Budget

Democrats and Republicans Team Up to Pass $1.8 Trillion Spending Package

Omnibus signals future of Obamacare, federal budget battles.

|

Gage skidmore / Foter / Flickr

One way to understand the massive federal spending package is as a compromise between Republicans and Democrats to ignore the deficit.

The deal is made of two different elements—a 2,009-page omnibus that folds in 12 appropriations bills and calls for $1.1 trillion in spending, and a separate 233-page tax "extenders" bill that continues about $650 billion worth of supposedly-but-not-really temporary tax cuts. All together, the package is worth about $1.8 trillion.

Many of the tax breaks in the extenders bill are the sorts of tax "cuts" that are the sort of targeted, incentives-and-behavior altering tax cuts and deductions that are best thought of as spending laundered through the tax code. (This includes the child tax credit, various business expensing provisions, and a credit to help people under 40 pay for tuition expenses, as well as credits for wind and solar power.)

Broadly speaking, that's the sort of spending that Republicans tend to like. The other part of the package, meanwhile, contains the sort of spending that Democrats tend to like.

And so, as The Washington Post notes, in the House, each party will be chiefly responsible for passing the part that they prefer, with Democrats largely backing the spending plan, and Republicans backing the tax plan. Afterwards, the two bills will be combined and sent to the Senate, which is expected to proceed in passing the plan and sending it to President Obama for approval.

If there is good, or at least non-terrible, news to be found in the bill and its all-but-certain passage, it comes less from the bill itself and more from what it signals about the future of federal budgeting, and, in a different way, Obamacare.

As I wrote earlier this year, the best thing about this particular end-of-year budget negotiation is that it avoids a last-minute shutdown showdown, which, while perhaps satisfying as a protest maneuver, would likely be counterproductive overall. In avoiding a shutdown and moving quickly toward passage, it sets the stage for a more sensible budgeting process next year, one that does not rely on midnight hour dealmaking and brinksmanship. Indeed, through a spokesperson, House Speaker Paul Ryan told The Washington Post  that the goal going forward is to avoid the process that led to this deal and move back toward budgeting through regular order.

Whether or not that will actually happen—and what sort of results it will produce if it does—is of course an open question, but the budget messes of the last few years are driven as least in part by a broken process overly reliant on midnight-hour dealmaking, and it is good to hear that Ryan intends to take measures to avoid such drama in the future.

The other notable news in the package is what it signals for Obamacare. The bill makes a number of changes to the law, including a Democrat-driven two-year delay of the Cadillac tax on expensive health plans, a repeal of the law's medical device tax which has long been a target for members of both parties (especially those who represent states with lots of medical device manufacturers), and a continuation of a previous provision capping the law's risk corridor payments to insurers (which is paired with a temporary lifting of another tax on insurers).

By itself, the repeal of the Cadillac tax is not a great idea, but the fact that Democrats are willing to alter the provision is a big deal, because it signals that Obamacare is not set in stone. For the last five years, Democrats have generally resisted meaningful legislative changes to the law, but the Dem-driven delay of the Cadillac tax—long hated by their union allies—suggests that they are willing to rethink and renegotiate the law. As Yuval Levin notes at National Review, the bill "offers evidence of both parties setting the stage for the next health-care debate, and the Democrats acknowledging that such a debate won't exactly start from Obamacare as we know it as an established premise."

All in all, then, the budget package is far from ideal. But it offers a few hints of a way forward, and out of the frustrating impasses that have defined the Obama era. It's effectively a teaser for the domestic policy battles and compromises of the era to come.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

138 responses to “Democrats and Republicans Team Up to Pass $1.8 Trillion Spending Package

  1. One need look no further than this most recent in a long line of “bipartisan” deals that kick the Republican base in the teeth to know why Trump leads the Republican primary polling.

    To more and more Republicans, what’s the point in supporting an “establishment” Republican? This bill carries water for the Dems on almost every front. It has OCare fixes (not repeals). It funds AGW lunacy. On and on. If you don’t like the Dem agenda, the establishment Repubs give no reason to vote for them, leaving a huge unmet political need currently being serviced by Trump.

