Hacker News Reader

I forgot to mention one more item. It takes a 2/3 vote to pass the budget. 50% + 1 makes much more sense. At this point I'd take 60% as much better solution.

View on HN

Oh really? You think that 50% of the legislature would spend less than 60% would and that 60% would spend less than 66%?

I think that even if we had politicians capable of putting together a well conceived plan, a relatively small group can effectively veto any budget.

That may be true, but the actual claim was that the Repubs blocked something good. If so, we'll find said "something good" in Dem proposals.

How many Dems were advocating 2005 level spending? How many Dems were willing to say "we'd love to have all these new programs but since we can't get the revenue, we're going to delay them or cut something else?"

I'd love to be making 25% more than I actually am, but is it responsible to spend that way? If not, why are Dems off the hook?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com