In case of shutdown military pay to continue

[henryclay]

An emergency bill to that effect has been introduced in the event of a shutdown and Obama does not prioritize on his own.

The legislation calls for emergency appropriations to pay the salaries and other allowances of active-duty service members if the government faces a funding gap because it defaults on its obligations. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, sponsored the bill along with Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who is running for president in 2012.

The Payment Reliability for our Obligations to Military and Investors to Secure Essential Stability (PROMISES) Act would prioritize the pay and allowances for all active-duty military personnel, including those in the reserves, in the event of a government default.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has said the government will begin to default on Aug. 2 if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling.

ebird.osd.mil/ebfiles/e20110714831081.html

[privateinvestor]

I am not at all confident this will happen Henry if the government defaults ....so we may find out in @ 2 1/2 weeks or on 02 August..

[billisonboard]

Jul 14, 2011 19:32:54 GMT -5 henryclay said:

... Military and Investors ...

The link is limited access so can't do my own research through it. I am very curious who they including other than military.

[henryclay]

Sorry, bills, but you'll have to look somewhere else for your answer. I'm taking a page from the liberal playbook and only looking iout for my own interests, and everybody else can wish they had it so good.

[billisonboard]

Jul 14, 2011 22:37:34 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Sorry, bills, but you'll have to look somewhere else for your answer. I'm taking a page from the liberal playbook and only looking iout for my own interests, and everybody else can wish they had it so good.

No problem.

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

I would be realllllllly annoyed if my wonderful DH's paycheck just stopped ~ especially while he's deployed.

[floridayankee]

Jul 14, 2011 21:10:03 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

The link is limited access so can't do my own research through it. I am very curious who they including other than military.

If I were a betting man, I would say...themselves.

[reasonfreedom]

Jul 14, 2011 21:10:03 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jul 14, 2011 19:32:54 GMT -5 henryclay said:

... Military and Investors ...

The link is limited access so can't do my own research through it. I am very curious who they including other than military.

Investors could mean anything. Manufacturers that build parts for aircraft, vests, guns ect.. . Or private security firms in Iraq or Afghan, other countries to support the wars. There are probably a lot of loop holes in the legislation.

[billisonboard]

Jul 15, 2011 7:12:47 GMT -5 reasonfreedom said:

Jul 14, 2011 21:10:03 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

The link is limited access so can't do my own research through it. I am very curious who they including other than military.

Investors could mean anything. Manufacturers that build parts for aircraft, vests, guns ect.. . Or private security firms in Iraq or Afghan, other countries to support the wars. There are probably a lot of loop holes in the legislation.

My thought was that it was almost all "loophole" with our military sitting simply as a cherry on the top to sell it.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

My thought was that it was almost all "loophole" with our military sitting simply as a cherry on the top to sell it.

Well, maintaining a military is one of the items that is constitutionally authorized.

[billisonboard]

Jul 15, 2011 9:50:25 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

My thought was that it was almost all "loophole" with our military sitting simply as a cherry on the top to sell it.

Well, maintaining a military is one of the items that is constitutionally authorized.

Then out the "I" out of the bill.

[Angel!]

Paying the investors refers to paying on our debt.

I have no problem with these 2 items be prioritized, however at some point they have to figure out who isn't going to get paid.

[reasonfreedom]

Jul 15, 2011 9:41:32 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jul 15, 2011 7:12:47 GMT -5 reasonfreedom said:

Investors could mean anything. Manufacturers that build parts for aircraft, vests, guns ect.. . Or private security firms in Iraq or Afghan, other countries to support the wars. There are probably a lot of loop holes in the legislation.

My thought was that it was almost all "loophole" with our military sitting simply as a cherry on the top to sell it.

I totally agree, politicians have been spending by using this type of method since the 70's. It is the magician trick mentality, I give you multiple things to look at so you don't see the secret to the trick

[billisonboard]

Jul 15, 2011 10:40:45 GMT -5 reasonfreedom said:

Jul 15, 2011 9:41:32 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

My thought was that it was almost all "loophole" with our military sitting simply as a cherry on the top to sell it.

I totally agree, politicians have been spending by using this type of method since the 70's. It is the magician trick mentality, I give you multiple things to look at so you don't see the secret to the trick

Plus it is the old, "How dare you vote against our military!!!" when people object to all the other stuff. We have a group of people in my state that do it with initiatives. They did this with $30 car tabs and buried a lot of other questionable stuff in the same initiative. Enough people saw only the car tabs and voted for it.