    1. Time to support an Impeach Paul Ryan Movement. Where do I sign?

      Ryan needs to learn how to shut his fucking mouth.

      I hear John Boehner is looking for a golf/drinking partner.

      1. People have had enough. it will be just like Kenya soon. They dragged those fat mergers from their huts and forced them to drink blood through a severed sheep’s penis, then hacked them to bits with machetes.

    2. Squeal like a pig bitches!

      /the establishment

    3. One need look no further than this most recent in a long line of “bipartisan” deals that kick the Republican base in the teeth to know why Trump leads the Republican primary polling.

      This is probably why Trump’s seemingly pointless efforts to start fights about any issue at all is polling so well with people. Even if Trump is just a bombastic, contrarian who loves drama at least he’s picking fights.

      Just about any other Republican goes along with nearly anything the Democrats tell them to, lest they be labeled racist, hater of women, killer of grandmas, skull-fucker of one legged Syrian orphan refugee prostitutes, et cetera.

      1. Lots of Americans love crappy reality TV. Trump just transforms the political race this year into the same format. People say and do stupid shit and have no sense of shame or decorum but it gets good ratings. If Trump would ever squirm or feel guilty or back down from one of his idiotic lies or insults, people would turn on him like they do on normal people. But Trump never admits he was wrong and just lies about what he said or didn’t say. The key is that he has NO sense of shame in lying or insulting. He can say one thing and a few hours later just deny he said it and apparently gets a pass from a lot of stupid people. Carly is ugly, have you seen that face? What, I never said that, I think she is beautiful. WTF And there are 50 other instances. He never has any solid details on anything he says. Just that he will somehow do something that is impossible or impractical or that violates multiple items in the Bill of Rights.

    4. Except Trump would approve of the deal and demand even more spending. Sure, he’s the protest candidate, but he isn’t what most of his supporters project him to be.

      1. Skippy — Have you got any proof to back up those inaccurate words of yours?

        I didn’t think so.

        1. Just what IS The Donald’s fiscal policy anyway? I haven’t heard anyone address that. And all Reason does is publish “Trump is a brainfarting fascist asshole” columns that don’t help sort any of it out.

          1. Ok, I found this quote from a WaPo article from October 1……..

            “So here’s the thing: There’s tremendous cutting that goes with my tax plan that I haven’t talked about yet, but that will be phase two,” Trump said in the interview. “So we’re going to have a government that’s going to be much leaner, much better, much meaner, but it’s going to be meaner in the sense… of it’s going to be efficient.”

            So…..stay tuned?

        2. Well, he wants to spend billions on walls and militia to patrol the borders. He loves big government like Obamacare and eminent domain. He likes to talk tough on military action. That’s pretty expensive. So, yes I think he would increase spending. We already know he thinks it is ok to go bankrupt multiple times.

  2. the best thing about this particular end-of-year budget negotiation is that it avoids a last-minute shutdown showdown, which, while perhaps satisfying as a protest maneuver, would likely be counterproductive overall.

    Counterproductive, how?

    1. Because Reason said it was last time when some pylons were put up around parks and stuff.

    2. Government shutdowns don’t actually reduce government spending or accomplish anything in reducing the size of government.

      1. I mean, if you click thru the link I posted, that guy is a shadow of his former self. Looks like he hasn’t had a decent meal in minutes.

      2. True. That makes them useless, which is not the same thing as counterproductive.

        How do they make things worse?

        1. It’s funny the government had to go out of its way to inconvenience people with the parks BS. Oh no, they might realize we don’t do much!

      3. It would be cheaper to put some outhouse federal workers through woodchoppers and not rehire for their positions. Then sell the compost to some hippie commune.

        1. Christ, I fucking hate autocorrect sometimes.

    3. How can we stop spending so much, if first, we don’t keep spending more?

      You fucking peckerwood paleoconservatives need to get this through your head.

