Senator John McCain claims CAP is Pork Barrel Spending (Again)

[SarDragon]

Can somebody pass me a mai tai? 

Out of rum. Can I sub popcorn?

[Майор Хаткевич]

I'd rather something be cut than nothing.

Right...lets cut something that leads to more expenditures. That type of "action" led to this problem in the first place.

Applying basic economic theory, the US won't be around much longer at this rate.

Clearly, you know nothing of the not-at-all-basic economic REALITY of the world economy. Just because you took a 101 course in econ, doesn't mean you just wrote an intelligent sentence.

Sequestration only slows the inevitable.

Sequestration is dumb. Period. It does absolutely nothing one way or the other besides screwing working folks and causing mass confusion.

[a2capt]

Just the term "Sequestration" or "Sequester" is dumb, to me. That means "to isolate" or "to seize", so you're saying "you dollars, go over here. you can't be spent. You have been seized".

The only thing that has seized is, like you say, many working people's livelihoods, in theory.

Political stroking and finger pointing, what do they care. They get paid. By election day the voters will forget it. If the voter registration people don't claim they can't afford to put out the ballot boxes first. 

[Extremepredjudice]

Something has to be cut. If it is CAP, I'm cool with that. If not, I'm cool with that, too. If CAP is needed the free market will step up and create something.

Need to do: laffer's curve. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
Don't do: Keynesian economic theory. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
And don't do: Central planning. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_planning

And don't come back with "you just took a 101 course." Prove I'm wrong.

I agree on sequestration. It is a stupid media label.

[Майор Хаткевич]

There's not much to prove. The US is the richest country in the world, China does not own us, we've had worse "debt" situations in the past. This is all part of the typical US cycle. We're in the middle of it right now, but we'll bounce back just fine.

[Devil Doc]

Well,
I  understand that you use Wikipedia Economics class, but this is 'Merica!! Sequestration is dumb. They are "Sequestering" the wrong stuff. They are looking at the wrong things to budget. How about Budget what the Parks Service Budget is? Salaries of the President, VP, Congress, Senate? There is many Departments that they can budget from, there is no need to risk the lives of Cadets/Senior Memebers for a budget.

Tribalelder, You really think the PD/FD/SD FEMA wants to do Inland SAR? They will only agree if they get more funding, which is quess what more expensive than funding CAP. We have Local Yokals respond to SAR/Crashes in this state. Around 24-48 hours, there begging CAP to come take over, bcause they do not have the manpower to cover the scene. They also what the Latest High Speed Low Drag Gear, which cost more money. Training, Gear, Manpower, Vehicles, Radios, funding all of that will be more expensive to Fund CAP for another year.

[JeffDG]

4 motions for quorum call, one vote on an amendment to limit the amount of amendments, some talking, and motion to adjourn for the night.... Wow...

Lemme guess, this is your first time tuned into CSPAN-2, right? 

Them having an actual substantive vote on an amendment is significant progress for the Senate.

[JeffDG]

Well,
I  understand that you use Wikipedia Economics class, but this is 'Merica!! Sequestration is dumb. They are "Sequestering" the wrong stuff. They are looking at the wrong things to budget. How about Budget what the Parks Service Budget is? Salaries of the President, VP, Congress, Senate? There is many Departments that they can budget from, there is no need to risk the lives of Cadets/Senior Memebers for a budget.

You know, except for the VP, none of those salaries can be touched until 2015 for Congress/Senate and 2017 for the President, right?

[Майор Хаткевич]

I believe that applies to raises...not sure on cuts.

[JeffDG]

I believe that applies to raises...not sure on cuts.

Nope, the language is quite clear:

President:

Article II, Section 1:
The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Congress/Senate:

Amendment XXVII:
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Well, look at that bs...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Something has to be cut. If it is CAP, I'm cool with that. If not, I'm cool with that, too. If CAP is needed the free market will step up and create something.

The "market" is not infallible, nor is it the answer to every situation.  Adam Smith never claimed it to be, and Ayn Rand was a kook as far as I'm concerned.  She would have scoffed at the entire idea of CAP.  Why so many pols worship these two I do not know.

Just "cutting" so you can say you did is not a workable solution.  The "scalpel v. hatchet" analogy is good, but I would prefer using laser microsurgery as a better one.

And the day that John McCain quits rolling us out as his straw man for DoD "waste" and actually comes up with other, concrete, examples of DoD "waste" and states those publicly is the day I will take him seriously.

[abdsp51]

And the day that John McCain quits rolling us out as his straw man for DoD "waste" and actually comes up with other, concrete, examples of DoD "waste" and states those publicly is the day I will take him seriously.

So you feel it's perfectly acceptable for the AF to cut 15 mil from their O&M budget for ops and send it to us?

[lordmonar]

And the day that John McCain quits rolling us out as his straw man for DoD "waste" and actually comes up with other, concrete, examples of DoD "waste" and states those publicly is the day I will take him seriously.

