Why Do Dems Fear A Balanced Budget???

[Whirlaway]

For some reason(s) the Democratics don't want the states to vote on a Constituional Ammendment to balance the federal budget.

The recently passed House bill will provide an increase to the debt ceiling in exchange for the Democrats agreeing to submit a balance budget ammendment to the Constituiton. But Obama and his Democrats don't want that. What's up with that???

[Whirlaway]

Because with a balanced budget; the democrats couldn't do stupid economic stuff like this:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/21/auto...=yes&hpt=hp_t2

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Because with a balanced budget; the democrats couldn't do stupid economic stuff like this:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/21/auto...=yes&hpt=hp_t2

What? Lose 1.3 billion and not lose the $40 billion the industry was expected to? The 1.3 billion was the interest we would have earned if they had kept the money till 2017.


Originally, the government committed a total of $12.5 billion to the struggling automaker, Old Chrysler, and the company's newly formed Chrysler Group. Of those funds, $11.2 billion have been returned through principal repayments, interest and cancelled commitments, the Treasury said. The new Chrysler Group paid back $5.1 billion in loans in May.

As part of the loan agreement, Chrysler was given until 2017 to return the bailout funds. If it had taken the full term, the interest accrued on the loans could have significantly reduced the government's losses.
Overall, $1.3 billion will not be recovered from the bankrupt Old Chrysler, but Massad still called it a "major accomplishment."
That's because the government originally expected it would lose much more on the auto bailout. Initial estimates from the Congressional Budget Office in 2009, predicted the government would lose $40 billion on the overall auto bailout.
Now it estimates, by the time the $80 billion program is completely wrapped up, taxpayers will have lost $14 billion.
The Treasury Department also considers the auto bailout a success because the industry has recently shown signs of a recovery.
In the year leading up to the Chrysler and General Motors' bankruptcies, the auto industry lost 400,000 jobs. Since the bailout, about 113,000 of those jobs have been recovered.
"We didn't make the auto interventions to make money, we made them to save jobs -- and on that front, we dramatically succeeded," Massad said.

General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) has already repaid loans it received from the bailout, but the Treasury still owns about one-third of GM's shares, worth approximately $16 billion. TARP overall, was originally authorized to cost $700 billion, but the Treasury Department has only paid out $411 billion.
Of that amount, $101 billion have yet to be paid back, mostly due to losses from assistance to AIG and mortgage modification programs.
The bank bailout part of TARP is expected to turn a profit of $20 billion, making up for some of those losses.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

For some reason(s) the Democratics don't want the states to vote on a Constituional Ammendment to balance the federal budget.

The recently passed House bill will provide an increase to the debt ceiling in exchange for the Democrats agreeing to submit a balance budget ammendment to the Constituiton. But Obama and his Democrats don't want that. What's up with that???

Part of the reason is because the republican version says tax cuts can be made by a simple majority and can only be repealed by a super majority (67 votes) in the senate. Why doesn't the republican controlled house come up with a balanced budget bill. If it's that important, why not do it themselves? They could whip one off that won't stand a chance in the senate. Then they can blame the democrates...again.