Trump has done it now....signed the bill..... - Page 4 - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

schweitz · 03-24-2018, 11:42 AM

You guys do know that this bill is NOT a budget and the President can spend the money any way he wants to; just like Obama did for the last 8 years. A budget spells out constraints. This appropriation is discretionary. Congress allocates, Executive branch spends.

boxcar · 03-24-2018, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schweitz

You guys do know that this bill is NOT a budget and the President can spend the money any way he wants to; just like Obama did for the last 8 years. A budget spells out constraints. This appropriation is discretionary. Congress allocates, Executive branch spends.

Really, not from what I've been reading or hearing. For example, the bill allegedly contains severe restrictions on the border wall.

And if this were truly the case, why would Trump lament signing it and also promise "never again"?

And one other thing for that matter: Why would Schumer and Pelosi be grinning ear-to-ear if what you say is true.

This bill was a outright win for the establishment and a loss for Trump, save for the military.

Clocker · 03-24-2018, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schweitz

You guys do know that this bill is NOT a budget and the President can spend the money any way he wants to

No he can't. Believe it or not there are a few specifics in 2200 pages. Like $400 million for the NY-NJ tunnel. And $500 million for Planned Parenthood. There is also specific language in the bill prohibiting spending any money on the bollard style border fences that were demonstrated recently.

While this bill does go into some detail, for the most part how the money is to be spent is spelled out in much greater detail in the 12 appropriation bills Congress passes every year. Those bills authorize the spending. This "omnibus" bill funds those appropriation bills.

Quote:

Annual appropriations are divided into 12 separate pieces of legislation:

Agriculture,
Commerce, Justice, and Science,
Defense,
Energy and Water,
Financial Services,
Homeland Security,
Interior and Environment,
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education,
Legislative,
Military and Veterans,
State and Foreign Operations,
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approp...#United_States

Saratoga_Mike · 03-24-2018, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxcar

Really, not from what I've been reading or hearing. For example, the bill allegedly contains severe restrictions on the border wall.

And if this were truly the case, why would Trump lament signing it and also promise "never again"?

And one other thing for that matter: Why would Schumer and Pelosi be grinning ear-to-ear if what you say is true.

This bill was a outright win for the establishment and a loss for Trump, save for the military.

Good assessment Box. To me, sequestration worked well. Granted, Obama fell into his own trap by putting it in place, but it did a good (not perfect) job restraining discretionary spending over the last few years of the Obama admin.

Clocker · 03-24-2018, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

Granted, Obama fell into his own trap by putting it in place, but it did a good (not perfect) job restraining discretionary spending over the last few years of the Obama admin.

Obama was another who thought he was a master of the art of the deal.

Tom · 03-24-2018, 02:29 PM

Turns out he was the ZONKED behind Door #3.

MargieRose · 03-24-2018, 03:18 PM

Am wondering:

The bulk of the spending bill has been allocated to the Department of Defense (DOD). The president is in charge of the DOD and of the Department of Homeland Security (DOHS). Let's assume that the huge DOD allocation ($700 billion) is in excess of what is actually needed or used for the designated spending areas of the DOF.

Per an article from CNBC Politics:

Here's what the $1.3 trillion defense-friendly spending bill looks like for the military

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/22/defe...-military.html

Quote:

The funding will be spread over the Pentagon's base budget of $589.5 billion and $65.2 billion for the overseas contingency operations, or OCO, budget. The remainder of the $700 billion is appropriated to other defense-related programs outside the Department of Defense.

Could the president apply some the "remainder," in this case what seems to be approximately 45 billion, to the DOHS...a "defense-related (homeland defense) program outside the Department of Defense? Could the president not get his 'wall' built, under this umbrella?

schweitz · 03-24-2018, 04:04 PM

I'm wondering does the money have to be spent? If not Shumer might not get his tunnel started until there is a Democrat in the White House.

Clocker · 03-24-2018, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargieRose

Could the president apply some the "remainder," in this case what seems to be approximately 45 billion, to the DOHS...a "defense-related (homeland defense) program outside the Department of Defense? Could the president not get his 'wall' built, under this umbrella?

If there ever was a "remainder", DHS could not get it and spend it because Congress approves an appropriation bill specifically for DHS, telling them how much they can spend and what they can spend it on. See Post #48 in this thread.

And "remainders" don't happen in the government. If a department doesn't spend it all, Congress will figure they got too much and cut their budget next time.

Tom · 03-24-2018, 05:16 PM

When do we call out the Pentagon for ridiculously excessive spending?

fast4522 · 03-24-2018, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom

When do we call out the Pentagon for ridiculously excessive spending?

You can't, you will live to see hell on earth and just maybe consider that money well spent if we survive.

Clocker · 03-24-2018, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom

When do we call out the Pentagon for ridiculously excessive spending?

We don't. That would be like giving your kid a big allowance and then complaining about how much he is spending. Pentagon spending isn't excessive, it is exactly 100% of what they are given.

You would think that a shrewd businessman like Trump might question the possibility of a little fat in the Pentagon budget. But the military says they need more, and Trump agrees, and Congress goes along as long as the members get the pork they need to stay in office. And no one is responsible.

And they all lived happily ever after.

barahona44 · 03-24-2018, 09:01 PM

A significant part of DOD spending are for things the military uses that are made in an influential legislator's state or district, even if these things are no longer needed or wanted by the military.

davew · 03-24-2018, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barahona44

A significant part of DOD spending are for things the military uses that are made in an influential legislator's state or district, even if these things are no longer needed or wanted by the military.

Wouldn't a wall be considered part of national defense?

classhandicapper · 03-24-2018, 09:41 PM

He probably did not want to sign it, but he knew the downside of not signing it was going to be worse than signing it. So he did the smart thing and signed it.
I would have held my nose and signed it too.

What this tells me is that we have to clean out the Senate and get rid of all the swamp creatures there now pretending to be conservatives and pretending to have the best interests of the people in mind. They are all despicable scoundrels. Our one hope of doing some smart things for the first time in decades is being forced into compromises that are continuing the damage of the pinheads that came before him.