Senate approves fiscal cliff legislation by 89-8 vote

WASHINGTON (AP) - Hours past a self-imposed deadline for action, the Senate passed legislation early New Year's Day to neutralize a fiscal cliff combination of across-the-board tax increases and spending cuts that kicked in at midnight. The pre-dawn vote was a lopsided 89-8.
Senate passage set the stage for a final showdown in the House, where a vote was expected later Tuesday or perhaps Wednesday on the measure, which also raises tax rates on wealthy Americans.
Even by the recent dysfunctional standards of government-by-gridlock, the activity at both ends of historic Pennsylvania Avenue was remarkable as the administration and lawmakers spent the final hours of 2012 haggling over long-festering differences.
"It shouldn't have taken this long to come to an agreement, and this shouldn't be the model for how we do things around here," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who negotiated the agreement with Vice President Joe Biden.
Under the deal, taxes would remain steady for the middle class and rise at incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples - levels higher than President Barack Obama had campaigned for in his successful drive for a second term in office.
Spending cuts totaling $24 billion over two months aimed at the Pentagon and domestic programs would be deferred. That would allow the White House and lawmakers time to regroup before plunging very quickly into a new round of budget brinkmanship certain to revolve around Republican calls to rein in the cost of Medicare and other government benefit programs.
Officials also decided at the last minute to use the measure to prevent a $900 pay raise for lawmakers due to take effect this spring.
"One thing we can count on with respect to this Congress is that if there's even one second left before you have to do what you're supposed to do, they will use that last second," the president said in a mid-afternoon status update on the talks. Yet when the roll was called nearly 12 hours later, only six Republicans and two Democrats opposed the measure.
As darkness fell on the last day of the year, Obama, Biden and their aides were at work in the White House, and lights burned in the House and Senate. Democrats complained that Obama had given away too much in agreeing to limit tax increases to incomes over $450,000, far above the $250,000 level he campaigned on. Yet some Republicans recoiled at the prospect of raising taxes at all.
Democratic senators said they expected a post-midnight vote on the measure. They spoke after a closed-door session with Vice President Joseph Biden, who brokered the deal with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.
"The argument is that this is the best that can be done on a bipartisan basis," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., when asked about the case the vice president had delivered behind closed doors.
Passage would send the measure to the House, where Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, refrained from endorsing a package as yet unseen by his famously rebellious rank-and-file. He said the House would not vote on any Senate-passed measure "until House members - and the American people - have been able to review" it.
Numerous GOP officials said McConnell and his aides had kept the speaker's office informed about the progress of the talks.
The House Democratic leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, issued a statement saying that when legislation clears the Senate, "I will present it to the House Democratic caucus."
Without legislation, economists in and out of government warned of a possible recession if the economy were allowed to fall over a fiscal cliff of tax increases and spending cuts.
And while the nominal deadline for action passed at midnight, Obama's signature on legislation by the time a new Congress takes office at noon on Jan. 3, 2013 - the likely timetable - would eliminate or minimize any inconvenience for taxpayers.
A late dispute over the estate tax produced allegations of bad faith from all sides.
After hours of haggling, Biden headed for the Capitol to brief the Democratic rank and file.
Earlier, McConnell had agreed with Obama that an overall deal was near. In remarks on the Senate floor, he suggested Congress move quickly to pass tax legislation and "continue to work on finding smarter ways to cut spending" next year.
The White House and Democrats initially declined the offer, preferring to prevent the cuts from kicking in at the Pentagon and domestic agencies alike. A two-month compromise resulted.
Officials in both parties said the agreement would prevent tax increases at incomes below $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples.
At higher levels, the rate would rise to a maximum of 39.6 percent from the current 35 percent. Capital gains and dividends in excess of those amounts would be taxed at 20 percent, up from 15 percent.
The deal also would also raise taxes on the portion of estates exceeding $5 million to 40 percent. At the insistence of Republicans, the $5 million threshold would rise each year with inflation.
Much or all of the revenue to be raised through higher taxes on the wealthy would help hold down the amount paid to the Internal Revenue Service by the middle class.
