#Stinkburger: House rejects Obama’s budget by a vote of 2-413

Posted by: ST on April 10, 2014 at 10:43 am

Fail

The Hill reports that another one of Obama’s budgets has gone down in flames in the US House:

The House on Wednesday handily rejected a GOP budget alternative based on President Obama’s 2015 spending blueprint.

It was defeated 2-413, following a pattern seen in recent years in House votes to overwhelmingly reject Obama’s budget proposals. Today’s vote is just slightly better than the unanimous vote against Obama’s budget in 2012.

The two “yes” votes came from Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) and Jim Moran (D-Va.), who is retiring.

Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) offered a budget alternative based on Obama’s budget plan as a substitute amendment to the House GOP budget. Mulvaney made this move as a way to force Democrats to go on the record about the president’s spending plans.

But Democrats have refused to play along, and have derided these GOP-sponsored options as a political tactic. Earlier in the day, House Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) urged fellow Democrats in a “Dear Colleague” letter to vote against the Mulvaney amendment, calling it a “political stunt.”

Van Hollen also argued that Mulvaney’s amendment did not truly represent the president’s budget, and complained that the GOP had only allotted 20 minutes of debate, split evenly between each side.

“I thought we didn’t even want to take up thousand-plus page bills. And yet now, supposedly, we’re going to debate and vote on something that is over 2,000 pages,” Van Hollen said.

An Obama administration official agreed with House Democrats that the GOP substitute was not an accurate reflection of Obama’s budget plan.

“The Administration would welcome votes on the actual provisions of President’s Budget,” said Office of Management and Budget spokesman Steve Posner. “That is not what this amendment represents, and a vote for or against this amendment is not a vote for or against the President’s policies.”

But Republicans rejected these complaints, and defended the idea of consider Obama’s latest proposal as a way to let the House consider all budget options.

“Any time the president of the United States takes the time to produce a budget, it merits a debate,” Mulvaney said. “I think it’s a valid discussion we should have every year.”

It should be noted that while Obama’s budget only got two votes, Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget will be up for a vote today and is likely to get many more votes – including a few from vulnerable House Democrats – proving that, when all is said and done, the real “stinkburger” budget will be … Obama’s.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

One Response to “#Stinkburger: House rejects Obama’s budget by a vote of 2-413”

Comments

  1. Carlos says:

    Van Hollen also argued that Mulvaney’s amendment did not truly represent the president’s budget, and complained that the GOP had only allotted 20 minutes of debate, split evenly between each side.

    Gosh, isn’t that about 20 minutes more than Creepy Harry ever allows on any Repub proposal in the Senate?