Let's talk about the debt
The U.S. Senate and House budget committees are again having “conversations” and hopefully, finally doing their jobs. I'm still perplexed as to why the House Republicans never accepted one of the 18 requests this year from the Democrat Senate to hold a joint budget committee conference.
The Senate and House committees are supposedly discussing the same basic issues as before. Democrats want to close tax breaks for the wealthy and large corporations to replace part of the sequester cuts, which will take $91 billion out of government funding next year. Republicans want to keep those perks and cut federal benefits programs.
Which programs do Republicans want to cut? Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? No one knows and no one is reporting it.
I know the Republicans have a plan — keep doing nothing and keep the current spending levels in place, even if it means bigger cuts to military spending. The right-wing spin to this will be Democrats support defense cuts because Republicans won't agree to more tax revenue, omitting that Democrats wanted the new revenue to come from corporate welfare tax breaks. Republicans always talk a good game.
Unfortunately, the conversation over our national debt is a secondary political news issue. The media in general and the VND in particular are obsessed with just one story: ObamaCare.
When will debt be the primary national issue?
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Missile defense, not talks
- Majority defied
- ... Or free-riding fad?
- Positive & healthy ...
- Resigning right thing
- Thanks for the coverage
- Goodell’s ‘pick-six’
- Russia, not Rice
- Ferguson & contradictions
- Sticker shock
- More answers, please