In addition to preventing higher rates for most, the agreement would retain existing breaks for families with children, for low-earning taxpayers and for those with a child in college. Also, the two sides agreed to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to affect an estimated 28 million households for the first time in 2013, with an average increase of more than $3,000. The law originally was designed to make sure millionaires did not escape taxes, but inflation has gradually exposed more and more households with lower earnings to its impact.
The legislation leaves untouched a scheduled 2 percentage point increase in the payroll tax, ending a temporary reduction enacted two years ago to help revive the economy.
Officials said the White House had succeeded in gaining a one-year extension of long-term unemployment benefits about to expire on an estimated two million jobless.
It was unclear whether the legislation would prevent a 27 percent cut in fees for doctors who treat Medicare patients was unknown.
Also included is a provision to prevent a threatened spike in milk prices after the first of the year.
Even as time was running out, partisan agendas were evident.
Obama used his appearance not only to chastise Congress, but also to lay down a marker for the next round of negotiations early in 2013, when Republicans intend to seek spending cuts in exchange for letting the Treasury to borrow above the current debt limit of $16.4 trillion.
"Now, if Republicans think that I will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone - and you hear that sometimes coming from them ... then they've got another think coming. ... That's not how it's going to work at least as long as I'm president," he said.
"And I'm going to be president for the next four years, I think," he added.
Obama's remarks irritated some Republicans.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona they would "clearly antagonize members of the House."
Senate passage set the stage for a final showdown in the House, where a vote was expected later Tuesday or perhaps Wednesday on the measure, which also raises tax rates on wealthy Americans.
Even by the recent dysfunctional standards of government-by-gridlock, the activity at both ends of historic Pennsylvania Avenue was remarkable as the administration and lawmakers spent the final hours of 2012 haggling over long-festering differences.
"It shouldn't have taken this long to come to an agreement, and this shouldn't be the model for how we do things around here," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who negotiated the agreement with Vice President Joe Biden.
Under the deal, taxes would remain steady for the middle class and rise at incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples - levels higher than President Barack Obama had campaigned for in his successful drive for a second term in office.
Spending cuts totaling $24 billion over two months aimed at the Pentagon and domestic programs would be deferred. That would allow the White House and lawmakers time to regroup before plunging very quickly into a new round of budget brinkmanship certain to revolve around Republican calls to rein in the cost of Medicare and other government benefit programs.
Officials also decided at the last minute to use the measure to prevent a $900 pay raise for lawmakers due to take effect this spring.
"One thing we can count on with respect to this Congress is that if there's even one second left before you have to do what you're supposed to do, they will use that last second," the president said in a mid-afternoon status update on the talks. Yet when the roll was called nearly 12 hours later, only six Republicans and two Democrats opposed the measure.
As darkness fell on the last day of the year, Obama, Biden and their aides were at work in the White House, and lights burned in the House and Senate. Democrats complained that Obama had given away too much in agreeing to limit tax increases to incomes over $450,000, far above the $250,000 level he campaigned on. Yet some Republicans recoiled at the prospect of raising taxes at all.
Democratic senators said they expected a post-midnight vote on the measure. They spoke after a closed-door session with Vice President Joseph Biden, who brokered the deal with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.
"The argument is that this is the best that can be done on a bipartisan basis," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., when asked about the case the vice president had delivered behind closed doors.
Passage would send the measure to the House, where Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, refrained from endorsing a package as yet unseen by his famously rebellious rank-and-file. He said the House would not vote on any Senate-passed measure "until House members - and the American people - have been able to review" it.
Numerous GOP officials said McConnell and his aides had kept the speaker's office informed about the progress of the talks.
The House Democratic leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, issued a statement saying that when legislation clears the Senate, "I will present it to the House Democratic caucus."
Without legislation, economists in and out of government warned of a possible recession if the economy were allowed to fall over a fiscal cliff of tax increases and spending cuts.
And while the nominal deadline for action passed at midnight, Obama's signature on legislation by the time a new Congress takes office at noon on Jan. 3, 2013 - the likely timetable - would eliminate or minimize any inconvenience for taxpayers.
A late dispute over the estate tax produced allegations of bad faith from all sides.
After hours of haggling, Biden headed for the Capitol to brief the Democratic rank and file.
