Tag: Appropriations

The role of the US House is supposed to be fund as needed, and not as a great big package.  The President as Cruz explained, called out the dangers of veterans services and parks being put at risk by the GOP led house holding off the big package.  The US House responded appropriately and offered funding only to have it rejected by Harry Reid.

Huh go figure.  Michigan GOP Reps pay attention.  KNOW that you are winning FOR the country.

In fact, I should have eight other press releases similar to this one.  Tim Walberg (CD7)yesterday, voted in favor of legislation that would provide funding for the National Park Service and the Veterans Affairs Department. However,both pieces of legislation failed by not gathering enough Democrats to reach the two-thirds required for final passage.  We have discussed this (quite appropriate)strategy on these pages recently.  Walberg says:

"President Obama and Congressional Democrats are already on record as supporting a piecemeal approach to keeping the government funded. It's disappointing some of my colleagues in the House do not feel as strongly about veteran services and disability claims, national parks and other areas of importance.

I remain committed to finding a compromised way to move this country forward. We deserve better."

Reality, is that Obama and Reid have said they will not negotiate.  The GOP led US House is completely in the correct mode holding out specific funding legislation for what might be perceived as an immediate need, while other negotiations (and hopefully complete dissolution of Obamacare) are being made.

Congress has already set an example of continuing resolutions, and money spending sans a budget, balanced or otherwise. Frankly, the role of congress has become that of enabler and cash valet to the spenders elsewhere in government, and little more.  Competing special interests over the years have created some form of acceptance that ALL issues are important enough to fund fully, and no congress critter majority has been able to (as a whole) suppress the need to please.

Its now a different world.  The stakes are higher, there is a tyranny begging to be funded, and the people are screaming at the top of their lungs that ENOUGH is ENOUGH!

And something happened in the meantime that should give us hope.  Letting a little steam off the pressure cooker that is Washington DC, the president is at the time of this writing, expected to sign a bill guaranteeing pay for military services and members in the event of a 'shut down'.

"The measure would also ensure continued pay for civilian employees of the Defense Department and Pentagon contractors whom Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel determines "are providing support to members of the Armed Forces." "

Think about it as one less thing the president can hold over the Republicans in congress. And the fact is, he really MUST sign it.  Otherwise the tables are turned hard on him.

And it is pure gold that should not be squandered.

Dr Benishek, you may not have realized it, but the minute that fat digit put its pressure on my breastbone and the words "We don't control the spending" came out, you lost a hell of a lot of respect and support from this concerned (and informed) citizen.  I have thought long and hard on how to broach this subject since our convention discussion.  Could it be that you do not understand your role as a congressman, and the powers vested in you and the house of representatives?  Perhaps you still do not understand that the power of the purse is yours, but Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 is clear.

"No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."

"The Appropriations Clause is the cornerstone of Congress's "power of the purse." It assigns to Congress the role of final arbiter of the use of public funds. The source of Congress's power to spend derives from Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. The Appropriations Clause provides Congress with a mechanism to control or to limit spending by the federal government. The Framers chose the particular language of limitation, not authorization, for the first part of the clause and placed it in Section 9 of Article I, along with other restrictions on governmental actions to limit, most notably, executive action.

Washington, DC- Friday, Congressman Walberg issued the following statement after voting against H.R. 2055, the Conference Report to fund the federal government for the rest of the fiscal year.

"It's positive that Congress reduced discretionary spending for the second year in a row, the first time since World War II, but with the magnitude of our fiscal challenges, this appropriations bill did not go far enough in reducing federal government spending," commented Congressman Walberg following the vote.

Thank you for your vote Representative Walberg.  As you must now realize allowing the debt to increase will only make your job and the jobs of all American citizens harder in the years to come.  Please continue to hold the line, and demonstrate the difference between the fiscally sane conservative Republican route, and the socially progressive fiscally insane Democrat rout of our constitutional government.

And while you are at it pull along a few more.