agracer said:i believe it was stripped out b/c of the "Byrd rule" or some procedural nonsense.kyledr04 said:
Still want tax free, no registration suppressors
It was but I saw an amendment
Big beautiful bill updates (SIAP)
105,890 Views |
1271 Replies |
Last: 8 mo ago by techno-ag
It was but I saw an amendment
They think they can grow the economy at 4%-5% and make it up. That's never going to happen. It happened in 2021 due to the covid rebound, topping 6%. The last time it was above 5% was 1984.BoydCrowder13 said:Logos Stick said:
Gonna cut the deficit in half folks! LMAO
Is that after we triple it?BREAKING: President Trump says the US “deficit [is] cut in half” in anticipation of his Big Beautiful Bill. pic.twitter.com/7KNgutvgQ8
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) July 2, 2025
I'd love to know the math he plans to use to show that. The deficit will likely increase every year under his admin.
If neither party can balance the damn checkbook or even come close, it is time for a new party.
And you know the Dems never will. It's just hard to believe the R's are down with this too. But that is likely due to Trump who historically makes a lot of money but spends like a drunken sailor too.
Trump has nailed everything so far, but this needs to go back to the drawing board.
And you know the Dems never will. It's just hard to believe the R's are down with this too. But that is likely due to Trump who historically makes a lot of money but spends like a drunken sailor too.
Trump has nailed everything so far, but this needs to go back to the drawing board.
I disagree. I think the American people get the government they deserve, good and hard. Have you seen the American people lately?GeorgiAg said:
If neither party can balance the damn checkbook or even come close, it is time for a new party.
And you know the Dems never will. It's just hard to believe the R's are down with this too. But that is likely due to Trump who historically makes a lot of money but spends like a drunken sailor too.
Trump has nailed everything so far, but this needs to go back to the drawing board.
I really think Ben Franklin's final speech before the ratification of the Constitution is in order here:
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/benjamin-franklin-closing-speech-at-the-constitutional-convention
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/benjamin-franklin-closing-speech-at-the-constitutional-convention
Quote:
I confess that I do not entirely approve of this Constitution at present, but Sir, I am not sure I shall never approve it: For having lived long, I have experienced many Instances of being oblig'd, by better Information or fuller Consideration, to change Opinions even on important Subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow the more apt I am to doubt my own Judgment and to pay more Respect to the Judgment of others. Most Men indeed as well as most Sects in Religion, think themselves in Possession of all Truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far Error. . .
. . . In these Sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its Faults, if they are such: because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well administred; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administred for a Course of Years, and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other. I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution: For when you assemble a Number of Men to have the Advantage of their joint Wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those Men all their Prejudices, their Passions, their Errors of Opinion, their local Interests, and their selfish Views. From such an Assembly can a perfect Production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this System approaching so near to Perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our Enemies, who are waiting with Confidence to hear that our Councils are confounded, like those of the Builders of Babel, and that our States are on the Point of Separation, only to meet hereafter for the Purpose of cutting one another's Throats. Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure that it is not the best. The Opinions I have had of its Errors, I sacrifice to the Public Good. I have never whisper'd a Syllable of them abroad. Within these Walls they were born, & here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the Objections he has had to it, and endeavour to gain Partizans in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary Effects & great Advantages resulting naturally in our favour among foreign Nations, as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent Unanimity. Much of the Strength and Efficiency of any Government, in procuring & securing Happiness to the People depends on Opinion, on the general Opinion of the Goodness of that Government as well as of the Wisdom & Integrity of its Governors. I hope therefore that for our own Sakes, as a Part of the People, and for the Sake of our Posterity, we shall act heartily & unanimously in recommending this Constitution, wherever our Influence may extend, and turn our future Thoughts and Endeavours to the Means of having it well administred.
On the whole, Sir, I cannot help expressing a Wish, that every Member of the Convention, who may still have Objections to it, would with me on this Occasion doubt a little of his own Infallibility, and to make manifest our Unanimity, put his Name to this Instrument.
"only one thing is important!"
James Forsyth said:I disagree. I think the American people get the government they deserve, good and hard. Have you seen the American people lately?GeorgiAg said:
If neither party can balance the damn checkbook or even come close, it is time for a new party.
And you know the Dems never will. It's just hard to believe the R's are down with this too. But that is likely due to Trump who historically makes a lot of money but spends like a drunken sailor too.
Trump has nailed everything so far, but this needs to go back to the drawing board.
