Sen Obama in 2006 Against Raising Debt Ceiling
The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 15)
This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.
Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”
“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.
STEARNS OPPOSES LARGEST DEBT LIMIT INCREASE IN NATION’S HISTORY – ONLY REDUCES SPENDING NEXT YEAR BY $6 BILLION WITH $1.5 TRILLION BUDGET DEFICIT
LESS STRINGENT SAFEGUARDS ON THE PRESIDENT IN RAISING THE DEBT CEILING NEXT YEAR
Washington, Aug 1 -
“The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff identified our deficit crisis as America’s greatest threat, and this measure does not go far enough in holding down the growth in our national debt,” said Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Sixth). “Without significant spending cuts and reforms to essential programs, we are facing fiscal insolvency and the collapse of essential programs such as Social Security and Medicare.”
Stearns today opposed passage of S. 365, the Budget Control Act, which would increase the debt limit by $2.4 trillion. “The final measure cuts less spending in the first year than the Boehner plan; the Boehner plan cut $22 billion compared with as little as $6 billion in this measure,” added Stearns. “I supported the Boehner plan to move us forward in reaching the $4 trillion in savings needed to avoid a ratings downgrade. This bill is $1.6 trillion short of what is needed to prevent a downgrade.”
Concluded Stearns, “This measure also makes it easier for the President to increase the debt limit in the future. In addition, the language for a balanced budget amendment is less precise and only requires a vote in the House and Senate instead of its actual passage by both that would result in it being sent to the states for ratification. Another concern was that this final plan sets discretionary spending for fiscal year 2012 at $24 billion higher than in the Ryan Budget Resolution, which I supported.”