How do the democrats defend their failure to have a budget?
The failure of the congress to engage in a serious debate about a budget is, as Hinderocker says, a scandal. I undersatnd the Republican/House position: Here's a budget, let's have a debate. Can someone explain the Democratic/Senate position that the continuing resolutions are a satisfactory substitute? I don't mean an explanation that says "they are idiots and partisan dolts". I believe these are smart people, they must have a way that they have rationalized this position. I'd love to understand what it is so that I could attack the rationalization.
Answer by cuppajoe
As near as I can tell, they have made no effort to defend it. It is roundly ignored by all, just try to find any mention in the news media. And the Republicans have also not pressed the point and forced the news media to cover it. A lot of talk here and mention in National Review and talk radio, but unless I have missed it, even Paul Ryan does not mention it very much. It does not seem to make much impression on anyone.
Answer by MJBubba
The Democrats have not wanted a new budget for three years, which is why no budget has passed. Congress adopted "baseline budgeting" a long time ago. It builds in an automatic increase for every line in the budget, so that if no new budget is passed, there is an automatic escalation in budget and then the old budget just gets carried forward. I think the current baseline is something outrageous, on the order of a seven percent increase every year. Until Republicans have the votes to pass a budget that reduces this spending, the Democrats are entirely happy with this situation.