  3. This bill is all about raiding the office supply cabinet before the business goes into chapter 11.

    1. +1 shopping cart full of free binders

      1. Are those binders full of women?

        1. Too soon. Lol

  4. At least it contains an end to the oil export ban. I thought it would take till after 2016 election to get that passed.

  5. For the last five years, Democrats have generally resisted meaningful legislative changes to the law, but the Dem-driven delay of the Cadillac tax?long hated by their union allies?suggests that they are willing to rethink and renegotiate the law.

    Sure, they’re willing to rethink it in ways that please their union allies. Where’s the rethink on the individual mandate?

    1. The Dems are always willing to alter their own programs to protect their cronies from the natural consequences of those programs.

      I don’t regard this as any kind of breakthrough in the Dem’s willingness to renegotiate the law. In fact, this is what you do instead of renegotiating the law – provide exemptions and breaks for cronies.

      1. Exactly. The analysis in the post makes no sense to me.

        1. It is as if Suderman does not quite understand how politics is played. It is like commenting on professional poker and finding slow playing a hand incomprehensible.

          1. HOLY SHIT, i was playing in St. Maarten and this chick has my number. She pokes at Kings on the flop I get uneasy by the river and she smacks down my two pair with trip kings…Ok bitch…lets play. She turns a straight against my trips and checks. I push hard on the river she comes over top. Bam…Alright, i misread your straight. FINE! And then I the ladies, she has rockets. She has first action and checks her rockets. I 3x poke the pot. she calls. flop gives shit. She checks again. I 1x poke the pot. She calls. Turn, trash. She checks, I check. (brain: wtf is going on here). River, more shit. She CHECKS AGAIN, knowing full well that I may not bet. So…having lost my testicles at this point (and a good thing too) I check the fucking river with Queens, having only raised pre flop and flop. See her aces. pick up what is left of my pride and leave.

            slow played like a fiddle…that is played slowly.

            1. Your poker story sounds just as boring as every poker story my poker playing friend tells me all the time. Then when I have a much shorter anecdote that doesn’t interest HIM, he rudely interrupts me and tells me he doesn’t want to listen to it.

      2. A more cynical (and IMHO likely) analysis is that the Democrats never had any intent to let the Cadillac Plan go into effect. They added it to help make the budget look better and to please certain activists, but they never intended it to go live. They knew they could get rid of it when push came to shove.

        1. Agreed – this has likely been the plan all along, and Republicans can “pretend” they addressed Obamacare. No reprieve for those who don’t receive employer- or government-provided insurance.

      3. In an election year, no less. Big victory for non-democrats??

    2. It just proves Democrats are much more willing to compromise. They’re the party of reality and science.

      1. The party of socialist utopia? I hope you’re joking

      2. Slowing coming to grips with the failure that is the ACA and wasting more money on crony wind/solar subsidies.. obviously reality and science are a matter of perspective to you.

      3. The only thing I can think of where progressives (some) admit they are wrong is ethanol reformulated fuel. And I think that is only because it’s had the unintended but foreseeable consequence of causing the rainforest to be mowed down at record rate. Notwithstanding the fact that it is an obsolete measures that actually causes more gasoline to be used unnecessarily.

        Outside of that, they cling to their failures like Linus Van Pelt to his blanket.

  6. “a compromise between Republicans and Democrats to ignore the deficit.”

    I think that’s known in D.C. as “Tuesday.”

    1. And Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday

        1. It makes me really happy that two people were simultaneously writing the obviously correct punchline. Well done.

    2. Or Monday…or Wednesday, Thursday, Friday or Saturday…and Sunday.

    3. I will gladly tax you Tuesday for more spending today.

      1. you old

  7. The repeal of the “Cadillac Tax” suggests that the Democrats will respond to criticism of ObamaCare from the Left. It does not mean that they are open to negotiation on its more odious provisions and demonstrates that they have no interest in it operating in a rational fashion. The thing is going to have break down in a way that screws one of their constituencies in an obvious way for them to change it in any important way.

