NYT: Senate G.O.P. Blocks Tight Budget Rule (50-50 tie vote)

Senate G.O.P. Blocks Tight Budget Rule
By CARL HULSE
Published: March 15, 2006


WASHINGTON, March 14 — Senate Republicans on Tuesday narrowly defeated an effort to impose budget rules that would make it harder to increase spending or cut taxes, a move that critics said that showed Republicans were posturing in their calls for greater fiscal restraint.

In the first of several politically charged budget and spending issues confronting Congress this week, the Senate rejected on a 50-to-50 tie a proposal to restore what are known as "pay-go" rules, a requirement that tax cuts and some new spending be approved by 60 votes or offset by budget savings or revenue increases.

Democrats and a handful of Republican allies said that the added discipline was essential to getting a handle on the mounting federal debt and that the rules had been instrumental in reducing red ink before they were allowed to lapse in 2002.

"For those who say they are fiscally responsible, here is your chance," said Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, senior Democrat on the Budget Committee. "You are going to be able to prove with one vote whether you are serious about doing something about these runaway debts and runaway deficits or whether it is all talk."

But Republicans said the push to add the rules to the budget was a back-door effort to make it harder to extend President Bush's tax cuts....


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/15/politics/15spend.html

"The proposals died on the tie vote, and since Republican leaders wanted that result, there was no reason to call in Vice President Dick Cheney to break the tie."

It seems to me that the GOP just loves to play the 'victim' card. They don't actually want to do anything, just whine, bitch, and moan. It's becoming more and more apparent that the only thing the GOP wants to accomplish is whip up the base for fundraising.

to reign in the credit card spending policies.

What about, "impose rulse that would make it harder to increase spending" doesn't imply fiscal restraint?