Obama gets another shot with his budget.

[kentuck]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/opinion/13fri1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion


<snip>
The bill is, for the most part, a step in the right direction. But political wrangling, including President Obama’s futile pursuit of bipartisanship, rendered it smaller and less focused than it needed to be.

It was especially lamentable that the stale politics of Washington ended up including $70 billion for relief from the alternative minimum tax. The relief is necessary, but it has nothing to do with stimulus or recovery. It is a perennial issue that Congress should have handled in another bill. To include it in the stimulus package — and stay beneath a self-imposed $800 billion spending limit — lawmakers had to ditch far more effective measures, such as aid to states for education and health care.

<snip>

The administration’s next shot at advancing its economic aims will be Mr. Obama’s first budget. The new president should stop courting Republicans who have shown no interest in compromise or real economic fixes. The budget resolution is immune from filibustering. If every Republican wants to vote against it, Mr. Obama should leave them to explain that decision to voters who are in danger of losing their jobs or their houses or both.

....more

[ComtesseDeSpair]

1. "The budget resolution is immune from filibustering"

Oh, that's music to my ears!!!

[Igel]

5. Yes, but it's a meaningless sentence.

Because it's immune it has to follow the requirements for cloture.

It has the awkward name of "reconciliation".

[bluestateguy]

2. An FYI: The budget resolution cannot be filibustered

I think the individual amendments can, but the final package, I believe, cannot be filibustered.

[Zenlitened]

3. K&R.

[jmg257]

4. Yeah, because helping 24million+ middle class taxpayers isn't stimulating...

"...Because the AMT disallows certain deductions and credits, it hits some taxpayers harder than others. Families with children are more likely to be subject to the AMT than those without children because the AMT eliminates dependent exemptions. Married couples will be more than 12 times as likely as singles to face the AMT in 2010. AMT participation for married families with two or more children and AGI between $75,000 and $100,000 will increase dramatically from less than 1 percent in 2006 to 89 percent in 2010. Since the state and local tax deduction is also disallowed by the AMT, residents in high tax states are currently almost three times more likely to face the AMT than those in low tax states. (Table T06-0268)"
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1001046

Not sure about anyone else, but I can think of ALOT of things I can spend the potential savings on...and not even have to wait to do so.


Link added.