    1. “The thing is going to have break down in a way that screws one of their constituencies in an obvious way for them to change it in any important way.”

      I think this is still a real danger, though. The really onerous penalties that are going to fall entirely on people who are too poor to afford insurance haven’t yet kicked in, and won’t until people file their 2016 taxes.

      It’s already a problem that people who couldn’t afford healthcare before are now in even bigger trouble because they are now forced to pay for insurance that they can’t afford so that they are even less able to pay the copays that the shitty plans they have to get require of them.

      At the same time, more people than ever are relying on emergency rooms for primary care.

      NPR is already frantically blaming greedy hospitals for skyrocketing healthcare costs, so you know they see trouble brewing.

      The only thing that will save Obamacare and the Democrats is the fact the poorest people don’t tend to vote, so that their anger may not be reflected in the polls. This is the only thing the Democrats can hope for.

      1. …or more likely, the working class will have to pay fines (oops, taxes….oops, penalties…oops, whatever they’re called this week) so they will be even poorer and STILL won’t have health insurance.

        Of course, this insurance is now even more unaffordable for the working class because of all the mandates for ‘free shit for lefties’ that are raising costs.

      2. the problem, well, one of the problems, is once we start giving benefits to one group of people politicians seeking approval will inevitably extend those benefits to everyone. when social security goes broke enough nobody will get any, but of course people want something for nothing (myself included), and being too generous with it is just gonna hasten the point at which there isnt anything at all left for people who are actually disabled or sick. our standards of living have advanced so, so much in the past few decades it seems like some people really think we can just do anything if we want to hard enough. we can put a man on the damn moon, right? why can’t everyone have the lifestyle they want? it’s really, really stupid that abolishing unfairness seems to be the point of at least half of current politics. not only is that impossible, its usually counterproductive to try

  8. fuck you cut spending.

  9. “””including a Democrat-driven two-year delay of the Cadillac tax on expensive health plans,”””

    If the Democrats keep on delaying all the parts of the plan that pays for Obamacare how soon will the whole thing collapse and who will they blame

    1. 1. January 21st, 2017.
      2. All non-Democrats.

    2. I think we all know who they will blame.

      If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, is it still Bush’s fault?

      1. According the to the Dems, a tree didn’t fall, there is no forest, and “what difference does it make”?

        1. And everything is “Bush’s fault” for all eternity.

  10. I think Suderman is so stoked about the Star Wars opening, that he is seeing positivity where none exists. Obamacare is a fucking nightmare, Cadillac tax or not. The inclusion of CISA further tortures an already bloody Fourth. Same old stupid tax credits.

    It’s a goddamn joke.

  11. By itself, the repeal of the Cadillac tax is not a great idea, but the fact that Democrats are willing to alter the provision is a big deal, because it signals that Obamacare is not set in stone. For the last five years, Democrats have generally resisted meaningful legislative changes to the law, but the Dem-driven delay of the Cadillac tax?long hated by their union allies?suggests that they are willing to rethink and renegotiate the law.

    Christ, Suderman. Yes, unwillingness to be thrown into a briar patch, followed by the toss is a big deal, because it shows Brother Rabbit doesn’t always get his way.
    Yes, they are willing to renegotiate the fucking bill, provided it
    a) rewards their friends
    b) punishes their enemies
    c) leads to more government involvement in healthcare.

    When Obamacare was being mulched into law, I remember Megan McArdle commenters (wasn’t a Reason visitor yet) outright stating that the cost projections were meaningless, because Democrats will not allow any of the cost reduction measures that were delayed to go through. “Cadillac Tax” was explicitly and repeatedly mentioned as one of them. And now, oh look, union-hated measure doesn’t go through after all!
    I’m sorry, Americans, but Obamacare is now as fixed as Medicare or Social Security. The best you can hope for is that it stops here, and doesn’t mutate into some NHS-influenced government-monopolist alliance straight out of Atlas Shrugged.