Before deporting is finished or after?
I wish a buck was still silver, it was back, when the country was strong.
What's extra deceptive is acting like we are going to grow our way past the tax cuts and spending
GDP growth is a guess, nobody knows when a recession will hit or why. We'll, except 2008, those banks terse knew exactly what they were doing. Selling home prices go up forever, rubber stamping AAA bonds, while betting against them to fail
Its a big shell game but spending is increasing no matter how we calculate growth and debt
GDP growth is a guess, nobody knows when a recession will hit or why. We'll, except 2008, those banks terse knew exactly what they were doing. Selling home prices go up forever, rubber stamping AAA bonds, while betting against them to fail
Its a big shell game but spending is increasing no matter how we calculate growth and debt
There is no underlying assumption, you are being deceptive in saying so. I did not ask any individual here to say they are for it without any reservations or exceptions. But if you are a hard NO on the bill as some of these holdouts are, then yes you are in reality voting yes to tax increases. Again, its the reality of the current situation.Tea Party said:It is deceptive to ask someone if they want tax increases, when the underlying assumption of said question is if you say no then you must be in favor of this monsterosity of a bill. A person can want to avoid tax increases while also being against a single monsterous spending bill.flown-the-coop said:
That's great, but its not reality. You and others are just wishing in one hand and spitting in the other, and keep being angry one hand is full of spit and the other empty.
I understand what you want. Its just not reality. What I describe as a this or that choice is what you are being faced with. A no vote on the recon bill is a vote to end the tax cuts.
Its not deceptive to ask someone if they are prepared for the consequence of their position.
That is deceptive. If you can't understand that then we will have to agree to disagree. It's no wish, nor spit. Just reality that focusing on spending cuts as justification for a bad bill is gaslighting others who are rightfully calling out the pros and cons.
There are major spending cuts in the bill. There are major curtailments to current entitlements. You are just wanting your little solution at the expense of other Americans. Thats selfish.
I will own being deceptive if you want to own being selfish. Let us know.
For the record, its monstrosity and monstrous.
🚨 BREAKING: Rep. Muesser has FLIPPED to a YES on the vote to advance the One Big Beautiful Bill
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) July 2, 2025
The amended OBBB now has the votes to proceed to a full floor vote.
This does NOT mean they have the votes to actually pass the bill. It’s still up in the air.
Some may vote to… pic.twitter.com/OvVsXNtMD3
The irony, calling others selfish for not going along with what you want.flown-the-coop said:There is no underlying assumption, you are being deceptive in saying so. I did not ask any individual here to say they are for it without any reservations or exceptions. But if you are a hard NO on the bill as some of these holdouts are, then yes you are in reality voting yes to tax increases. Again, its the reality of the current situation.Tea Party said:It is deceptive to ask someone if they want tax increases, when the underlying assumption of said question is if you say no then you must be in favor of this monsterosity of a bill. A person can want to avoid tax increases while also being against a single monsterous spending bill.flown-the-coop said:
That's great, but its not reality. You and others are just wishing in one hand and spitting in the other, and keep being angry one hand is full of spit and the other empty.
I understand what you want. Its just not reality. What I describe as a this or that choice is what you are being faced with. A no vote on the recon bill is a vote to end the tax cuts.
Its not deceptive to ask someone if they are prepared for the consequence of their position.
That is deceptive. If you can't understand that then we will have to agree to disagree. It's no wish, nor spit. Just reality that focusing on spending cuts as justification for a bad bill is gaslighting others who are rightfully calling out the pros and cons.
There are major spending cuts in the bill. There are major curtailments to current entitlements. You are just wanting your little solution at the expense of other Americans. Thats selfish.
I will own being deceptive if you want to own being selfish. Let us know.
For the record, its monstrosity and monstrous.
If anything, it's selfless being unhappy with the tax raises yet willing to suffer through them in the hopes that it brings more attention to the need for fiscal responsibility later. Too many people are ok with big spending as long as their team wins and they get a small shiny win to distract them from the bigger issue, Congress abstaining from their duties to fiscal responsibility.
That seems pretty selfish of them to want their tax cuts now in a monsterosity big spending bill so their team can win, even though it screws over the next generation and enables more can kicking politicians.
