(AP) WASHINGTON The nation's budget deficit has topped $1 trillion for a third straight year, adding pressure on Congress and the White House to make more progress a long-term plan to shrink the growing imbalance.
The Treasury Department said Wednesday that the deficit through July totals $1.1 trillion. Three years ago, that would have been a record high for the full year.
This year's deficit is on pace to exceed last year's imbalance of $1.29 trillion but fall short of the record $1.41 trillion set in 2009.
For the first 10 months of the budget year, spending has risen 2.4 percent while revenue has climbed 8 percent. That's a sign that more people are working and paying taxes, although unemployment remains high at 9.1 percent.
Record deficits have forced President Barack Obama and Congress to create a 12-member committee of lawmakers tasked with reducing the imbalance over the next decade by $1.2 trillion. If the panel splits and cannot agree on a plan, severe across-the-board spending cuts would go into effect automatically.
The committee was a key part of a deal forged last week that allowed the government to boost its borrowing limit. But the deal fell short of the $4 trillion in cuts that Standard & Poor's said was needed to achieve a credible deficit plan. As a result, S&P downgraded the U.S. government's credit from AAA to AA+.
The deficits prompted a political backlash that allowed Republicans to take control of the House in last year's elections. While both parties say they are committed to reducing the deficits, Republicans are opposed to tax increases and Democrats are fighting to protect entitlement programs, such as Social Security and Medicare from big cuts.
Before 2009, the deficit had never come close to $1 trillion in a single year. The soaring deficits have reflected increased government spending in response to a deep recession plus a loss of tax revenues as millions of people lost their jobs.
The government last recorded a budget surplus in 2001, when revenues were $127 billion greater than spending. The surpluses were expected to total $5.6 trillion over the next decade.
But the country was back in the red by 2002. The deficit grew after President George W. Bush won approval for broad tax cuts and launched the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 2008, Bush's last full year in office, the deficit reached $454.8 billion, a record at that time. And when the economy plunged into a deep recession, the yearly imbalance topped $1 trillion.
Higher spending on unemployment insurance and food stamps, and a sharp contraction in tax revenues, widened the deficit. And it grew even more after the Obama administration backed a $787 billion stimulus program to boost the economy.
The deficit also worsened after Obama and congressional Republicans agreed to extend Bush's tax cuts for two more years.
(KUNA) - President Barack B.O. Obama met with industry officials on Tuesday to discuss the first-of-their-kind fuel efficiency and greenhouse-gas pollution standards for work trucks, buses and other heavy-duty vehicles. These are designed, of course, to make us more competetive. A stimulus like this to industry should create thousands of jobs...
The White House meeting marked the administration's announcement of the standards, which will save American businesses that operate and own these commercial vehicles approximately 50 billion dollars in fuel costs over the life of the program, according to the White House. The "life of the program" stretches from today to infinity. When the Archangel Gabriel shows up to honk the Last Trumpet it will be in a government-approved, fuel-efficient chariot.
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the standards in close coordination with the companies that met with Obama, as well as other stakeholders, following requests from companies to develop the program. "What companies?"
"Diff'rent companies!"
The cost savings for American businesses are on top of the 1.7 trillion dollars that American families will save at the pump from the fuel-efficiency standards announced by the administration for cars and light-duty trucks, including the model year 2017-2025 agreement announced by the President last month, the White House announcement said. Right. The fuel's gonna cost a lot more, but cars'll go further on it. You're sure to get somewhere around 300 miles out of a tank...
"While we were working to improve the efficiency of cars and light-duty trucks, something interesting happened," Obama said. "We started getting letters asking that we do the same for medium and heavy-duty trucks. They were from the people who build, buy and drive these trucks. And today, I am proud to have the support of these companies as we announce the first-ever national policy to increase fuel efficiency and decrease greenhouse gas pollution from medium-and heavy-duty trucks."