      1. I prefer “chipped”.

    1. I agree, except for the part about Obamacare being as fixed as Medicare. It’s not. Most people hate it. A good proposal to (mostly) repeal it in favor of a more free-market approach could be created and sold politically, if libertarians and the GOP could get their act together.

      1. I agree. Thanks to Obamacare, I now no longer have medical coverage after having it for the first 43 years of my life. I refuse to pay $700-800 per month for the ‘platinum’ plan that is dog shit compared to the mediocre plan I had in 2013 for $247 per month that had lower deductibles and a much wider range of options for providers.

    2. “Obamacare is now as fixed as Medicare or Social Security.”

      You’re wrong. It will get repealed. The middle class gets too obviously screwed and far too little benefit for this thing to be politically viable. It’ll probably get chipped away like forced bussing.

      1. Even Canada’s “Universal” BS system is slowly getting chipped apart and has been for decades.

        http://globalnews.ca/news/2319…..e-mri-law/

  12. Regular order. everyone says they want that. but that means the rank and file have more influence.

  13. Bipartisan – when Democrats get everything that they want.

    1. The GOP are unreasonable if they object.

      1. Obstructionist. Come on, get the terminology right.

        1. It was something I saw someone I know post on Facebook recently. Basically, “Bob Dole was a reasonable Republican the Dems could deal with, unlike the crazies the GOP has in Congress now and is that not a shame” sort of thought.

    2. And the Elephants get some military $ and then stick their asses out at their voters.

      1. Voters like military money. The constant flow of cash to BIW has kept “Two Term Collins” (Susan Collins’ original campaign slogan) in office for three terms.

        1. Didn’t she write some books about a future society?

          1. That’s Suzanne.

    3. Progressive notions of compromise have always involved the other side taking half-steps towards what progressives want.

    4. The only way this stops is when there are less democrats. And that had better happen soon. Nothing else will save us without imposing a dictatorship.

  14. The government passes a fucking Cadillac tax on insurance plans. My company does the “responsible” thing and dumps the old plan and imposes high-deductible plans across the board (which really fucks over late-middle-aged employees that haven’t been dumping cash into HSAs). Now, the government dumps the Cadillac tax, and the UAW can continue to provide gold-plated insurance to the mother fuckers that can’t build a decent car.

    Par for the course.

    1. The good news is the union member in our company got fucked over worse than I did. And they are never getting the gold-plated insurance back again.

    2. But you’re not bitter or anything…

      1. Why shouldn’t he be? He got screwed by a union-druven plan that came back and bit a union member in the ass. The man is just pointing out that karma’s a bitch.

  15. Then there’s this.

    Should go over well.

    1. Both party establishments hate and fear Trump, and then do crap like that which fires up his base and proves him right. Brilliant!

  16. Suderman, please use a more up-to-date picture of Paul Ryan. The fact that he clearly just survived a month alone in the wilderness is likely a factor in his decision making.

    1. The fact that he clearly just survived a month alone in the wilderness secretly converted to Islam is likely a factor in his decision making.

      1. If all dudes with beards are actually Muslims, I’m starting to see why some people hate Muslims so much.

      2. Paul Ryan is a secret moslem.

    2. Did he eat his own leg?

    3. +1 road to Damascus

    4. Look at his eyes… I think he ran into STEVE SMITH while he was out there.

  17. Well this is a huge relief. I was starting to worry about having to spend the upcoming holiday curled up in my basement paralyzed with fear and unsure of how to act with no government oversight.

    Now I’m free again to celebrate Consumermas assured that all of the tax money collects will be put to good use.

  18. Come on Charlie Brown, kick the football. I won’t move it this time, I promise. It takes all I have not to sneer at my Republican friends.

  19. I would have sympathy for the Reason staff if they could articulate a way out of this. If the GOP says, “Hell no, we’d shut down the government first”, then Reason runs a bunch of articles about how ineffective this is, and why the GOP is in the wrong. If the GOP compromises to get something done, they are equally to blame.