[privateinvestor]

Henry Obama said today at his news conference he will NOT let a shutdown happen on his watch and he will do whatever it takes to avoid Armageddon, I think possibly he may raise the debt ceiling in a few days


www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43765362/ns/politics/

[reasonfreedom]

I think they need to show some of these plans publicly, so that I may read them and then rip on the stupid congressmen for not being able to pass one(democrat or republican).

[privateinvestor]

Jul 15, 2011 11:23:29 GMT -5 reasonfreedom said:

I think they need to show some of these plans publicly, so that I may read them and then rip on the stupid congressmen for not being able to pass one(democrat or republican).

Administration officials and private economists say that if the U.S. fails to raise its borrowing limit by Aug. 2 and begins to stop paying its bills as a result, the fragile U.S. economy could be cast into a crisis that would reverberate around the globe.

The United States hit its current $14.3 trillion debt ceiling in May and has been juggling its books since then. Republicans, who control the House of Representatives, say they won't raise the debt limit unless Democrats agree to major spending cuts to reduce the spiraling U.S. deficit.

Democrats say cuts must be accompanied by some tax increases. Republicans, prodded by junior members backed by the small-government tea party movement, oppose any tax hikes.

Still, Obama said that Republicans opposition to any new tax revenue was complicating efforts to reach a deficit-cutting deal.

.
"If they show me a serious plan I'm ready to move," he said.


www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43765362/ns/politics/

[reasonfreedom]

Jul 15, 2011 11:24:38 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Jul 15, 2011 11:23:29 GMT -5 reasonfreedom said:

I think they need to show some of these plans publicly, so that I may read them and then rip on the stupid congressmen for not being able to pass one(democrat or republican).

Administration officials and private economists say that if the U.S. fails to raise its borrowing limit by Aug. 2 and begins to stop paying its bills as a result, the fragile U.S. economy could be cast into a crisis that would reverberate around the globe.

The United States hit its current $14.3 trillion debt ceiling in May and has been juggling its books since then. Republicans, who control the House of Representatives, say they won't raise the debt limit unless Democrats agree to major spending cuts to reduce the spiraling U.S. deficit.

Democrats say cuts must be accompanied by some tax increases. Republicans, prodded by junior members backed by the small-government tea party movement, oppose any tax hikes.

Still, Obama said that Republicans opposition to any new tax revenue was complicating efforts to reach a deficit-cutting deal.

.
"If they show me a serious plan I'm ready to move," he said.


www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43765362/ns/politics/

That 14.3 in May wasn't subject to the limit, they have stuff like hope bonds and federal finance banking that aren't subject to limit. I agree with the democrats on this, just simply because I know it is common sense that you are not going to kill this monster with just cutting. If you cut too much even if we know it is not necessary you will hurt the economy just because people have become reliant on those unnecessary projects/funds. In the future when all is well then maybe we can cut those tax increases if our cutting is more than efficient.

[deziloooooo]

Jul 15, 2011 0:39:27 GMT -5 ❤ mollymouser ❤ said:

I would be realllllllly annoyed if my wonderful DH's paycheck just stopped ~ especially while he's deployed.

I can't see that happening , work with no pay. Now possible he could be laid off..told to go home till called for..same as say postal workers..andy government workers..to work for no pay..even if pay was to be paid later..don't think that would legally pass the courts.

Do I see that happening? No. However, it could..then I guess he would file for unemployment..as so many others have done.

[reasonfreedom]

Jul 15, 2011 12:18:56 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

Jul 15, 2011 0:39:27 GMT -5 ❤ mollymouser ❤ said:

I would be realllllllly annoyed if my wonderful DH's paycheck just stopped ~ especially while he's deployed.

I can't see that happening , work with no pay. Now possible he could be laid off..told to go home till called for..same as say postal workers..andy government workers..to work for no pay..even if pay was to be paid later..don't think that would legally pass the courts.

Do I see that happening? No. However, it could..then I guess he would file for unemployment..as so many others have done.

See what happened with the postal workers, just imagine what soldier could do( not saying at all that your husband would). Not to dis either positions, I just wouldn't want to be the one to take away their pay checks.

[deziloooooo]

Postal workers may be faced with no Saturday deliveries IF Congress can get their act together, it is suggested that would save 4 Billion per year..and while I like my Saturday mail, to be honest, I can live with out it very nicely..and there are many other Government programs that could be eliminated to save big bucks I am sure, but here, Congress doesn't really want to consider real savings, and that is all parties..

The only ones who really need a Saturday delivery would be some busionesses , though there are so many ways to get materialn to people, electronically today, and for the few who need original documents , there are other private delivery services that can be used..and possible for no more costs and if a bi more costly, if the documents are THAT important , the extra cost would be well worth it to them, businesses, who took advantage of these other services that are available.