So you feel it's perfectly acceptable for the AF to cut 15 mil from their O&M budget for ops and send it to us?

Yes.

If we assume for a moment that the $15M is going to be spent on something that is really needed (such as new aircraft in this case IIRC).   If we don't have those aircraft, then the USAF is the one who is going to have to fill the gap.   We are still cheaper then the USAF in doing inland SAR.

Having said that............personally I would like to see the "budget process" go like this.

The departments submits their budgets to the White House who approves them and then they go to congress......for approval or disapproval.  No amendments, no riders, no pet projects, no crossing the streams (i.e. tieing a new road or gun control in with the department of educations budget).

Yes or No......if no then the adminstration either makes the changes or works the politics.

All these "pork barrel" stuff either need to be their own bills voted on indivdually (so we don't need to give the president Line Item Veto Power).

[NCRblues]

And the day that John McCain quits rolling us out as his straw man for DoD "waste" and actually comes up with other, concrete, examples of DoD "waste" and states those publicly is the day I will take him seriously.

So you feel it's perfectly acceptable for the AF to cut 15 mil from their O&M budget for ops and send it to us?

Yes I do. THE subject matter experts on the AF budget and funding cap, which is shockingly the USAF, has said that 15 million is better spent on keeping us flying than the AF blowing through it in a month or less.

The standing rules of the senate state that when funds are removed by amendment to a funding budget, the amendment must designate an area to return the money to. As of today, unless changed in the past 10 minutes since I read it, mcCains amendment does not return it to the AF. So, if it passes, it just returns to the treasury...

A fail in almost every regard. In every shape and form, this simply does not pass the legitimate sniff test. This is mcCain taking advantage of the fear and heartburn over the whole budget situation to take out a vendetta.

[vento]

More on the Amendment  from CAWG FB Page.

With 126 amendments now being considered for HR 933, the Senate was forced to invoke cloture in its consideration of the bill yesterday. This means that the time the Senate has to consider this bill is limited to 30 hours for votes, quorum calls, reading of amendments and things like responses to the Chair. It also means that there cannot be a filibuster of the bill.

It is unclear how the Senate will handle the large number of amendments or what method they will use, if any, to limit the number of amendments that will be discussed. The McCain amendment is germane to HR 933 so it could still be brought up for consideration.

It is important that we don't let up our efforts on this issue. Those CAWG members who have not yet done so, but who want to let their Senators know how they feel about this issue, should still make that call. Your opinion will count. Those who have already contacted their Senators do not need to do so again, your concern has been heard. Please refer to SenatorMcCain's proposed amendment #50 to HR 933, the full-year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2013 for Defense, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. A no vote will ensure that CAP's budget is not reduced for the rest of FY 2013.

Today Col John Swain, CAP's Government Relations Consultant, visited most of the Senate offices and it was clearly noted in a majority of the offices that CAP members had voiced their concern and had been heard. Everyone who called, faxed, emailed or communicated using Facebook and Twitter should be very proud of their efforts.

[JeffDG]

The standing rules of the senate state that when funds are removed by amendment to a funding budget, the amendment must designate an area to return the money to. As of today, unless changed in the past 10 minutes since I read it, mcCains amendment does not return it to the AF. So, if it passes, it just returns to the treasury...

McCain's amendment doesn't remove the funds from the USAF, it simply reduces the amount of those funds earmarked for CAP, or at least that's how I read it.

[NCRblues]

The standing rules of the senate state that when funds are removed by amendment to a funding budget, the amendment must designate an area to return the money to. As of today, unless changed in the past 10 minutes since I read it, mcCains amendment does not return it to the AF. So, if it passes, it just returns to the treasury...

McCain's amendment doesn't remove the funds from the USAF, it simply reduces the amount of those funds earmarked for CAP, or at least that's how I read it.

Right, but since it is earmarked for CAP from the USAF it becomes its own potential budget line item. By reducing the funds going to CAP, he is removing a line item and inserting another one with a different number. So, the funds he takes will automatically go back to the treasury and not automatically return to the AF O&M budget.

( I'm getting my information from an aide to senator Blunt, so I trust what she is saying)

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

So you feel it's perfectly acceptable for the AF to cut 15 mil from their O&M budget for ops and send it to us?

Yes.  It has been stated many, many times on this board and elsewhere how much of a "force multiplier" we are for the USAF for so little actual monetary investment.

Investing $15M in CAP has a pretty good ROI in the long run.

$15M is barely enough to gas up an F-22 for a short time.

[JeffDG]

And the day that John McCain quits rolling us out as his straw man for DoD "waste" and actually comes up with other, concrete, examples of DoD "waste" and states those publicly is the day I will take him seriously.

So you feel it's perfectly acceptable for the AF to cut 15 mil from their O&M budget for ops and send it to us?

If spending that $15m saves the AF $60m that they would have needed to spend to fulfill the missions that CAP handles on their behalf, that's excellent value for money.