While the $33 billion war supplemental may have the 289 votes needed under suspension of the rules to pass, because Republicans are likely to support it strongly, a growing number of Democrats are expressing second thoughts.
|By: David Dayen Tuesday July 27, 2010 2:57 pm|
|By: David Dayen Monday July 19, 2010 3:00 pm|
Pelosi and Obey make some nods to inserting the teacher funding into a separate bill, like a revived tax extenders package, but I would say the chances of that happening are between slim and none. And so literally hundreds of thousands of teachers will pay the price of additional job cuts, because we had to fight 100 or so Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. That’s the functional trade-off here.
|By: emptywheel Saturday July 17, 2010 1:00 pm|
Our country and its legislators have been considering cutting the food allowance to those suffering most in this recession in order to keep some teachers on the job, all while we appropriate $33 billion to fight around 350 al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
|By: David Dayen Friday July 2, 2010 8:10 am|
Let’s walk through just what happened last night in the House of Representatives on the war supplemental, and its multiple implications, given that the House bill differed from the Senate bill significantly, with all kinds of additional spending. It’s unclear whether the Senate can pass a now-$80 billion dollar supplemental.
|By: Robert Naiman Wednesday June 30, 2010 5:00 pm|
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has told the Huffington Post she expects a “serious drawdown” of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in the summer of 2011. The House Rules Committee has now approved an amendment for consideration on the war supplemental that will allow Speaker Pelosi to “put her money where her mouth is.”
|By: Robert Naiman Saturday June 19, 2010 6:00 pm|
At long last, Rep. David Obey has called the question: which is more important to America – saving teachers’ jobs, or pointless killing in Afghanistan? This could be the beginning of the end of the Washington consensus that wars and other military spending exist on their own fiscal planet. But where are the big Democratic constituency groups? It isn’t just a question of missing an opportunity: there is a freight train coming called “deficit reduction,” and if cuts in military spending aren’t on board the train, the train’s cargo will be cuts in Social Security and Medicare benefits.
|By: David Dayen Wednesday June 16, 2010 11:31 am|
With all the uncertainty on the scope of the extenders bill, David Obey has decided to take a hostage. Basically, there will be no war funding until the extenders bill gets resolved.
|By: David Dayen Wednesday May 26, 2010 8:56 am|
This administration has been through one budget cycle. Mistakes like this are either unconscionable or deliberate. The $500 million for border security attached to a National Guard presence gets tossed in at the last minute, and a teacher funding bill which has been on the priority list for two weeks gets scuttled amidst mixed messages. Can’t anyone here play this game?
|By: David Dayen Wednesday May 5, 2010 9:59 am|
The turnover in the House is pretty striking – while more Republicans are departing, I believe this makes the 39th member of Congress not seeking re-election to his or her seat. Most of these seats will stay with the same party, but it’s an indication that members are not enthused about re-election campaigns in this political climate. And Obey is a real lion – like that, the two top members of the Appropriations Committee (Obey and the late John Murtha) will be gone.
|By: David Dayen Sunday November 29, 2009 3:15 pm|
A war surtax would really give Republicans trouble, in addition to being the right policy, to show the real cost of war, instead of living in this fantasy world where our actions abroad have no effect on our actions at home. But Democratic threats have been proven to be so idle over the years that nobody accords them a smidgen of respect. And thus we have a failure to govern.