Under the comprehensive new national program, trucks and buses built in 2014 through 2018 will reduce oil consumption by a projected 530 million barrels and greenhouse gas pollution by approximately 270 million metric tons. The program - which relies heavily on off-the-shelf technologies - was developed in coordination with truck and engine manufacturers, fleet owners, the state of Caliphornia, environmental groups and other stakeholders.
The DOT/EPA program will include a range of targets specific to the diverse vehicle types and purposes. Vehicles are divided into three major categories: combination tractors (semi-trucks), heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocational vehicles (like transit buses and refuse trucks). Within each of those categories, even more specific targets are laid out based on the design and purpose of the vehicle.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
On the surfac a GOOD bill, subsurface aother story alltogether, New trucks will be legislated OFF the highway, FORCING replacement.
All together a BAD BILL.Designed to create sales through Legislation, not need.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
08/10/2011 0:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Archangel Gabriel" > Uh, uh, MADONNA'S "LIKE A PRAYER" VIDEO ['cept no Wings]???
gut nuthin.
D **** NGED ARCHANGELS = EX-POTUS GEORGE
"HERBIE" BUSH 1 [Gulf War] = ALWAYS DRAWING "LINES IN THE SAND"!
Said it then, will say it now in 2011 = LESS SAND, MORE MADONNA IN SKIVVIES!
Did my math go stupid, or is this a massive bill to be passed down, on gov rules, to those who pay for services?
Does it save, fuel or pollution-wise, to ship a flat of hay bales 1/3 across the country in one trip on a rig with Horsepower, or 3 rigs of the same capacity?
And I'm gonna stop right there. Who is going to make the parts, I understand Assembled in America, but Made in America?
EPA don't want no talk talk talk
All it want
Bang bang bang.
#7
Yep. No question about it. As a Canadian, I'd rather have our local bus company overpay for rickety, diesel-guzzling A-MER-I-CAN buses than the nice, sleek, fuel-efficient Euro-trams. Tell me something, what dillusionary planet our you people living on?
Posted by: Shakey Steve ||
08/10/2011 6:46 Comments ||
Top||
#8
"was developed in coordination with truck and engine manufacturers, fleet owners, the state of California, environmental groups and other stakeholders". Another con job. I don't believe a word of it. Always claims savings but we will never see it. South of the boarder chaps will just drive on by exempt. Just mentioning California tells the story. Fire trucks, military, this is so invasive. Many will retire, quit as independents. Only large fleets will make it with government wavers and bailouts. DOT and EPA will be the ones who will get all the jobs. When has this administration been accurate on anything. More job losses I guarantee. Companies and people are being bled dry now. Who will have the resources to replace equipment because everything will cost so much more. Government is coming at us from every direction. Pay per mile, tolls, registration fees, insurance, fuel taxes, payroll taxes and fines galore. I just got out business because I saw this coming but it wasn't the main reason. Many are just walking away. The government is killing enterprise.
#9
Ops Of. This just in "9,450 fewer restaurants in the U.S. than there were last year". This is just restaurants. I shutter to think how bad its been for others. Some chains but mostly independents. I'll bet you they held out as long as they could. It's their "baby". So they are dead broke in most cases.Bankruptcy protection so suppliers or creditors have loss a bundle.
#10
Tell me something, what dillusionary planet our you people living on?
Proof that the left lives in an alternate universe. In 1970 there were 200 million Americans, today there are 300 million and the air and water are cleaner than they were in 1970. The standards were met and exceeded only to have the bureaucrats continuously jack up the standards to justify their existence.
#11
We will use less fuel, pay more for it, and pay more for the vehicles with less payload. You cannot legislate the laws of physics.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
08/10/2011 8:31 Comments ||
Top||
#12
and less safe
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/10/2011 8:45 Comments ||
Top||
#13
This is classic rent-seeking by the big truck companies so that they can put the independents out of business, dressed up as 'environmental policy'.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/10/2011 9:15 Comments ||
Top||
#14
President Barack B.O. Obama met with industry officials on Tuesday to discuss the first-of-their-kind fuel efficiency and greenhouse-gas pollution standards for work trucks, buses and other heavy-duty vehicles.
