I do not want to see anyone’s taxes raised at this time, but I believe reducing funding for Social Security by extending the payroll tax holiday is bad policy. It has not helped boost economic growth, and it replaces Social Security revenues with more borrowing. This is the last thing we need considering that Social Security already has an unfunded liability of $18.7 trillion.
I support tax relief for low and middle-income taxpayers - but not by starving Social Security revenues. Now that the Senate has voted to extend the payroll tax holiday for two months, let's use that time to craft an alternate tax relief package that targets middle-to-lower income workers. A properly-targeted package would be smaller and easier to offset with credible spending cuts - instead of increased fees on taxpayers.
The proposal the Senate passed last Saturday is typical Washington politics, intended to produce short-term political gains. Without structural reform, we will bankrupt Social Security, and we will bankrupt our nation. It is long past time to act responsibly and begin to seriously address and reduce our debt and deficits.
Opposing Omnibus Appropriations Measure
The budgeting process for the Federal government is horribly broken. The Democrat-controlled Senate has refused to fulfill its legal obligation by failing to pass a budget in over 2 years (968 days and counting). The Omnibus bill that I voted against last Saturday is just the latest example of Washington’s business as usual. Business as usual is bankrupting our nation.
The bill is 1219 pages long, and was available for review only 58 hours before the Senate voted on it. It does not begin to address our spending problem or our serious fiscal challenges. It will still produce a deficit that could exceed $1 trillion for the fourth year in a row.
My ‘NO’ vote is a vote against the broken process, as well as the continuation of massive deficit spending. Washington is growing our national debt faster than our economy is growing. That is reckless and irresponsible. It mortgages our children’s future. If we don’t begin to seriously address our fiscal situation, we face a day when our creditors will do it for us – in a process that will be far more painful than had we acted sooner. The time to act is now. Time is running out.
While Congress is engaged in partisan gridlock and U.S. citizens take financial hits, Congress DOES NOT SUFFER THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS of the remaining U.S. populace, regardless of party affiliation. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45793299/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/t/economic-downturn-took-detour-capitol-hill/ What is wrong with this picture?
I expected little else from this supposed "entrepreneur." His brightest move was to marry Jane Curler, the Bemis heiress. The company he was supposed to have started, PACUR, was actually founded by his brother in law Pat, who gave Ron a job after the marriage to his sister. (Get it? Pat Curler = PACUR. Why would Ron name his company after his brother in law?) I don't listen to one word Ron Johnson has to say. He is an obstructionist in the Senate, and misrepresented himself and his business background during his campaign (a 2010 campaign theme, apparently).
BTW, how did sleepy Herb fall into all of his wealth? Think he benefited from the family business? And why isn't he being pilloried for supporting every spending bill known to man. Where is his leadership in demanding the Senate (that he is a majority member of) puts forth a budget? Nine hundred days and counting the Senate has shirked its primary constitutional responsibility.
Timothy Gaithner is destroying our economy. And again you can't face the facts that he was elected by the majority of people in our state. Feingold lost and now you want to whine about that too. Did you everythink that the majority of us wanted someone that wasn't just going to bow to politics as usual? There is a distinct reason why the payroll tax cut is a bad idea and someone who aspires to Democatic social values, you may actually agree with this. Social Security, year in and year out, has said to be in financial trouble. We are now paying out just at the start of the babyboomers. Where is this tax cut coming from? Employee contributions to Social Security. How dumb is that? Both the beltway Republicans and Democrats took from the one place that didn't mean anything to them today, but could bankrupt Social Security in the future. Why didn't they simply cut the federal income tax by 2%? Because then they would have to stop spending money. And back to Gaithner, cutting interest rates is a short term fix. Printing money is long term damage. He's printing money like its going out of style and thprinting presses can't keep up with the interest on the borrowing we are doing just to pay the interest. And now he wants to raise the debt ceiling again?
And yes, Herb Kohl and Jim Sensenbrenner come from wealthy families. The difference is that they respect their offices and constituents. Sensenbrenner did create a national stir with his immigration reform ideas, but said at the outset that his intent was to develop a starting point for discussion. That's very different from sending an ignorant and embarrassing letter to the White House during a first term. Concerning the budget, I think most of us are figuring out that the corporate-owned Tea/GOP is causing obstruction/imbalance in government. I feel sorry for John Boehner, I truly do. We the People can do something about the Tea/GOP in the next election cycle. Brian Dey, Social Security is not in trouble for the next 25 years. Here's an opinion piece from USA Today on the subject: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2011-02-22-editorial22_ST1_N.htm If Social Security had not been treated like a slush fund to pay for war (thanks GWB), this fund would be even larger. It was designed to accommodate for population fluctuations over time. And no, Tim Gaithner is not destroying our economy. I heard that on Fox, it's not true.
Not raising the debt ceiling would have had serious global repercussions, which economists and past presidents know. And do let's keep blaming Barack Obama for America's massive debt, even though his predecessor took office with a surplus and ended with a record deficit. It took Clinton 8 years to fix Reagan's mess and that was with some measure of cooperation from Republicans. If you read Gaithner's response to Ron Johnson (link provided in a previous post in this thread), you will gain understanding as to why Ron's suggestion was unsound.
And I'm not so obtuse as to get hung up on where the arbritray debt ceiling limit line gets drawn. Wherever it ends up, we deficit spend right back up to it. Not raising the limit forces accountablility. Gaithner is part of the problem, not the solution.