News That Will Drive You To Drink

Happy Hour News

“My Preciousssss”

You know how the Republican’s first order of business is to give a tongue bath to their donors and roll-back the IRS funding? It’s going to increase the deficit by over $100B Ameros, but you know…

What’s happening: After voting on the adoption of a rules package Monday night, the House plans to vote on a bill from Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) that would yank back about $80 billion in IRS funding, which Democrats included in their party-line tax, climate and health bill last year. But the Congressional Budget Office has put a big pricetag on this first legislative priority.

Inside the numbers: The CBO estimates that the bill to roll back IRS funding will increase the deficit by more than $114 billion over a decade, reducing spending by more than $71 billion and decreasing revenues by nearly $186 billion.

So all that noise about a balanced budget, fiscal discipline, etc?


Anyway, they plan to balance it by cutting Social Security and Medicare because their donors don’t depend on that stuff:

Their plans to target health care programs follow demands from a group of conservatives that helped elect House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) over the weekend. Those far-right lawmakers have sought across-the-board spending cuts in order to tackle the growing national debt.

But the narrow House GOP majority ― McCarthy can afford to lose just four votes on any bill ― is far more divided on cuts to defense spending than for entitlement programs.

“I’m all for a balanced budget, but we’re not going to do it on the backs of our troops and our military,” Rep. Michael Waltz (R-Fla.), a former Army Green Beret, said Monday during an interview on Fox Business.

“We’ll balance it by starving granny!,” Waltz didn’t say, “and really stick it to the Poors!”

“If we really want to talk about the debt and spending, it’s the entitlements programs.”

I guess Waltz forgot to tell Chip Roy about that:

Republicans don’t plan to alter benefits for current Social Security and Medicare recipients, according to Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas).

“What we have been very clear about is, we’re not going to touch the benefits that are going to people relying on the benefits under Social Security and Medicare,” Roy said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “But we all have to be honest about sitting at the table and figuring out how we’re going to make those work, how we’re going to deal with defense spending and how we’re going to deal with nondefense discretionary spending.”

And that’s going to be the drama: cut spending, don’t cut spending, and for gawd’s sake don’t touch the billionaire piles of treasure, and fire the IRS because it’s optics- important because Possum Hollar believes that The Revenue Man is comin’ after their stills out back in the woods.

That’s gonna be some tricky math. I hope K-Mac is better at math than he is at his job.

This entry was posted in K-Mac Kevin McCarthy who is very bad at his job, snark, Wingnuttia. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to News That Will Drive You To Drink

  1. Martin Pollard says:

    Fortunately, none of this will ever pass the Democrat-controlled Senate, and even if by some strange miracle it does, it’ll never survive Handsome Joe’s veto. It’s all kabuki theater for the rubes and the doner class.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Mike B. says:

    Yes, they want to balance the budget, but not raise taxes (and not catch the tax cheats) and not cut the bloated military budget. And Social Security is paid from payroll taxes, so it doesn’t affect the deficit at all. Medicare costs budget money, but that’s mainly because our “health care system” is really a “money-making system,” with costs far higher than other countries.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. MDavis says:

    Republicans don’t plan to alter benefits for current Social Security and Medicare recipients

    Emphasis on “current”. Gotta convince their voters that they’ll still get their SS checks.
    I don’t believe for a second that they intend to maintain SS for current recipients. I also don’t believe that those who have been paying into the system for any amount of time will be refunded those payments, with interest, if the House Repubs do manage to gut SS.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ali redford says:

      That’s why I keep wishing someone would ask them how they’re going to pay everyone all back our money. In the 1990s I used to bring that up around town at small forums, but it got glossed over. But, they can’t just take all our money like that. At least, we should frame it that way, because that’s what they’d be doing if/as/when they actually try.

      Liked by 1 person

      • MDavis says:

        Party mascot should be camels, for that canard about camels getting their toe in the door and then forcing their way in where they are not welcome.
        Seems to be the method. So far with Social Security they have pushed retirement age up, but it was stepped up so that people with months to go could still retire on schedule.
        There is also some talk about how people should plan for retirement rather than counting on Social Security. But, seriously, what part of “Social Security retirement IS part of my retirement plan” is so difficult to understand?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mike B. says:

      I think Social Security is in decent shape, with many fixes that don’t involve cutting benefits (such as a modest, gradual increase in payroll taxes). So I was confident enough in the system that I was going to wait until age 70 to start benefits. But when the GOP keeps talking about cutting benefits, I decided to start Social Security early. I don’t think they’ll do it, but just in case.

      By the way, the running of Social Security is way underfunded (which comes out of the trust fund and not the budget, but the amount must be approved by Congress). They don’t have enough people, so employees are overworked and things get put off (especially for disability insurance), and people quit because of this, making it worse. And fully training new employees, if they can find them, takes several years. So they’re killing the program by underfunding.


      • MDavis says:

        So they are using the same method as dealing with IRS funding – underfund it and then campaign on it running on empty so they should just kill it.


  4. glitterbug says:

    I am 64 years old (today 1/10!) and have never done my taxes.

    Dad did them until he passed in 1991, since then I’ve used his accountant. Send him all the stuff and he tells me how much to pay who. I think it’s $150 now. Worth every penny.

    I wouldn’t know how to cheat 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.