The standards will be accompanied by an increase in the resumption of oil operations in the Gulf, exploration in the U.S., and the drilling for new oil and gas in the U.S. to make us energy independent and increase jobs.
Scratch the last paragraph. Sorry, I was just engaging in a fantasy this a.m.
Cannot we not have honest impact statement required for the EPA (just as they require for the public) and other Federal agencies before they are allowed to regulate anything? The bureaucracy operates as shadow government that forces huge costs on the States and the public with little oversight. They usurp the power of the other branches of government.
#18
The bureaucracy operates as shadow government that forces huge costs on the States and the public with little oversight. They usurp the power of the other branches of government. Congress is FULLY complicit in this 'usurpation.' A simple modification to the Clean Air act saying the EPA may not regulate CO2 emissions would more than suffice. It won't happen.
#21
Yes, but only through government legislation (e.g. The Clean Air Act). The point is not that there hasn't been improvements in fuel efficiencies in American vehicles, but more to the point that your competitors (Euro and Asia) are making more efficient (and, frankly, higher quality) vehicles than you. Do you not want to sell your shit outside the US?? I guess Obama does, but you dinos don't...Enjoy your 10 Trillion and counting...
Posted by: Shakey Steve ||
08/10/2011 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Congrats! We'll be thinking of you when gas is 8 bucks a gallon...
Posted by: Shakey Steve ||
08/10/2011 12:37 Comments ||
Top||
#23
...and 0bummer wonders why businesses aren't hiring.
Here's just one more reason!
#24
Well, it seems to me that if there is such a thing as a sleek, fuel efficient EUROTRAM that can compete in a real world market on the basis of miles-per-dollar then Americans would be buying them and using them. It's called competition in the free market...as opposed to central government planning of the entire economy as practiced with such devastating results in the USSR and so admired by certain Canadian and American liberal loonies.
With the price of fuel what it is, the companies that can build the most fuel efficient, capable and dependable vehicles will sell them as has Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, etc. Companies that produce rickety, diesel guzzling vehicles will fall by the wayside...er, that is, unless the government bails them and their union workers out.
#25
...but more to the point that your competitors (Euro and Asia) are making more efficient (and, frankly, higher quality) vehicles than you
You do know that Hondas, Toyotas, and Nissens are also built in the United States? And that some of those rubbish 'American' cars are actually built in Windsor Ont. Well at least they've been classified as American built for some reason that only a properly bought and sold politician could write into the laws and regulations.
#26
If they want to sell vehicles outside the US, they could build a line without needing a law.
You cannot put a heavy load onto a lightweight underpowered truck/tractor, not only would it be dangerous to decelerate but will lift the front axle smokey.
Ever use a light car on snow/ice? Ever needed a bit of oommph to escape that poor merge situation?
So, waivers for those who can petition for them. Big Auto gets money from the gov to develop the next generation of volts. IIUC all the auto has to do is bring the average fuel efficiency of their available product line up to this minimum so we get some busy work for unions, which will increase the payroll of the company, which will overprice those vechicles they would export overseas....or just have them built overseas and keep the money over there. The cost is labor and if the employer cannot tailor the workforce as necessary the business begins to lose money by paying multiple people for a single seat, and in this case at premium wages and benifits. People overseas love American cars, seen them, sometimes they have troubles fitting in the road, but the drivers always have big ol shiteating grins on their faces. Problem is they are a luxury good because by the time it is built (US COGS + % profit) and transported, then taxed by the receiving company, what was alread expensive compared with the citron or moped or taxi/PT becomes fucking rediculous.