Learn about the Texas Nationalist Movement
https://tnm.me
https://tnm.me
If time travel was possible, I would want to hear speeches like this from the Founding Fathers. So much wisdom from great men, I wish I could hear it said in their voice.OPAG said:
I really think Ben Franklin's final speech before the ratification of the Constitution is in order here:
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/benjamin-franklin-closing-speech-at-the-constitutional-conventionQuote:
I confess that I do not entirely approve of this Constitution at present, but Sir, I am not sure I shall never approve it: For having lived long, I have experienced many Instances of being oblig'd, by better Information or fuller Consideration, to change Opinions even on important Subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow the more apt I am to doubt my own Judgment and to pay more Respect to the Judgment of others. Most Men indeed as well as most Sects in Religion, think themselves in Possession of all Truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far Error. . .
. . . In these Sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its Faults, if they are such: because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well administred; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administred for a Course of Years, and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other. I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution: For when you assemble a Number of Men to have the Advantage of their joint Wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those Men all their Prejudices, their Passions, their Errors of Opinion, their local Interests, and their selfish Views. From such an Assembly can a perfect Production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this System approaching so near to Perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our Enemies, who are waiting with Confidence to hear that our Councils are confounded, like those of the Builders of Babel, and that our States are on the Point of Separation, only to meet hereafter for the Purpose of cutting one another's Throats. Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure that it is not the best. The Opinions I have had of its Errors, I sacrifice to the Public Good. I have never whisper'd a Syllable of them abroad. Within these Walls they were born, & here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the Objections he has had to it, and endeavour to gain Partizans in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary Effects & great Advantages resulting naturally in our favour among foreign Nations, as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent Unanimity. Much of the Strength and Efficiency of any Government, in procuring & securing Happiness to the People depends on Opinion, on the general Opinion of the Goodness of that Government as well as of the Wisdom & Integrity of its Governors. I hope therefore that for our own Sakes, as a Part of the People, and for the Sake of our Posterity, we shall act heartily & unanimously in recommending this Constitution, wherever our Influence may extend, and turn our future Thoughts and Endeavours to the Means of having it well administred.
On the whole, Sir, I cannot help expressing a Wish, that every Member of the Convention, who may still have Objections to it, would with me on this Occasion doubt a little of his own Infallibility, and to make manifest our Unanimity, put his Name to this Instrument.
So apparently buried in the bill is a new rule that you can only deduct 90% of your gambling losses.
So you could win $10,000, lose $10,000 and come out owing money.
If enforced as written, it basically ends professional poker and sports betting.
So you could win $10,000, lose $10,000 and come out owing money.
If enforced as written, it basically ends professional poker and sports betting.
Proposition Joe said:
So apparently buried in the bill is a new rule that you can only deduct 90% of your gambling losses.
So you could win $10,000, lose $10,000 and come out owing money.
If enforced as written, it basically ends professional poker and sports betting.
What's the current deduction for gambling
You can deduct gambling losses up to the amount of winnings
What is the house gonna do with it?
The parlimentarian needs to be removed from her position.agracer said:i believe it was stripped out b/c of the "Byrd rule" or some procedural nonsense.kyledr04 said:
Still want tax free, no registration suppressors
The whole reason the NFA was deemed constitutional by the SC was due to the fact that it was, in fact, a tax. Now we have this ditz saying it's not a tax, so due to the Byrd rule, it can't be included in the bill. Well, if it ain't a tax, how the hell can it be considered a constitutionally compliant law?
Can someone elaborate on this here? This seems to get brushed aside because our process is so byzantine now.AggieMD95 said:J. Walter Weatherman said:
If there was a bill that was solely a continuation of the tax cuts they would happily vote for it. That's not what this is and there's no reason to jam thousands of other pet projects we can't afford into one stupidly named bill.
That would unfortunately continue to codify the Democrat spending bill reconciliation from last yr. No thanks
So, is it my understanding that each big CR Omnibus attempts to overwrite and replace previous CR's? Thus, if we actually did piece meal legislation (like we should) then anything passed in the past stays law. That makes sense; if you don't directly address a prior law it's not going anywhere.
In other words, we've created a monster because if we don't pass an omnibus that covers everything under the sun then prior bull**** by the other party gets preserved. Thus, the R's are doing this big CR to reset the baseline and cancel out all of Biden's crap?
Slicer97 said:The parlimentarian needs to be removed from her position.agracer said:i believe it was stripped out b/c of the "Byrd rule" or some procedural nonsense.kyledr04 said:
Still want tax free, no registration suppressors
The whole reason the NFA was deemed constitutional by the SC was due to the fact that it was, in fact, a tax. Now we have this ditz saying it's not a tax, so due to the Byrd rule, it can't be included in the bill. Well, if it ain't a tax, how the hell can it be considered a constitutionally compliant law?
