

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The House gave President Obama the budget he asked for Thursday, voting 233-196 for the $3.6 trillion plan that includes a deficit of $1.2 trillion.
No Republicans backed the budget plan, which ramps up domestic spending, increases taxes on the wealthy and funds Obama's ambitious health care, energy and education proposals. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was not apologizing for the breakdown of bipartisanship.
"The American people want us to find our common ground where we can, but they did not send us here to split the difference," Pelosi said. "They want real change, and we have come here to make a difference."
While the budget was dismissed as a "road map to disaster" by House Republican leader John Boehner, of Ohio, it also disappointed liberals who wanted to see less defense spending and more investment in economic and social renewal at home.
After progressive alternatives advanced by California Democrats Barbara Lee and members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Lynn Woolsey and members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus were dismissed by margins of 318-113 and 348-84, respectively, the House rejected Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan's tax-cuts-for-the-rich plan on a 293-137 split. (Thirty-eight Republicans, 21 percent of the party's House caucus, joined 255 Democrats in voting "no" on Ryan's plan.)
In the final vote on the budget, all 233 supporters of the budget were Democrats.
Of the 196 "nays," 176 came from Republicans and twenty from Democrats.
Most of the dissenting Democrats were southern and western members of the conservative "Blue Dog" grouping. But one of the House's most progressive members, Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich, also voted "no."
Said Kucinich: This budget is a statement of principles for the upcoming year, and I cannot accept it in its entirety. I will not vote for a budget that ties military spending to the operational funding of our government. This year, the budget includes $130 billion for war funding. The Washington Post reports today another 10,000 troops may be sent to Afghanistan, bringing our total number of troops there to as much as 78,000 by 2010 -- a more than 100% increase from today's troop levels. This budget is a plan that authorizes the expansion of the war. I simply cannot endorse a budget or a plan that sends more of our brave men and women to Afghanistan, a conflict which has the potential to become this generation's Vietnam."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The House gave President Obama the budget he asked for Thursday, voting 233-196 for the $3.6 trillion plan that includes a deficit of $1.2 trillion.
No Republicans backed the budget plan, which ramps up domestic spending, increases taxes on the wealthy and funds Obama's ambitious health care, energy and education proposals. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was not apologizing for the breakdown of bipartisanship.
"The American people want us to find our common ground where we can, but they did not send us here to split the difference," Pelosi said. "They want real change, and we have come here to make a difference."
While the budget was dismissed as a "road map to disaster" by House Republican leader John Boehner, of Ohio, it also disappointed liberals who wanted to see less defense spending and more investment in economic and social renewal at home.
After progressive alternatives advanced by California Democrats Barbara Lee and members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Lynn Woolsey and members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus were dismissed by margins of 318-113 and 348-84, respectively, the House rejected Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan's tax-cuts-for-the-rich plan on a 293-137 split. (Thirty-eight Republicans, 21 percent of the party's House caucus, joined 255 Democrats in voting "no" on Ryan's plan.)
In the final vote on the budget, all 233 supporters of the budget were Democrats.
Of the 196 "nays," 176 came from Republicans and twenty from Democrats.
Most of the dissenting Democrats were southern and western members of the conservative "Blue Dog" grouping. But one of the House's most progressive members, Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich, also voted "no."
Said Kucinich: This budget is a statement of principles for the upcoming year, and I cannot accept it in its entirety. I will not vote for a budget that ties military spending to the operational funding of our government. This year, the budget includes $130 billion for war funding. The Washington Post reports today another 10,000 troops may be sent to Afghanistan, bringing our total number of troops there to as much as 78,000 by 2010 -- a more than 100% increase from today's troop levels. This budget is a plan that authorizes the expansion of the war. I simply cannot endorse a budget or a plan that sends more of our brave men and women to Afghanistan, a conflict which has the potential to become this generation's Vietnam."
The House gave President Obama the budget he asked for Thursday, voting 233-196 for the $3.6 trillion plan that includes a deficit of $1.2 trillion.
No Republicans backed the budget plan, which ramps up domestic spending, increases taxes on the wealthy and funds Obama's ambitious health care, energy and education proposals. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was not apologizing for the breakdown of bipartisanship.
"The American people want us to find our common ground where we can, but they did not send us here to split the difference," Pelosi said. "They want real change, and we have come here to make a difference."
While the budget was dismissed as a "road map to disaster" by House Republican leader John Boehner, of Ohio, it also disappointed liberals who wanted to see less defense spending and more investment in economic and social renewal at home.
After progressive alternatives advanced by California Democrats Barbara Lee and members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Lynn Woolsey and members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus were dismissed by margins of 318-113 and 348-84, respectively, the House rejected Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan's tax-cuts-for-the-rich plan on a 293-137 split. (Thirty-eight Republicans, 21 percent of the party's House caucus, joined 255 Democrats in voting "no" on Ryan's plan.)
In the final vote on the budget, all 233 supporters of the budget were Democrats.
Of the 196 "nays," 176 came from Republicans and twenty from Democrats.
Most of the dissenting Democrats were southern and western members of the conservative "Blue Dog" grouping. But one of the House's most progressive members, Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich, also voted "no."
Said Kucinich: This budget is a statement of principles for the upcoming year, and I cannot accept it in its entirety. I will not vote for a budget that ties military spending to the operational funding of our government. This year, the budget includes $130 billion for war funding. The Washington Post reports today another 10,000 troops may be sent to Afghanistan, bringing our total number of troops there to as much as 78,000 by 2010 -- a more than 100% increase from today's troop levels. This budget is a plan that authorizes the expansion of the war. I simply cannot endorse a budget or a plan that sends more of our brave men and women to Afghanistan, a conflict which has the potential to become this generation's Vietnam."