What we should have is the choice to select what is appropriate. A commuter in SoCal may want that lightweight fuel efficient car. A commuter on I-70 may find that light weight not just a hassle but boucoup dangerous in a typical 40 mph gusting crosswind. A cowboy hauling a horse trailor is going to want that extra weight and power. Universities will want those quiet efficient buses which need only to trolly little students from campus to coffee dive. If all that makes sense, then why the law, the arguement makes itself without a government jockey with a whip stick.
Furthermore, the current stock of these lightweight vehicles are more dangerous not only because of their lack of weight, but because the lightweight alloys they are using a quickly becoming too difficult for rescue workers to cut especially as they are becoming more and more surrounded with air bag bombs.
As said, this is just salesmanship. You got sold fool.
#27
Day after day there is more scientific evidence that "Anthropogenic Global Warming" is a fraud, and that CO2 is not causing a rise in temperature. Day after day the OBumble administration keeps shoving "green" (I.E., Watermelon) laws down our throats. There WILL be a day of reckoning, and when that day comes, a lot of "greens" will be hanged, shot, run down, or driven into the ground by the rest of us that are tired of their sh$$.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/10/2011 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#28
I drive a Smart Car to work and back. I get about 44mpg and on windy days I have to keep both hands on the steering wheel to keep in in one lane. The jury is still out on how it will do in snow but it held up very well against a deer. It won't, however, pull my two horses over the mountain to the 4-lane highway. It won't even pull them out of the barnyard.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
08/10/2011 14:52 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Funny, this piece of shit asshole troll wants to blame US for the inefficiencies of domestic vehicles when it's the EPA that's more or less kept _functional_ fuel efficient vehicles off the market by creating regulations that mean anything with high enough combustion temperatures to be sufficiently fuel-efficient are basically illegal here.
The last two generations of European economy diesel cars were never marketed in the US because they couldn't be sold in CA, and the Zero Administration decided to make CA's smog abatement rules nationwide.
He seems to enjoy blaming the people who actually have to do physical work for everything that goes wrong and credits the writers of laws for everything that goes right.
It's just bullshit.
I expect all this shit to never really get implemented because the US is going to go into receivership anyway.
#30
If we are going to legislate fixes by just making up numbers, why don't we simply change the laws of thermodynamics? That's the *real* problem. I blame the Carnot Cycle. And George Bush. And of course, the Juice.
#31
19 mpg in a 2010 Ford Explorer, but I avoid the lead foot on the brakes and the gas. 20 mpg on a recent road trip, at 75 mph+, most of the way.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/10/2011 19:08 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Regarding trucks, I imagine you'll see a massive movement of the entire trucking industry to the Mexican side of the border where the standards are a bit more lax. NAFTA will allow those same trucks to go anywhere they need to go. Yeah Mexico is a warzone but the trucks only need to be registered there, they don't actually need to spend much time there.
Regarding cars, you remove all the safety requirements forced into the cars in the last thirty years you can make the new fuel-standards fairly easily. If not, well they are going to have to use lighter, stronger metals for their frames. Smart Car is a giant roll-cage surrounding a toy. Its actually supposed to be safe. Do that and you can probably make the rest of the car out of tin foil or something else (Mylar?) : http://broadbandsports.com/node/28635
Buses, well a lot are electric or propane anyway. School buses should all go biodiesel and reuse the cooking oil from the cafeteria and cooking class or something. Perhaps give McDonald's some kind of incentive to donate their cooking oil. Really don't know about busses.
#33
Regarding trucks, I imagine you'll see a massive movement of the entire trucking industry to the Mexican side of the border where the standards are a bit more lax. NAFTA will allow those same trucks to go anywhere they need to go. Yeah Mexico is a warzone but the trucks only need to be registered there, they don't actually need to spend much time there.
To me that's yet another reason to ditch NAFTA. AND put in place tariffs. If the bastards are going to legislate poverty for those of us who actually DO stuff by exporting Yet Another Goddamn Industry, let's close all the free trade loopholes that let them keep THEIR wealth, and we can all eat fucking dirt TOGETHER, EQUALLY.
