Skip to comments.

Omnibus bill: not an official Federal Budget.

Closed Grp: Donald J Trump, e pluribus unum ^ | March 23, 2018 | Ching Yan Wong, Adm

Posted on by UMCRevMom@aol.com

Ching Yan Wong, Adm wrote: "I just picked this up on another post

Wheatietoo and I spent hours yesterday providing links, researching the laws, the 1974 law and statutes . Do you know why the Omnibus is not going to get any notice Here it is..

It's not an official 'Federal Budget'. It's an Omnibus bill not a Budget He outsmarted them again Congress basically screwed themselves by not passing a Budget

Per the Constitution the President must adhere to a Budget set forth by Congress and direct the expenditures as provided therein.

This is another one of those big Porkulus Bills, like they gave Obama for 8 years. This is not a Budget..

An Omnibus Spending Bill may have some 'instructions' as to how the money will be spent but Obama ignored them. He spent the money, or didn't spend it, however he wanted to.

And Congress didn't do a thing about it! Because they couldn't..

I think our President observed how this happened, year after year. He is bound to realize that those 'appropriations' for different things in these Omnibus bills are merely 'suggestions'.

So like Obama, Pres Trump can spend this money on whatever he wants to. Or not spend it.

Planned Parenthood? What if our President decided to tell the Treas Dept to 'slow-walk' that money to Planned Parenthood until the Senate gets off their ass and confirms his appointees?

Sanctuary Cities? What if our President decided to 'slow-walk' that money too until those Sanctuary Cities assist ICE in rounding up criminal illegal aliens?

Splodey heads? From the Dems and the Enemedia? Why yes. There would be a colorful display of splodey heads.

But what could they do about it. Hah.

Our President could just say 'What! Congress should've passed a Budget.'

done finished research was done and it is so very humorous actually .our VSG..just said just give me money for the military and the wall put anything else you want in it and those goofballs did.

In this case, as per above .he doesn't have to spend a dime .because it is not a budget and even if it was researched .he could still spend as he please Congress appropriates .up to the President to spend it or not .as he pleases..

If anyone disagrees, I can go back and get the links and evidence, but if you just read yesterdays political thread Wheatietoo and I laid it all out for all Wheatietoo did most of the work and put together the consolidated update as per above .

Again, that is why Obama never had a Budget in his Presidency Congress did continual Omibus's and he just took the money .for 8 years and no one seems to know where it went



TOPICS:

Constitution/Conservatism

Government

News/Current Events

Politics/Elections

KEYWORDS:





To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

I so HOPE that this is true!!!



To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Just one question...is the $1.3 Trillion to be spent over the next 6 months, or is that figure annualized (so it would just be $650 B in 6 months?)



by 3 posted onby rfp1234 (I have already previewed this composition.)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Hopefully Trump will use the funded army to build the wall



by 4 posted onby rurgan (The Federal reserve r leftists raising rates to hurt Trump.Fed kept rates at 0 for all of obama yrs)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Well thats a relief. For a second I thought it was real money.



by 5 posted onby proust ("The rule is, jam tomorrow and jam yesterday, but never jam today.")

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

So Ill go ahead and put my anger and disgust on hold for a bit. See how this shakes out. It could end up being a great thing... or yet another disappointment from D.C.



by 6 posted onby Two Kids' Dad (((( Sessions couldn't find his own ass if Al Franken was grabbing it at the time ))))

To: rurgan

Trump just banned himself from building the wall. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/03/23/spending-bill-trump-banned-from-building-border-wall-with-prototypes-he-toured-in-san-diego/



by 7 posted onby proust ("The rule is, jam tomorrow and jam yesterday, but never jam today.")

To: rurgan

Border crossing fees would be an ideal funding source for the Wall. The rats and rinos failed to include that in the Omnipork Bill, but it's a good idea on which to campaign.



by 8 posted onby rfp1234 (I have already previewed this composition.)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com



Unfortunately, according to our own LS, it's not true: Unfortunately, according to our own LS, it's not true:

1) There have been some crazy theories going around so let's look at what is actual law. 2) Congress has a two-step program for spending money. Technically, the President doesn't spend anything. 3) First, there is the "Authorization" process. The House, then the Senate . . . 3) contd: . . . AUTHORIZE every department and agency to spend up to a certain amount of money. Think of this as giving your kid permission to spend the money in his piggy bank. 4) The APPROPRIATIONS process then actually allocates how much of that authorized $ can be spent. 5) So, you "authorize" your kid to spend $10 . . . but there is nothing in the piggy bank to spend. Then you put in $5 that you have "appropriated." He still can only spend $5, because that's all that has been appropriated. 6) Departments turn in their budgets yearly. 6) contd. Typically, Congress does what's called "baseline budgeting," wherein they assume a department starts with LAST year's budget #s, and Congress works up from there. (another reason for constant deficits). 7) "Zero-based" budgeting would require a dept be reviewed . . . 7) contd. . . . annually with new hearings. Actually, as much as we hate "baseline," it would be almost impossible to run any government of any size on "zero." But a five-year zeroing out would be reasonable. 8) So, DoD gets its budget: 8) contd. You have $xm for tanks, $ym for planes, $zm for pay. DoD CANNOT willy-nilly just "move" money from tanks to planes. That hasn't been AUTHORIZED. 9) You say to your kid, "Sure, spend $5 on a movie ticket." But you didn't authorize spending $5 on candy. 10) Sometimes, authorization/appropriation is conditional upon meeting conditions set by Congress. Don't meet the conditions? Don't get the money. 11) This COULD be the basis for, if Congress had a spine the basis to deny virtually ALL federal funding to "sanctuary cities." 12) It has been the basis on which the feds get involved in ALL education: don't accept our rules on transgenders? No $$. 13) Anyway, the point is, Trump CANNOT simply "take" money from DoD and apply it to the Wall. The Army Corps of Engineers is funded, and they have 13) contd. already submitted their list of projects/payroll for which money is authorized. If ANY of that is spent any other way, Congress simply would not APPROPRIATE any further of the AUTHORIZED money til Army CoE straightened up. 14) Further, Richard Nixon thought he had a way to contain spending on what he thought was extravagant stuff in 1973. He "impounded" the AUTHORIZED and APPROPRIATED money, but wouldn't spend it. it sat there. 15) Nixon cited Truman, Ike, JFK, and Johnson, all of whom impounded funds. However, in each case they did so on the basis of "economy and efficiency." Nixon impounded money on grounds that in the future it would raise taxes. Likely, but not provable. 16) Further, it was subsequently concluded by courts that the illegal acts by Truman, Ike, JFK, and LBJ were not precedent for another illegal act. 17) In other words, just cuz Zero "got away with it" once or twice doesn't make it legal precedent. 18) Nor would it make it likely Trump, with a semi-hostile congress, could get away with it. 19) There is no Constitutional wiggle room for Trump to arbitrarily build the wall. 20) Actually, that's a good thing. If an when it's built, it will be on firm Constitutional and legal foundation as well as on its physical foundation., 21) And remember, the Founders took all these precautions to empower the LEGISLATURE to control all spending. 22) We have ourselves, the voters, to blame for the legislature that has taken full advantage of its Constitutional powers. 23) Not until we have people in there who genuinely think like us will we have change.

https://twitter.com/LarrySchweikart/status/977319120965287937







by 9 posted onby BlessedBeGod (To restore all things in Christ~~Appeasing evil is cowardice~~Francis is temporary. Hell is forever.)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Hopefully someone in the know may comment. In the meantime hope this idea gets used; Where’s the commercial or video showing a toddler happily playing suddenly being demanded to pay its thousands of dollars share of the national debt ? When the toddler breaks into screaming” HOW COULD THEY DO THIS TO ME ???” in tears ?

http://www.theusmat.com/index.htm



by 10 posted onby mosesdapoet (Mosesdapoet aka L.J.Keslin another gem posted in the wilderness)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

It would be helpful if there were links to the research points, so we could check it out. Without those, and only a link to a closed facebook group, this thread is not valuable., IMO.



To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Bookmark I’ll also add on what Larry Elder was saying, Okay, most people here want small government, etc. Well, if that is what people wanted, they should have elected Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, maybe Ben Carson. But Trump did not run as a fiscal conservative, he ran as a populist, we knew at least, he wanted to increase the infrastructure with a big spending project. People get what they voted for. If folks wanted other, they needed to elect Rand Paul or something. I don’t think Trump is betraying us ideologically.



To: proust

I think he could still start to build it, if the NSC and DHS deem it to be necessary for national security.



by 13 posted onby rfp1234 (I have already previewed this composition.)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

I’m willing to give Trump a hold on this.

For a while

As for the Republican “congresscritters”, I loathe, despise, sh*t upon, and wish a very long and hard demise upon their slimy bottom dwelling bodies.

Repubs, you are living on borrowed time. You give this to the dimbulbs and following the inevitable CW-II, you will be treated as if you are one of them.

Because you are dumbasses. Turncoat dumbasses. Guillotine worthy dumbasses.



To: UMCRevMom@aol.com





by 15 posted onby McGruff (It's time to investigate the investigators)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Hope this is what happens



by 16 posted onby Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)

To: BlessedBeGod

Nice summary



by 17 posted onby Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Some very good points!! I have more TRUST and FAITH in President Trump than I do in virtually any member of the Congressional Republicant Party Pukes. I will stand with him and be prepared to piss on the rest of those worthless Congresscritters.



by 18 posted onby Howie66 ("Tone down the tagline please." - Admin Moderator)

To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

Just spin and BS. An outrage any way you look at it.



To: UMCRevMom@aol.com

It's not an official 'Federal Budget'. It's an Omnibus bill not a Budget Wrong. It's a barrel of rotting, stinking pork. Much of it placed there by the GOPe.



by 20 posted onby llevrok (DACA = Democrats Against Citizen Americans)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson