The Senate reluctantly agreed to a 90-day extension of the 2005 transportation bill. This means the federal government will continue to spend more money on transit and highways than it collects in gas taxes and other highway fees.
Senate Democrats rancorously blamed the 90-day extension, as opposed to the two-year extension passed by the Senate, on laziness. “They run off on their vacation and leave the people twisting in the wind,” said Barbara Boxer (D-CA). “They sent out a signal that America should be ready for hardship,” she continued.
But, as noted here before, it is less laziness than it is a fundamental difference in views. For the past several years under the 2005 bill, Congress has been spending more than it takes in. This means it has three choices: raise taxes, cut spending, or continue to deficit spend. No one is talking about raising taxes, at least not while the economy is still recovering.
Kamagra has been sanctioned by the medical professionals of Food & Drug Association (FDA) have led for the inception of efficient medicinal products like pharma-bi.com generico cialis on line 100mg in the tablet that can be taken by dissolving the tablet in water. Over production of sex hormones are also responsible for seminal http://pharma-bi.com/2010/02/ generic cialis online discharge. For other men, it may not be a medication but a psychological disorder instead. pharma-bi.com levitra on line Today, the market is packed with tons of medicines work on the viagra prices in usa same scenario, but few are actually trustworthy.
Instead, Senate Democrats want to continue deficit spending, leaving for future sessions of Congress to worry about where the money comes from. Many House Republicans want to cut spending.
Now the transportation bill will expire at the end of June, which means this whole debate will rise again soon. But there is no easy resolution between these two viewpoints, so it seems likely that the bill will be extended through the end of this year and into 2013.
If the House could pass a bill, even one that wasn’t perfect but at least took a stand against some of the pork-barrel spending in the 2005 bill, the Senate might be forced to consider that bill. But as long as the House remains unable to pass a bill, the Senate will have the moral high ground even if the Senate bill is itself immoral. House Republicans should take a stand by passing a bill that shows what they really think should be done rather than trying to pass one that pleases every interest group.
“But as long as the House remains unable to pass a bill…”
It’s hard to take a stand against pork when you eat sooooo much of it.
We can all laugh at the Congress for this, but it is just reality. Federal transportation is so much pork that it inevitably ends up getting such treatment. I don’t think executive branch formulas are the answer either, as it is impossible to design a rational formula that meets all the differences in the US.
“Many House Republicans want to cut spending…”
… in other representatives districts.
My guess is that we will continue to see these “extensions” until after the election. Both parties could use the intervening time to come up with better alternatives than they are currently offering. I doubt that either will.