I read somewhere that removing the tax could make it possible to challenge that again with SC.
The BBB is one of the strongest living arguments I've seen against omnibus legislation. Unless you read policy documents as a 20+ hour/week hobby, it's impossible to even track WTF is in this thing.
If they kill this, they kill the momentum and torpedo the economy. Best of luck with that approach ladies and gents. Pass it, continue the momentum and do more reconciliation down the road. This economy would take off
Looks like they are doing a test vote right now. 4 Rs right now are nay
Lol
Timberwolf said:
If they kill this, they kill the momentum and torpedo the economy. Best of luck with that approach ladies and gents. Pass it, continue the momentum and do more reconciliation down the road. This economy would take off
Didn't MAGA just spend the last 6 months telling us we needed to feel the pain with tariffs? If you want to boost the economy start there.
🚨 BREAKING: All Republicans have VOTED.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 3, 2025
The Big Beautiful Bill has the votes to PROCEED, 220-212. pic.twitter.com/mdyzwg9AWu
Why are these votes so late at night?
Oh hey it's another person who has never dealt with a tariff.AgDev01 said:Timberwolf said:
If they kill this, they kill the momentum and torpedo the economy. Best of luck with that approach ladies and gents. Pass it, continue the momentum and do more reconciliation down the road. This economy would take off
Didn't MAGA just spend the last 6 months telling us we needed to feel the pain with tariffs? If you want to boost the economy start there.
You sure?
🚨 UPDATE: Big Beautiful Bill DOES NOT CURRENTLY have the votes to proceed.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 3, 2025
We are at 202-215, with 14 Republicans yet to vote.
Somebody has to flip of the 4 NAY votes, and they cannot lose any more. pic.twitter.com/xJhDlmUtx9
Deputy Travis Junior said:
The BBB is one of the strongest living arguments I've seen against omnibus legislation. Unless you read policy documents as a 20+ hour/week hobby, it's impossible to even track WTF is in this thing.
That's because it's modification to existing legislation. No one except those on staff doing this full time have any idea how much money the original legislation spends and how much the change adds to, or subtracts from, that spending.
🚨 UPDATE: Congressman Mark Green votes YES to advance the Big Beautiful Bill.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 3, 2025
WHAT'S NEEDED:
✅ All remaining 9 Republicans
✅ At least ONE "NAY" to flip pic.twitter.com/ffam54PQ5i
.@SenateGOP jammed @HouseGOP, as expected.
— Rep. Victoria Spartz (@RepSpartz) July 2, 2025
Now, the House has 2 choices:
1. Improve this bill in Rules and send it back to the Senate, or
2. Don’t waste everyone’s time & just pass it as is.
I prefer the first one, but the second will work too. This bill has some good stuff.
Spartz will flip
Who?mikejones! said:🚨 UPDATE: Congressman Mark Green votes YES to advance the Big Beautiful Bill.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 3, 2025
WHAT'S NEEDED:
✅ All remaining 9 Republicans
✅ At least ONE "NAY" to flip pic.twitter.com/ffam54PQ5i
I'm watching Fox. Is this the test vote or the actual vote or maybe I'm misunderstanding what's going on? Earlier they called it a test vote
I think this is a vote to get to the vote
Who?mikejones! said:
I think this is a vote to get to the vote
Gotcha. Man I could never serve in the swamp. What a damn mess.
How many times does congress vote before actually voting on a bill? No one wonder nothing gets done.Who?mikejones! said:
I think this is a vote to get to the vote
All the gods, all the heavens, all the hells are within you. Joseph Campbell
My paycheck goes to my wife's shopping addiction, red bull and nicotine.
My paycheck goes to my wife's shopping addiction, red bull and nicotine.
One of these days we'll never have to see an Eric Daugherty tweet again, but it won't come soon enough
Featured Stories
See All
11:13
2h ago
653
LIVE from Davis Diamond: No. 15 Texas A&M vs. Louisiana Tech
by Kayla Gaither
26:55
19h ago
6.6k
Red-hot Dominguez, Griffen's career-high lead A&M to crucial win
by Olin Buchanan
11:13
1h ago
446
MaroonGlasses99
Basketball Attendance - Complex Issue - Season Ticket Holder
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
57