Senate Passes Spending Bill 64-36
President Obama ready to sign
The U.S. Senate passed a two-year budget deal on Wednesday to ease automatic spending cuts and reduce the risk of a government shutdown, but fights were already breaking out over how to implement the budget pact.
By a vote of 64-36, the Senate sent the measure to President Barack Obama to be signed into law, an achievement for a divided Congress that has failed to agree on a budget since 2009.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
How is once again not passing an actual budget somehow an "achievement"? This isn't a real budget is it? AFAIK, it's basically yet another kick of the can.
Now I have been told that anti-GOP rhetoric is nothing but drama by the Tea Party. Us fanatics who are impeding the government's ability to run.
What exactly is fanatic? To say we shouldn't support illegal aliens as by definition they aren't supposed to be here, have broken our laws and shouldn't get one dime in support. Is the almighty Progressive that devoid of common sense? That engulfed in anti reason?
Or how about a basic economic fact. A law if you will. If you continue to borrow eventually you will collapse. Another fanatic argument I know. The rational approach is we should just keep spending into further debt, right?
Or how about if you continue to grow a population that is "disabled" then eventually there will not be enough money to support anything? I was medical provider so I'll claim to be the expert on the "disabled." A few are legitimate. A lot aren't. Most, not a few, but most are lazy welfare recipients that have no intention of ever supporting themselves. Very few people are incapable of doing anything at all.
So I guess the above principles are that right wing fanaticism again. I write about collapse of society. It's not hard to imagine--just look in front of you and keep saying everything is fine. In the end we'll find it's not going to be fine at all.
Charles Hurst. Author of THE SECOND FALL. An offbeat story of Armageddon. And creator of THE RUNNINGWOLF EZINE.