Boozman Calls for Supercommittee Transparency
“I think the supercommittee has a great opportunity to help us reduce the deficit which we all agree is out-of-control,” Boozman said during a morning press conference.
Created by the “Budget Control Act,” the supercommittee is tasked with cutting more than $1 trillion in deficit spending by Thanksgiving. In August, Boozman joined six of his colleagues in sending a letter to Senate leadership calling for meetings of this committee to be open to the public and available for television broadcast.
Boozman said he believes transparency is a step in the right direction to regaining confidence in Washington.
“I believe with all of my heart that the people of Arkansas, the people of American have the right to understand what goes on as we make some very significant decisions in trying to determine how we reduce the deficit,” Boozman said.
Watch Boozman’s remarks during the press conference.
Tags: Senator, John Boozman
Arkansas, Senate, Congress, Washington, Budget, transparency, supercommittee To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 5:11 PM - Post Link
9 Comments:
Instead of calling for transparency, he should be calling for the abolishment of this unconstitutional group. Calling for transparency means one accepts their premise that it should exist in the first place.
Understand the frustration with almost all things in Washington, D.C. However, since this is actually a joint Congressional committee that recommends action to their respective houses, it is not an unconstitutional group. Congress has always had committees. It would be unconstitutional, if what ever the committee decided was binding on the rest of Congress.
One committee that is constitutional but is closer to being what you mean by being "unconstitutional" are the reconciliation committees which is used when bills are passed in the House and the Senate but are somewhat different and have to be reconciled. When one party rules both house of Congress, no one from the minority party has input and the reconciliation does not need to be voted on by all the members of Congress.
The danger in the process is not "constitutionality" of the joint deficit reduction committee but the law that has been passed. If these people cannot reach agreement or one side games the system so enough votes can be garnered in either House of Congress for the proposed changes, then the predetermined automatic cuts occur which begins to effective gut DOD and eventually to place our Nation at risk.
Cliff said what I was going to say. Sorry, Dr. Bill, but that Super Congress IS unconstitutional. Making rules of procedure is completely different from this. Congress is not authorized to delegate 12 people to create laws. You need to read this for a start: http://www.conservativecut.com/blog/?p=285
Once again, Mr. Boozman accepts the liberal premise but does not stand up for the Constitution but then wants political points for it. The entire premise of the Super Congress is wrong.
Don't forget the obvious point that Mr. Boozman voted yes to the Super Congress in the first place! And he wants us to be impressed that he is now calling for "transparency"? What good does "transparency" do for a group that is already unconstitutional?
Congress wrongly delegated its authority with the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 which united legislative, judicial, and executive functions in one agency, the Interstate Commerce Commission. It set the stage for all future regulatory agencies. While the Supreme Court was able to get most of it declared unconstitutional through cases in the 1890s, by the time of the first Roosevelt administration, it became well established and the rest is sad history.
Christine, you made my points for me. Since appropriations bills will arise from this group, they have actually set up a tricameral Congress. Not only that, the bill that they propose can't even be amended but must have only an up or down... vote. If the Senate and House don't agree with the bill, guess what? THE SUPER GROUP CAN PUSH IT THROUGH ANYWAY! Really now? Really? What part of "unconstitutional" is not understood here? What kind of fools do they take us for? If there can only be an up or down vote, why the hell are we even sending our representative to Congress in the first place? If this group decides the fiscal state of America, only a lucky 6 districts and 6 states in America will have the privilege of running the country's economy. Essentially, it makes it easier for a power hungry executive to financially ruin our country. So much for appropriations bills originating in the House of Representatives (as in, the House where we elect our Representatives to represent us the American people completely and not partially by a group of 12 men).
Well, exactly, Cliff! And which 6 Republicans do you think will get appointed to this Super Congress? Of course, only ones who are actually Democrats and will play the game. It is GROSSLY unconstitutional all the way around. There is no ...way a conservative can defend this nonsense.
And John Boozman, Tim Griffin, Steve Womack, and Mr. Crawford all voted YES to this. It still makes my blood boil. I am amazed at how some will excuse the most blatantly unconstitutional actions because Republicans did it. If people with D by their names had voted for this, the same people would have been all over it.
Stockholm Syndrome
Post a Comment
<< Home