It ain’t working so we say…bye.
What the hell else are the repugs going to try?
You think we should keep funding programs that don’t work? Figures.
Uh…
It doesn’t seem like that bad an idea to me, and I’m way over on the socialist end of the “liberal -> conservative” spectrum.
The comission would be under fairly intense pressure not to recommend popular programs for termination; it seems like the most likely targets would be pork projects that only benefit one or two districts. It’s not like they’re gonna say “let’s axe medicare.” “Pork barrel” projects frequently draw the ire of both liberals and conservatives–I don’t see what’s so bad about a comission charged with getting rid of them.
Pork barrel projects are not programs.
Programs are like Education. medicaide, food stamps.
My complaint is that, according to this article…all it takes is this commission to say it doesn’t work, and unless congress reinstates it, it’s gone.
I wouldn’t like this whoever controlled congress.
Give me a list of programs you think don’t work.
Our current occupation of Afghanistan hasn’t wiped out the Taliban, hasn’t found Osama bin Laden, and has actually increased the opium crop. Lop it off.
I must have slept through the first 7 years of the Aghan war
They’re not? [ul][]Rural Community Advancement Program[]Conservation Land Internship Program[]Trees Forever Program[]Go-Girl-Go Program[]Community Schools Program[]Institutional Security Program[]Western Kentucky University Spotlight Youth Program[]Western Kentucky University Public Safety Program[]Milwaukee Summer Stars Program[]Hickam Air Force Base Alternative Fuel Vehicle Program[]Hawaii National Guard Counter-Drug Program[]Pacific Rim Corrosion Research Program[*]Marine Mammal Research Program[/ul]And that’s not even halfway down the page! What’s the difference between a Program and a program?
So unless the elected (and very pressure sensitive) representatives of the people want to keep a program, it should be cut. This is a bad overall idea because of what?
Well, they’ve neither tried nor succeeded in throwing you in a dungeon or hanging you from the nearest tree, so I’m guessing your hysteria of the end of life as we know it is a little overblown.
Please find a hobby that doesn’t involve 24/7 web scouring looking for shit to bitch about.
I used to think you were passionate in your views. Now I see you’re just nuts when it comes to politics. It sounds like you’re against any legislation being recinded at all. No matter the reason, use or validity of it.
Jeez, even us Catholics can adjust a view/stance or two on further review. You left-wing fundies though, (yes liberalism is its own religion) make Phelps look almost reasonable
Actually, this does raise my eyebrows a bit. :dubious:
The republicans have a very massive and highly organized spin machine. Does anybody remember the “death tax?” It wouldn’t take a whole lot of work to make any program seem negative or unjustified. Once the voters are kind of down on it, off with it’s head.
I’m really surprised to hear that people believe that a commission of politicians is going to cut pork spending. The only pork that will get cut will be that of political rivals and party dissidents.
I will say that “sunset commission” does sound very pretty.
If Congress can’t be bothered once a decade to review and reinstate a program, the program is not important enough to keep. I don’t want programs to continue via inertia and laziness alone.
I’m sure that this commission will dissolve the SEC/EPA/FDA/Medicare/Education/Food Stamps and Congress wouldn’t bother to reinstate any of these.
Oh, please explain this. I hope it’s as stupid as your assertion that global warming doesn’t exist because it’s cold where you are.
I don’t think a committee like this would be repealing tax laws. Programs yes, but tax laws? Or laws in general? That wouldn’t fly.
I know. I was using the “death tax” as an example of spin, not of programs.
A commission like this would be quite a good thing if it were bi-partisan and if its membership was not stacked in any direction. If the assumptions made by the author of the article (Osha? What the hell kind of name is Osha?) are correct, it would be quite a bad thing.
Personally, I believe damn near every law, regulation, order, or directive passed or issued by any piece of government at any level should have a sunset provision in it. It shouldn’t take a commission. It makes it a lot easier to dispose of bad ideas, and a good idea will be renewed.
Bolding mine. That’s the part that worries me.
I’m seriously asking this: Why does that bother you? Is there something that you don’t like in very idea of the president appointing commissions that can be vetoed by Congress, or is it because you don’t trust the current president? You’re saying that if it were Clinton, you’d still be saying the same thing?
One of the things that I really don’t like about government is that once something gets started, it hardly ever stops. There’s not a mechanism in place to get things stopped that have become just legacy items.
I think the problem with the President appointing a council like this is that it becomes yet another partisan weapon. Instead of objectively looking at programs the council would go after programs that the President is not an advocate of while ignoring the pork projects. I can’t see a council like these getting rid of farm subsidies for example.
treis got it. It’s that the committee will be chosen solely by the President’s discretion, which to me is a red flag going “Partisan lever! Partisan lever!” I fear it’s not going to be a group of bipartisan thinkers from both sides of the aisle, it’s going to be a bunch of Gonzaleses and Boltons.