قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ US https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Rand's Excessive Rand's Response to Health for 9/11 Respondents

Rand's Excessive Rand's Response to Health for 9/11 Respondents



Liberal comedian John Stewart is not a fan of Rand Paul. Following the Kentucky Senate's decision to oppose the approval of unanimous funding for health care for the first response on September 11, Stuart kills him as "absolutely scandalous" and complains of his decision as a "signaling of the power of fiscal responsibility ". Democratic senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York accused that Paul "turned his back on our first responders."

Meanwhile, news coverage across the political spectrum has the impression that Paul denied it himself. our heroes, healthcare, and #RandPaulHatesAmerica started to move on Twitter. The violation is completely unjustifiable and is, in fact, equivalent to a fierce prey against the senator. Paul does not oppose healthcare for the first respondents, and he has not permanently prevented funding from being allowed. All he has done is to delay the bill so that they can vote for an amendment to offset the extra costs with discounts elsewhere. This is in full accord with Paul's long record as a fiscal hawk and the responsible owner of taxpayer money. The angry reactionaries have to breathe in deep: Funding for the 9/1

1 officials will still be allowed. All that is going to happen now is that instead of voting unanimously, as it was done on Wednesday, Senate Major Mitch McConnell will have to bring the already adopted home vote bill, including a vote on the Paul to offset the costs, and then it will almost certainly become a law.

There is no expiration date for this funding. The Health Fund on September 11 has not yet finished its money and people can still file claims. Moreover, if the costs are offset, Paul is likely to support the bill.

This particular battle may not seem like a hill to die, but our national debt is certainly an urgent problem, and at that time extreme measures are needed to make someone care . Even with Trump and the Republicans controlling the Congress until 2018, we are now approaching the 1 trillion dollar deficit during a boom in the economy. Our national debt is rising sharply to dangerous levels.

However, one criticism of Paul's position is that he voted to reduce the 2017 GDP tax, which is expected by some to add about $ 1.5 trillion to the national debt for a decade. However, it is a little misleading to assume that tax cuts "add" to debt – they only do this if you keep spending money that you do not have. Paul backed "pay as you go", which would require costs. Overall, he has voted to cut costs many times to count them.

Pacemaker Paul is not.

In fact, Paul does such a thing – preventing spending bills. unanimous consent – all the time trying to force such amendments to be voted to compensate for other costs. He just is in line with his last request for a vote, of course, it does in the swamp in the swamp. such as Washington DC


Source link