Earlier, McConnell had agreed with Obama that an overall deal was near. In remarks on the Senate floor, he suggested Congress move quickly to pass tax legislation and "continue to work on finding smarter ways to cut spending" next year.
The White House and Democrats initially declined the offer, preferring to prevent the cuts from kicking in at the Pentagon and domestic agencies alike. A two-month compromise resulted.
Officials in both parties said the agreement would prevent tax increases at incomes below $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples.
At higher levels, the rate would rise to a maximum of 39.6 percent from the current 35 percent. Capital gains and dividends in excess of those amounts would be taxed at 20 percent, up from 15 percent.
The deal also would also raise taxes on the portion of estates exceeding $5 million to 40 percent. At the insistence of Republicans, the $5 million threshold would rise each year with inflation.
Much or all of the revenue to be raised through higher taxes on the wealthy would help hold down the amount paid to the Internal Revenue Service by the middle class.
In addition to preventing higher rates for most, the agreement would retain existing breaks for families with children, for low-earning taxpayers and for those with a child in college. Also, the two sides agreed to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to affect an estimated 28 million households for the first time in 2013, with an average increase of more than $3,000. The law originally was designed to make sure millionaires did not escape taxes, but inflation has gradually exposed more and more households with lower earnings to its impact.
The legislation leaves untouched a scheduled 2 percentage point increase in the payroll tax, ending a temporary reduction enacted two years ago to help revive the economy.
Officials said the White House had succeeded in gaining a one-year extension of long-term unemployment benefits about to expire on an estimated two million jobless.
It was unclear whether the legislation would prevent a 27 percent cut in fees for doctors who treat Medicare patients was unknown.
Also included is a provision to prevent a threatened spike in milk prices after the first of the year.
Even as time was running out, partisan agendas were evident.
Obama used his appearance not only to chastise Congress, but also to lay down a marker for the next round of negotiations early in 2013, when Republicans intend to seek spending cuts in exchange for letting the Treasury to borrow above the current debt limit of $16.4 trillion.
"Now, if Republicans think that I will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone - and you hear that sometimes coming from them ... then they've got another think coming. ... That's not how it's going to work at least as long as I'm president," he said.
"And I'm going to be president for the next four years, I think," he added.
Obama's remarks irritated some Republicans.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona they would "clearly antagonize members of the House."
PLEASE, take crazy Joe and put him back in the asylum !
 @Rob C 503 Sure, as long as you take McCain, Boehner, Latorette, Lindsay(Gay)Graham and several others lying thieving dawgs with him..
 @dougrpdx  @Rob C 503 throw the whole lot in including Obama.
this is crap. fire them ALL
Now, if Republicans think that I will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone - and you hear that sometimes coming from them ... then they've got another think coming. ... That's not how it's going to work at least as long as I'm president," he said. "And I'm going to be president for the next four years, I think," he added.
Â
Well, Duh, the USA will be in total financial chaos, either nationalized or all most there in another four years, and  I am out of here......mission accomplished. What a deal. OH, but we have ObamaCare for your headache.
 @erudite so who is Obama paving the way for? it seems that each president we get keeps getting worse and worse. When will it end? how will it end?
@lee986321 Â Lots of finger pointing. My understanding is that the ultimate goal is for the UN/ ICLEIÂ to manage a World Government with the USA, Canada and Mexico as one sub government. They even have uniforms and logos chosen, and some already made in readiness of a transition.
Â
USA has already granted Agenda 21 co-operation and ultimate control. Â A-21 has the world population at 5,000,000 million (we are currently 2.5 over their max)Â meaning a stop in growth and a kill off. Population, transportation and financial control come with the reduction of all carbon prints. Private employment will stop. All forms of income producing will be government originated credits toward your own upkeep with them dictating how you will earn you credits, or if you are wroth keeping...no savings. High-rise, cubical "resting" places with the government parenting youth...etc.etc.
Â
I know Obama said in his college years he wanted to study constitutional law so he would know where he would begin changing it.  It will take awhile, but hey, look how far they have moved and "changed" the USA in 4 years....about the same amount of time it took for Soros to destroy most of Europe's finances and souring thinking on socialism . It will hurt for a while, then you get used to it and youth or the new borne won't know the difference.
