Blunt claimed he inherited a budget that was in the red, made tough decisions and turned it around. Since we are constitutionally bound to have a balanced budget in MO, what does he mean that he inherited a budget in the red? There’s always been a balanced budget in MO. Way to re-write history. This time it’s not going to stick.

He also claimed that in 2004 Missouri was losing jobs, but on the contrary Missouri was actually gaining jobs at a rate greater than at any point during his administration. Need proof? Check the numbers for yourself from the Bureau of Labor Statistics at bls.gov.

Anyone notice that the coverage (supplied by the House video feed) is only showing Republicans clapping and standing? Are the Democrats even in the room? Why aren’t they showing the whole chamber?

Common Sense you are lacking in that department. The budget was “balanced” under the Holden regime by using one time settlements courtesy of the tobacco settlement payments and a settlement with SBC. Since these were one time payments, the only way to balance the budget was to cut spending or raise taxes and Blunt chose the former. Good for him!!!

Now I haven’t brushed up on my rhetoric, but can a budget be “more balanced”?

Joke, by the way.

Amazedbythelunacy it seems that you are practicing what you preach. The Constitution of the State of Missouri requires a balanced budget. Holden wanted to use the rainy day fund and the legislature refused to release the money. Blunt has not added a single dollar to education, he has simply funded education to the same level that it was funded during Carnahan’s last year as Governor. The fact that Blunt continues to say that he inherited a Budget deficit is an outright lie. Most Missourians aren’t smart enough to know that the Constitution requires a balanced budget from the funding sources received that year, which is exactly what Holden did.

The Constitution DOES require a balanced budget, but Holden withheld and otherwise manipulated the budget process by using a shell game with one-time federal dollars, and he knew that once the federal money dried up, the budget would be severely underfunded, which would have led to a tax increase. This whole thing was orchestrated by his administration.

What boggles my mind is the fact that the dems continue to try to play the “citizens who were thrown to the streets without health insurance” card. Anybody who actually has followed this issue realizes that those who were removed from the rolls were found to have not qualified in the first place. They were all welcome to re-apply for coverage, but only a few did, and those who met the eligibility requirements were provided with coverage.

Those that weren’t STILL don’t meet the requirements. For anyone to demagogue this issue is nothing more than pure politics, and they’re intentionally trying to mislead the public.

Jim, “Bah, humbug! Let them starve and we’ll thus be rid of the excess population!”

If you tell a Big Lie often enough, people will start believing it! No, Jim they were thrown off the rolls as the legislture both terminate Medicaid, AND reduced the eligibility requirements to qualify throwing thousands into uninsured chaos.

People will die as a result.

Babies will not be able to get pre-natal and infant care and mothers will more likely choose to abort. Democrats tried to stop this by re-establishing the old guidleines if abortions went up but, the GOP House voted it down, including all of our still serving members in the St. lous Archdiocese.

Seniors and disabled will be forced out of their homes and into nursing homes because its not cost effective for the new scheme set up to create a bonanza for insurers to care for them.

“Healthcare advocates” will take over the system where they (as yet undetermined as to what one is) have the power to override your family physician or any Board Certified specialist, even if they only have a six week program certification.

New programs are created to replace old progams never previously funded by the General Assembly.

“Healthcare homes” are created to steer care from family chosen providers to the ones provided by the managed care programs endorsed by the new law.

If there’s a problem, you can complain to a board of doctors who work for the insurance companies, members of the insurance companies, and people appointed by the governor (insurance companies), and the compalints aren’t a public record so we can’t see what care is sytematically being denied by providers under the new plan.

I say we need two Missouri constitutional amendments. The first will make heathcare a human right under the Missouri Constitution. The second will issue revenue bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the State of Missouri to fund the provision of healthcare services to all Missourians on a financially sound basis.

The cost of making a car or truck or SUV in Missouri will drop by $1,500 overnight with other expanded economic benefits. There will be a federally funded component for the less well off in Missouri which will restore the cruel cuts imposed by Governor Blunt and his Republican cronies. If we take a comprehensive healthcare reform approach, we can serve the welfare of all the citizens of Missouri.

Tim (#

“I say we need two Missouri constitutional amendments. The first will make heathcare a human right under the Missouri Constitution. The second will issue revenue bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the State of Missouri to fund the provision of healthcare services to all Missourians on a financially sound basis.”

Tim, I agree!

Although I’d vote against both of them.

Let the people, rather than the courts decide!

Damn smilies!