    I am done with the GOP, but at the least be consistent when they try to make stands. Otherwise they have no reason to hew towards the libertarian philosophy- they are damned either way.

    1. I’m no expert on the process that is Washington’s lawmaking, but it seems to me that holding the line on spending IS shutting down the government.

      If I’m a lawmaker and I won’t give you your debt-limit increase, I’m effectively shutting down the government– because we’ve allowed ourselves to get to a place where the government can ONLY FUNCTION if the debt limit is increased every year.

      Increasing the debt limit has become a core government function and our broad acceptance of that dooms us to our own fate.

  20. This country is so fucked.

      1. ditto

  21. How in the hell did we get to the point that Congress not funding any specific administration program means “shutting down the government”? So if Congress passed a giant spending bill that had (e.g.) no money for Planned Parenthood or Syrian refugees, then Obama would veto it and the government would shut down and it would all be the fault of the GOP? WTF? Why not pass smaller bills?

    1. Because the population of stupids exceed the population of not-stupids.

      1. Even more so in congress.

      2. “In other words, a democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.”

        Alexis de Tocqueville

        1. I think the “American Experiment” will demonstrate that the more things change the more things stay the same. We are Rome.

          1. At least the Romans had some freaking balls. And they funded their government spending projects using private donations from office holders.

            Including ROADZ!1!1!!!

            I wish we were Rome.

            1. They had toga parties!

    2. I think they don’t pass smaller bills because then some things wouldn’t get funded. Lump it all together, everyone gets what they want and they all have cover for the things that passed that their particular constituents don’t like.

      1. I think Ryan claims that this is what will happen next time: There will be 12(?) separate appropriation bills.

        I don’t think there is any reason to believe him at this point. But at least he knows the right lie to tell us. Sometimes that’s the best you can hope for.

    3. Well, if we had to vote on every single government expense and law seperately there wouldn’t be enough time in the day to have all of thossss…wait a mutha’ fukin’ minute!

  22. Horrible shit bill, but the end of oil-export ban and the Ocare mods take a lot of the suck out. We should be grateful for that much.

  23. I was especially disgusted with the clause that says meat no longer has to be labeled where it was sourced from i.e. from mexico, china, etc. That will keep us pesky consumers from turning away polluted gulf shrimp or shrimp from taiwan using slave labor. Disgusting corporate trade interests at the expense of the people.

    1. Oops forgot the link: http://consumerist.com/2015/12…..ding-bill/

      #11: Where’s My Beef From?
      [i]One questionable rider that did make it into the omnibus bill repeals mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) rules for beef and pork coming into the U.S. Supporters of this rider argue that the current rules are in violation of World Trade Organization standards and could result in $1 billion or more in trade retaliations. Interestingly, it appears that this repeal does not apply to poultry.

      Our colleagues at Consumers Union opposed this rider, saying that a response to the WTO’s decision shouldn’t be done through the hasty process of a must-pass spending bill.

      “An increasing amount of our food supply comes from outside the United States ? not just from Canada and Mexico, but from China, Chile and many other countries,” said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, earlier this month. “These labels provide consumers with important information that allows them to make informed decisions about what they put on their plates.”[/i]

    2. Companies can still label their products, you can still refuse to buy unlabeled products, and you can still sue for falsely labeled products.

      1. I suppose that’s true. I will no longer buy from companies who do not label where the meat comes from. Simple as that.

  24. I’m glad my ridiculously awful “Cadillac” health insurance plan won’t be taxed for another two years at least…

  25. In avoiding a shutdown and moving quickly toward passage, it sets the stage for a more sensible budgeting process next year

    What possible reason would you have to think that? The historical record (suuuuuure….)? Or is it that you think that those in power are either ethical or competent?

    it avoids a last-minute shutdown showdown, which, while perhaps satisfying as a protest maneuver, would likely be counterproductive overall

    Not as a protest maneuver, as a satisfying end state. Shut the government down and never start it back up again. Kill the beast!