Â
A new generation will be molded, somewhat as todayâs youths never knew the depression, or World War as our parents and grandparents knew it...but sadly these children were sheltered and never really knew... and the USA has never seen war inside our borders, sans Pear Harbor. Â
Â
Now even death Camps of Germany are suspect of a fabrication. It would be unthinkable, yet even then it only took 4 years for Hitler to become ruler after being voted in and begin using force...after he demanded guns be banned and shortly after the public was given a time to turn them in, they started searching homes for "dissenters". I don't believe it will end lee986321, just keep changing, and it will be where you are in the new world order class system, how comfortable you will be.
Â
Study A-21 in debth and you will see how ICLEI is involved, even down to our small city planning. Read some of the inter communicaton memos, recommendations and action already taken, and you might just wet your pants.
$1 cut for every $41 of increase in spending- Wish lenders and the IRS would see my budget with such favor.  Bankrupt in an instant....but who cares as long as pie eating continues with money falling out of the printing presses in the sky..... well, countries who are now more powerful and bigger than us who hold leverage on those pie makers and the printing presses in the sky.
Who writes this FLUFF? This is "remarkable? Whoa there. I seriously DOUBT the average American finds any of this "remarkable".Â
Â
But hey - since this is a local Oregon NEWS agency how about reporting just exactly how Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden voted? Were their votes "remarkable" too?Â
Â
Come on... all this amounted to early this morning - was a treasonous refusal by our elected public "servants" to cut the size of our bloviated unsustainable government. That's all. Abuse of power-wise did Wyden "remarkably" agree to that - and Merkley too?Â
There is no such thing as a "fiscal cliff".
Â
There is, however, "fiscal irresponsibility" which has been running rampant in Congress and the rest of government for years.
Â
Naturally, the people of this great nation have nothing to do with that. :-P
 @Mikey Mikey - we kept on with the fiscal irresponsibility by RE-electing status quo Obama.Â
Â
What did you all think would happen - fiscal budget wise - if you kept Obama in the highest elected office - over all?Â
Â
Despicable STATUS QUO. Lead by the chief STATUS QUO enabler. Mr. Kick the can solutionless Barack Obama.Â
Â
Just like Americans wanted it. Right there...
First, this legislation also has to get past the House. Second, it is a poorly framed compromise that simply kicks the can down the road for a few months. Third, the Dems simply can't let go of the incessant giveaway programs. Fourth, the Reps cannot let go of protecting the wealthiest from fair taxation. Fifth, this temporary agreement is politicians playing the game so they can save some face. Sixth, it will all hit the fan over the next two months as the debt ceiling comes into play once again.Â
Â
What we are witnessing is grown men and women playing childish political games while the nation and its citizens suffer. Throw them all out!
 @I812 I wonder why this news service refuses to tell us - publish it on the INTERNET THIS MORNING - how Wyden and Merkley voted at 2:00 am in the cowardice of the early morning hours.Â
Â
When both men know better - than to kick the can and refuse to cut down the size of our bloviated unsustainable federal BUREAUCRASY. Did both of these public servants of ours - kick the can and refuse to take on the UNSUSTAINABLE pink elephant right in front of them.Â
Â
And did these public servants from Oregon vote in a 1/2 percent raise for all members of congress - while they were at it?Â
I am ashamed of ALL of the legislators, Republican and Democrat, for allowing this to go on for so long. We elect them to take care of our country's business and I think it's time we hold each and everyone of them accountable for their inability to serve!
 @Lonna I don't think it's actually each and everyone.. It's a select few who have power and they abuse it..
Politicians have learned a lot from Hollywood.
@Obongo Geddon Well, you know  the old saying ...... Politics is hollywood for ugly people
At least the Senate was not a bunch of Bu** wipes like Congress. Thank you for having a brain.
@Luckylucy ...the senate IS part of the congress !! You need to do some homework !
@Luckylucy ... we have the Senate and the House - together they are the Congress...with Harry Reid in the Senate he makes sure they are the dodo's and everything they do stinks to high-heaven....
