This only makes sense if you realize that Republicans in Congress have absolutely no principles to speak of (besides of course trying to crush and destroy):

In his State of the Union address last night, President Obama urged the Senate to adopt pay-as-you-go rules (PAYGO), which essentially stipulate that all spending increases will be offset by either cuts elsewhere or tax increases. “When the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason for why we had record surpluses in the 1990s,” Obama said.

Today, the Senate followed through, and considering all of the deficit fearmongering that has been going on in Congress, you’d think that it would have passed by a fairly wide margin. But no. Instead, the rules passed on a party line vote of 60-40.

And the blanket Republican opposition is particularly interesting considering that some Senate Republicans used to support PAYGO, even when it was opposed by their own party. For instance, in 2004, three current Senate Republicans — Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) — joined 47 Democrats in adopting PAYGO, against the majority Republicans’ wishes (although the rule was ultimately scuttled when Congress failed to pass a budget). The next year, the same three senators were joined by Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) in a failed attempt to implement the rule.

What could be a more “conservative” proposal than forcing lawmakers to pay for the legislation they write? Sigh.

Share
  1. Gherald says:

    I suppose statutory pay-go means they'd actually have to pay for any new tax cuts, as opposed to engaging in the new republicanism of tax cuts without spending cuts.

  2. Joe says:

    Pay-Go means nothing to a party that has a 59-41 majority. Toward the end of the last iteration of Pay-Go, Congress routinely voted to pass spending bills that were exempt from Pay-Go. In addition, this Pay-Go has more exemptions than inclusions. Perhaps, people should read the legislation rather than looking for the knee-jerk reaction that the democrats are shooting for…

    Nah, that would be too hard.

  3. […] against ideas that it once sup-ported, like tax cuts, and even ini-tia-tives Repub-li-cans once spon-sored, sim-ply because they are pro-posed by Democ-rats as pos-si-ble solu-tions to some of the […]

  4. More just say no so that we can defeat the black president. No ideas, no intelligences, just say no and blame the cost of 2 wars and a major republican recession on the president who didn’t start them. Just charge to the national debt and cut back on the seniors to pay for it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.