy and a squirrel on his head?

I mean, not that it matters, as west of the Mississippi, Trump is not venerated by anyone as anything more then a celebritard.

reply to post by Carseller4


What is Kooky about Ron Paul? Tell me some kooky stuff, cuz I've only seen, read and heard quite rational ideas from the man.

reply to post by Carseller4


Seriously? You guys are in the endgame here. It's possibly the last chance to save America peacefully and you are gonna let his age stop you from voting him? Because he is old!? Who made you guys so materialistic? This is proof of how radically America has changed. It now stands for the total opposite of what it was conceived as.

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Whereweheaded

 

Didn't Rand Paul try pushing something related to abortion when it comes to this shutdown?

Both parties need to understand that this is not the time for partisan grand-standing. This means that such frivolous measures should not be included in any bill to avert a shutdown.

I wonder if that $12 billion includes social programs? If so, then these morons still don't GET IT. If they were willing to shave some money out of the defense budget, there would be no need to cut social programs.

Sure they can cut money from social programs. Social programs or ( welfare ) is Unconstitutional anyhow!

reply to post by Whereweheaded


Having a military that goes on adventures around the world is unconstitutional too.

But, I don't see anyone on here complaining about that.

Typical.

If they shut down the government,does that mean all the house,legislators,senators,representatives
will have a stoppage of all there perks,like limos,parties,food money?
I think they should be the first to suffer.
But big fat chance on that happening!!!!
The common worker,the poor will suffer.

I just spent a week around the "elite" in Atlanta,Georgia,specifically the Buckhead area.
I was so uncomfortable and just made me sick to my stomach.
But,they have so many sushi bars around there,I think their time will come soon.

reply to post by The Sword


I am 100% against the military / security industrial complex.

How's that?

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Whereweheaded

 

Having a military that goes on adventures around the world is unconstitutional too.

But, I don't see anyone on here complaining about that.

Typical.

You do realize that the military doesn't go on these excursions without the commander in chiefs say so right? Why not point the finger at the culprit, and not the messenger. Obama is the commander in chief like it or not. Why not address that? Oh thats right, Obama and his supporters wouldnt dare to take actual responsibility for their actions, that would be to much to ask~

This is a battle of egos. What's good for the American people is irrelevent. 1.3 trillion dollar budget and they are arguing pennies.

This is a perfect example of why we need a broom to sweep out the democrats who would wish to have a government implode under its own weight and republicans who talk nice, but make no real move for any government overhaul.

Kick 'em all out!