 @KHEB  @Luckylucy As usual KHEB blames the Democrats when the facts show BOTH parties are to blame!  Some day KHEB, some day......
Â
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/boehner-s-house-has-increased-debt-18944-household
Â
"Under the leadership of House Speaker John Boehner (R.-Ohio), the 112th House of Representatives has thus far approved legislation that has increased the debt of the federal government by $2,176,949,774,695.46âor approximately $18,944 for per American household."
@KHEB Uh, it wasn't Harry Reid who introduced a bill to give the President the authority to raise the debt limit unilaterally and then, when it looked like it would actually get to the floor for a vote, filibustered his own bill! That is your buddy, Mr. McConnell. Talk about your basic Dodo.
 @Mechanic  @KHEB Filibuster your own bill...... BRILLIANT!
Gee Whiz, I guess they expect a Big Atta Boy for ALMOST doing what they are Paid to do in the first place, NOT! Now the House led by Boner will screw it all up.
"Stimulus tax credits:Â Three tax credits expanded as part of the stimulus will be extended for one year as part of the compromise. The Americaâs Opportunity Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, and Earned Income Tax Credit "
Â
All 3 of these credits can be used by people who PAY NOT INCOME TAX....TOTAL BS! Â Once your tax bill gets down to zero that should be it. Â You should not be able to take money out of a system you put no money into!
Â
And I don't believe you should simply get tax credits for having children....
@B Smizzle What does "pay not income tax" mean? Putting it all in caps doesn't clarify it, either.
 @Mechanic  @B Simple, lets say for ease of math I paid $100 in federal income tax.  I can take deductions and credits to get as much of that money back as possible but once I get to $100 that is it....I should be done with my taxes.  I get my $100 back and not a penny more.
Â
Now lets say I qualify for the EIC, I do my taxes, get my $100 back, but then on top of that I get the $2500 EIC, so now my return is $2,600! Â See the problem?
Â
And the majority who get the EIC as well as many other CREDITS pay no income tax at all, then get that credit money cut to them as a check from the government! Â At least if someone is "rich" they are paying into the system....much better than leaching off a system you don't even pay for!
 @B SmizzleÂ
Â
You cannot have a negative tax balance. Thus if you don't pay any tax (because you are otherwise exempt for example) no matter how many tax breaks you take, you will not get any return. The most in return you can get is everything you paid in.
Â
And the fact you believe you should not get a credit for a child obviously tells me you have not had children. The spending required to pay for a child more than makes up for the credit you get. That spending is stimulating to the economy and new "buyers" being created help keeps the economy from collapsing further under and aging population.
Â
Unless you want to look like Japan. Empty schools, empty nests and no future to pay for the things they need. You think it's bad now, a future with fewer children is worse.
Â
 @B SmizzleÂ
Â
Â
I actually did a Google search before I made the comment to be sure i was not incorrect.
Â
I obviously missed that reference.
Â
And to think apparently with my income and household size, I actually qualify to get EIC.
Â
So I guess the fail is on the people who are going to give me money?
Â
:)
Â
I guess I should have someone else do my taxes huh?
Â
:)
Â
 @Repoman "e. Thus if you don't pay any tax (because you are otherwise exempt for example) no matter how many tax breaks you take, you will not get any return. The most in return you can get is everything you paid in."
Â
You do know the difference between a credit and deduction don't you?
Â
http://www.jacksonhewitt.com/Resource-Center/Tax-Topics/Earned-Income-Credit/
"The credit can be refunded even if you do not owe any tax."
Â
I don't know what is sadder, the fact you didn't know this or the fact that you didn't take 5 seconds and do a google search before posting! Â Everyone seems to scream the rich need to pay more (my guess you are one of those people) but don't even have a clue the poor don't pay in but they do take out! Â I say if you get to zero owed....fine.... but at that point NO MORE CREDITS! Â Get back what you pay in, sure. Â Get back more than you paid in, no way!
Â
But the EIC is only one of many, many credits out there, and it gets even worse!
Â
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/illegal-aliens-get-billions-annually-in-tax-refunds/
Â
"The reporter then visited an illegal alien who took part in the scam. He admitted his home was being used by four other âundocumented workersâ who donât live there. Combined they claimed 20 dependent children were living inside one trailer home in Indiana. Their combined tax refund? $29,608."
