Just as I thought
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Automatic Medicare and Medicaid Cuts under Paygo averted under Temporary Funding Deal
- Thread starter FollowTheWay
- Start date
Just as I thought
Senate passes stopgap spending bill, allowing Congress to avert partial government shutdown
Congress passed a stopgap spending bill Thursday, averting a partial government shutdown at midnight Friday but pushing into January showdowns on spending, immigration, health care and national security.
Among the issues still to be resolved is federal aid for victims of recent hurricanes and wildfires. The House on Thursday passed a separate $81 billion disaster relief bill, but the Senate did not immediately take it up amid Democratic objections.
The stopgap extends federal funding through Jan. 19 and provides temporary extensions of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which has languished politically since it expired in October, a veterans health-care program and a warrantless surveillance program set to expire Jan. 1.
Thanks for the link.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the time lines. So the paygo waiver was complete less than 24 hours after the tax bill was signed? It seems like people were posting about "Oh no, mandatory paygo cuts!!!" well after Friday, the 22nd of December.
What does the word "temporary" mean to you? This agreement can be thrown out on Jan. 19.
Yes or no?
Republicans will allow the automatic PAYGO occurs to occur.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
I don’t speak legalese, isn't it waived through the current Congressional session?
DIVISION E—BUDGETARY EFFECTS
SEC. 5001. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
(a) In General.—The budgetary effects of division C and each succeeding division shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
(b) Senate PAYGO Scorecards.—The budgetary effects of division C and each succeeding division shall not be entered on any PAYGO scorecard maintained for purposes of section 4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress).
(c) Classification Of Budgetary Effects.—Notwithstanding Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 105–217 and section 250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the budgetary effects of division C and each succeeding division shall not be estimated—
(1) for purposes of section 251 of such Act; and
(2) for purposes of paragraph (4)(C) of section 3 of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 as being included in an appropriation Act.
SEC. 5002. BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF RECONCILIATION ACT.
(a) Definition Of Reconciliation Act.—In this section, the term “reconciliation Act” means an Act enacted into law before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act that was considered pursuant to the reconciliation instructions in H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018.
(b) PAYGO Scorecard.—The budgetary effects of the reconciliation Act shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010
Sorry, meant to say:
Republicans will allow the automatic PAYGO cuts to occur.
Yes or no?
Yes but Democrats will try to block it.
I'll be honest with you. This bill has been so wrapped in confusion and not reviewed with the Congress let alone the American people that I don't know. Maybe I'll call my Congress woman but she wasn't truthful in her last town meeting.
Bzzzz! Wrong. The answer is, no, the Republicans will not let the PAYGO cuts occur. This fact has already been stated by both Ryan and McConnell, and in an article YOU posted on BB.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
I said it wouldn't happen. You agreed and said that was because the Democrats would block it.
No, I said the Democrats would never support PAYGO cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. Therefore they would never vote against a waiver of PAYGO.
The GOP passed the tax cuts along with a PAYGO waiver. Dems did nothing to stop the waiver.
There is a difference
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
Why would they want to block the waiver? They're against cutting Medicare and Medicaid.
Some more of that money movement from the wealthy to the poor is occurring...
---
AP--President Donald Trump's administration announced $2 billion in grants Thursday for local agencies trying to help the homeless even as the government proposes deep cuts to federal housing programs.
The total awards in the Continuum of Care program is the most ever, though only slightly above collective grants of more than $1.9 billion in the last few years. About 7,300 programs are being funded.
Across the country, homelessness has been on a downward trend for years, according to government counts. But there's been a spike in numbers, particularly among homeless living on the streets along the West Coast, where rents have been rising fast, The Associated Press has reported.
Slight gains in the Continuum of Care funding as you noted.
Significant cuts elsewhere:
The Trump administration’s budget proposal calls for cutting the number of people assisted through federal public housing programs and rental vouchers that can be used to prevent homelessness and to house the homeless.
“Any cuts to housing assistance are going to impact on homelessness,” said Nan Roman, president and CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness.
The administration’s proposed budget also calls for the elimination of the Interagency Council on Homelessness, which coordinates the federal response to the problem.
This is not what I was referring to as the increase in inequality due to increased opportunities for the rich, however. That's largely a function of thinks like tax changes, minimum wage amounts and the dying out of unions. The inheritance tax rate is highly significant. Even though that was already very reasonable or even too reasonable for the wealthy, the maximum estate size to be untaxed was raised in the GOP tax bill from an estate size of $11.2M (couple) to $22.4M. This affects only about 5,500 households but is a major benefits to their wealthy supporters. Reducing the inheritance tax increases inequality significantly by increasing the number of individuals who are born rich like Trump.
Hilarious.
Since the estate tax only kicks in at $11.2M (now $22.4M, if your numbers are correct), I hate to break it to you but if you've got an $11M estate you're already among the people with wealth inequality. Raising the threshold to $22.4M is not going to confer any higher status of these people over the hoi polli that they already don't enjoy. And these people would give to the GOP no matter what the inheritance tax was at. In fact, some of the wealthiest people are Dems--Musk, Soros, Gates, Bezos, etc.
The point is why was this inserted into the bill? ONLY to make the rich richer and increase inequality. This will make America continue to decline and become more and more like a 3rd world country.
Why? The rich covered by this change in the tax laws are simply keeping more of their own money. Money that has already been taxed. They're not taking money from the poor. The rich aren't getting richer, rather, the government is not confiscating their money.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk