Free Markets, Free People

Obama lacks votes to pass budget

Barack Obama doesn’t have the votes to pass his $4 trillion budget:

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he has spoken to enough colleagues about several different provisions in the budget request to make him think Congress won’t pass it.

Conrad urged White House budget director Peter Orszag not to “draw lines in the sand” with lawmakers, most notably on Obama’s plan for a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions.

“Anybody who thinks it will be easy to get the votes on the budget in the conditions that we face is smoking something,” Conrad said.
Conrad joined Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), the top Republican on the Budget Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in criticizing the administration’s cap-and-trade proposal for not doing enough to counterbalance increases in energy costs that will be felt by consumers and companies, especially those in energy states such as North Dakota.

Conrad said that it would be a “distant hope” to expect the climate change plan to pass unless it includes help for industries that would be hit hard by limits on carbon emission production.

That’s good news, though I don’t have much faith in Democrats holding the opposition.

Let’s face it, these policies will hurt the economy even in good times, so why try to pass them when the economy is already in shambles? It makes no sense.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

9 Responses to Obama lacks votes to pass budget

  • It’s not good news. It’s disastrous news. It sounds like there’s a way it can pass: It can pass with “help for industries that would be hard hit”. They tax the industries to the verge of disaster, then they write them a relief check. Well, when the government gives you a little of your own money back, they always want something in return for the “favor”. 

    The choice is between ramming a hand grenade up the economy’s a** and running away laughing, or ramming it up there and sending a bomb squad in after it in hobnailed boots. 

    If you’ll pardon my French.

  • I’m afraid Retardo’s right.

    (There’s a sentence I don’t get to type everyday.)

  • The whole point on the political side of AGW is to generate a new tax, the “carbon tax”. Obama’s own Global Poverty Act, which was left on the Senate floor last session without a final vote, was to be funded by the “carbon tax”. It was supposed to send an additional $680+ billion out of the country over 13 years as the UN Millenium Initiative. Just think how the UN could waste $60 billion. Every time I hear “Global Warming” or AGW .. a “chajing” goes after it. 

    Frankly, since when has any politician every really cared about the environment unless there was a vote or a dollar attached to it ?

  • I hate to predict it this early, but I think this may be a tipping point. I think some Democrats – the ones who can think and actually have brain cells – realize that The Clown™ is leading the entire party to doom in the 2010 midterms. They are about to do to him what they did to Clinton in 1994: run a “who, us?” campaign, as if somehow they and Clinton were not in the same party, and that they had not supported his gun control policy and health care grab in 1993-94. But we know what that does – it means that people turn away from a party anyway. But Democrats are now in a humongous pickle: back The Clown™, or die with The Clown™. There is no middle ground.

    It is as I keep saying: Democrats are starting to realize that 2010 is about to be bad for them. That is why The Clown™ wants to rush things through now, because in 2011 he may have to deal with Speaker John Boehner and a Republican House that will make The Clown’s™ life a living hell, as well as far fewer than the 60 votes needed in the Senate.

    • Don’t forget how Clinton managed to bring the “gay issues” to an early peak when he tried to mess with the military and Sam Nunn (D-GA) codified “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to set him straight (no pun intended).

  • I have to echo Retardo here.  None of this was good news.  These people have a sense of reality warped by a belief in their own omnipotence which always reduces to the belief they never get paid enough for their services.

    I did like Conrad’s “smoking something”.  To bad it was only a rhetorical flourish rather than a call for an investigation.

  • The reason I say it’s “good news” is because at least they’re slowing it down. You’d expect a Democratic president’s budget to pass a Democratic-controlled Congress with ease. At least they’re willing to question him.

    • You’re right on that count.  At least they’re not walking in lockstep.

  • I guess Conrad didn’t get the memo that piling up massive deficits, especially in a down economy, is a Good Thing (TM) that will lead to economic growth.