Â
Yeah I am sure the illegals paid that $29,608 in and were just taking it back out.....FAIL
Â
Â
 @B Smizzle ~  I agree 100%... excellent post..!  Â
Don't worry Joe Biden has this one...Is that a halo around his head?
 @CorporateCowMoo Holy Joe?
@CorporateCowMoo  """""Is that a halo around his head?""""
I believe that flash is highlighting his former hair line :)
"Whew"Â Â Â dodged that bullet
WOW, count me impressed.....$41 in new taxes for every $1 cut in spending!
Â
How exactly is this "helping" us?
Â
Senate, House, President......FAIL.Â
Â
I guess that is what we get when we continue to vote the same people into office!
Â
@B Smizzle Elect actual Republicans instead of Tea Party creeps, and things would be a whole lot better.
 @B SmizzleÂ
Not entirely accurate
Â
If they did nothing, then taxes would go up. Thus doing SOMETHING means taxes WON'T go up for many. You can call it a tax cut at this point, because otherwise itâs a tax increase for all.
Â
Fail, yeah, but it's a fail we apparently wanted. We WANTED the house and senate to not agree. We WANTED to go over the "fiscal cliff" and we WANTED to pay more and have mandatory spending cuts, even on things we like.
Â
Obviously this is what we wanted. Not only did we vote these people into office, we RE-VOTED them BACK into office.
 @Repoman  @B Smizzle Taxes will be skyrocketing anyway once the obamacare crap kicks in.
The bottom line is, Democrats succeeded once more in achieving their favorite goal. Raising taxes. And not cutting government handouts to their constituents.Â
 @last boyscout 51 democrats in the senate, 3 voted against it.....I would say the republicans are as much to blame as the democrats.
Â
Also note, not getting cut.....DEFENSE SPENDING.....I bet we can thank the Republicans for that!
 @B Smizzle And I do thank them. I'd cut welfare BS spending in half before cutting any defense spending. It's way past time for the laziest couch potato overweight chip crunching welfare cases to get off their azz's and start earning their keep. We are tired of carrying their weight.
Mechanic...We spend more on Japanese cars too. So what. How about the Democrats "War on Poverty" or the Democrats "War on Drugs"? What is the Democrats exit strategy of both of those "wars"? FIFTEEN TRILLION dollars later spent on the "war on Poverty", and we're still spending. What's the Democrats exit strategy?  Just Wondering.
@last boyscout @B Smizzle We don't merely spend more on the military than anyone else, we spend more than the next ten combined. Republicans shouldn't start bogus wars with no exit strategy, and we could save lots of money.
 @last boyscout  @PDXguy23 I wouldn't expect any protection from a military that seems occupied with protecting foreign interests instead of defending its own country.
 @PDXguy23 If you can find a way to allow us individually designate where our tax dollars are spent, I'm on your side. But if you don't pay for military, don't expect any protection from them. And we need not "pay" to occupy the poor, if the government would get off our backs, we could supply enough jobs to keep the "poor" occupied.
 @last boyscout  @B Smizzle Just don't be surprised if you get your TV stolen after welfare cuts. I'd rather been paying for something to keep the poor occupied than unnecessary weapons to fight in frivolous wars.
 @B Smizzle We agree. There's plenty of blame to go around. No doubt we spend more on military than any one else, but we also outspend everyone else on video games, birth control and a thousand other things. But in military vs. human services per capita, Id guess China out spends us quite handily. If you could take a nation wide poll, which do you think bothers people most?, paying welfare cases to sit on their butts and watch the flat screen that we paid for, or more jet fuel and Black Hawk helicopters?
 @last boyscout I agree with that cutting welfare BS spending, but also agree to the fact we spend more on our military than the entire world combined.  On September 10th, 2001 (one day before 9/11) do you remember Rumsfield on the news saying that they can not account for over 2.3 trillion dollars that went to the pentagon?  That was 10 years ago, I wonder what that figure is today!  Not to mention the billions that are unaccounted for in Iraq.
Â
I say cut that fat too!
Well I guess they saw the Linch Mob gathering outstde.......