    1. Not as a protest maneuver, as a satisfying end state. Shut the government down and never start it back up again. Kill the beast

      This just gave me a good idea.

      Next year, if Paul Ryan really does end this omnibus crap, each appropriation bill should be pro-rated for time.

      I.e. They leave, say, 15 or 30 days for Senate and President to do their thing. After that the total amount of funding granted by each bill would go down 1/365th for each day the bill is sitting on the presidents desk or in committee.

  26. it sets the stage for a more sensible budgeting process next year

    Funny how it always seems to be “next year”.

    1. Spending cuts are always spread over ten years. Spending hikes are immediate.

  27. You know, Peter, the bs you continually pass off about Obamacare is now at the point it’s comical. The Dems haven’t allowed changes to the law? Really?

    “Except it’s actually not that unusual. For all the raucous debate over repealing Obamacare, such technical fixes can happen. Since the Affordable Care Act was first passed along party lines in 2010, President Obama has signed at least 14 bills making substantive changes in his signature legislation of his presidency, according to an analysis by the Congressional Research Service. Eight of those have been Republican bills.”

    Oops! Good try. And you give a pass to the GOP who over 40 times attempted simple repeal. Willingness to make adjustments has always been there from Democrats. Taking my ball and going home is from your party of choice.

    1. Here is the link from CRS showing laws passed amending ACA. Table 1.

      http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43289.pdf

      1. +1 partisan spin

  28. Days like today are the exact reason that the founders picked up their rifles. Just saying.

    1. It’s actually worse.
      The triad of sex drugs and entertainment, dope the masses into passivity.

      1. Truth. Luckily for myself (and many of us here) I enjoy sex, drugs, entertainment, and rifles.

      2. Truth. Luckily for myself (and many of us here) I enjoy sex, drugs, entertainment, and rifles.

        1. and squirrels!

  29. It’s Christmas time, after all.

  30. Tax and spend spend spend
    regulate
    tax tax
    spend spend spend
    regulate tax spend spend
    fees fines mandates
    tax and tax
    spend spend spend
    more forms and schedules
    fee fines
    tax spend spend spend
    for the communists
    the government is never big enough
    and there are never enough
    taxes, fees fines, regulates, and mandates

  31. Once again, the tax-payer is told to sit in the back of the Omnibus.

  32. The libertarian moment continues….

    1.8 trillion ought to be enough to fund the government in perpetuity, but it will be gone in less than six months.

  33. The bill makes a number of changes to the law, including a Democrat-driven two-year delay of the Cadillac tax on expensive health plans, a repeal of the law’s medical device tax which has long been a target for members of both parties (especially those who represent states with lots of medical device manufacturers), and a continuation of a previous provision capping the law’s risk corridor payments to insurers (which is paired with a temporary lifting of another tax on insurers).

    It’s still deficit neutral, though, even with delaying and repealing all those taxes, right?

  34. Suderman: No matter how stupid a target tax cut is, it is not “spending laundered through the tax code.”

    It is not spending of any kind, period. The sort of mentality that believes it *is* spending is the sort that believes government owns all the capital, and is “spending” what it doesn’t take.

    That drink in your hand is the Kool-Aid. Put it down before you start telling us that Al Qaeda is dead and General Motors is alive.

  35. Where is that gridlock when you need it?

  36. Anyone who still thinks this irresponsible behavior is just a Republican or Democrat issue isn’t paying attention.
    This is both sides feathering their nests at taxpayer expense. El Ryan-O being the worst example, as he lied about his intentions from the start, he destroyed any chance Romney might have had in saving this Republic, caved on everything true conservatives wanted and told us what a good deal it was. If you like golden showers and being told it’s raining, then it was a good deal for you.

  37. Most spending, on every level of government, is misspending and money designated for evil purposes!
    Revolution is the only recourse!
    robertsrevolution.net

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.