Let's see if they're still in the mood to eat dirt for the precious environment if THEIR children will have to do it too.
Mr. Boehner selected Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, who is Congress's chief tax-writer; Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, who is chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee; and Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, who is chairman of the House Republican Conference.
Also Wednesday, Senate Republicans named their three members: Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, and freshman Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio and Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, who both have long records of service in the House and, in Mr. Portman's case, as President George W. Bush's budget director.
Democrats in Wisconsin fell short of their goal of capturing control of the state Senate and blunting the agenda of Governor Scott Walker when they failed to oust three Republicans in six recall elections.
Republican incumbents Alberta Darling, Sheila Harsdorf, Luther Olsen and Robert Cowles survived yesterdays recalls, according to vote tallies by the Associated Press. Democrats took two seats, cutting the Republican margin in the Senate to 17-16. Jennifer Shilling defeated Senator Dan Kapanke and Jessica King beat Senator Randy Hopper, AP said.
The results represent a victory for Walker, 43, who used his legislative majorities to place collective-bargaining curbs on most public employee unions in March, sparking weeks of protests. The Aug. 16 recall election of two Democrat senators will now have no bearing on control of the chamber.
The recall elections for the state legislative seats drew national attention and a projected $40 million in campaign spending from Republican and Democratic support groups in a fight that was viewed as the first battle of the 2012 election season.
The votes were the climax of months of political fighting in Wisconsin, sparked by Walkers collective-bargaining bill, which he signed into law March 11.
Recall efforts by Democrats began as Walker used Republican majorities in the Legislature to push through the union curbs. Republicans retaliated with ouster efforts against some of the 14 Democrats who fled the state in February in an unsuccessful effort to block a vote on Walkers plan.
Outside Spending
The record number of recall elections spurred national Republican and Democratic interest groups -- most from outside the state -- to spend tens of millions of dollars in television and radio ads that mirrored the nations political divisions.
Republican groups saw the votes as an attack on Walker and a potential threat to his fiscally conservative policies and efforts to rein in the influence of public-employee unions. Democratic groups and organized labor, a traditional ally, viewed the collective-bargaining curbs as a political assault on unions that could spread nationally.
Political interest groups registered with the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, the states elections bureau, reported $14.2 million in spending as of this week. At least $14 million in additional money has come from unregistered groups for television ads and other efforts, said Michael Buelow, research director for the nonpartisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks campaign spending.
Labor Groups
The biggest contributors for Democrats were We Are Wisconsin, a coalition of labor groups led by the AFL-CIO, and the Greater Wisconsin Committee. The leading Republican support groups were the Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity.
Voter turnout in the Milwaukee suburb of Glendale was heavier than expected, said Susanne Hanaman, the city clerk. Voting in off-year special elections is normally light, election officials said. Precincts in Milwaukee suburbs reported turnout of 50 percent or higher.
Some recall supporters said the vote was a warm-up for an ouster vote of Walker, who legally cant be recalled until he has been in office for one year.
#1
Then I guess I pay a hamburger Tuesday for a hamburger today; el prez sayz no partisinship so despite his constituant demonizing he will have to ketchup on currant tv talking points.
#6
Looks like Baucus and Kerry from Finance, Murray from Budget and Appropriations. Why not Conrad and Inoue, the actual chairmen of those two committees? Kerry's *on* Finance, but his big Senate thing has always been Foreign Affairs, and his extremely limited intelligence and knowledge has mostly been applied in that direction. As others have pointed out, Murray's a nonentity, not really a fire-breather nor a notable centrist or pragmatist like Tester, Baucus, or Conrad.
Kerry and Murray are basically clock-punchers on the relevant committees, there to make up the numbers for the majority party when it comes to a vote.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/10/2011 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Wonder if any Tea Party members will be appointed from the House? They have been already demonized by Kerry.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
