SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Peter Dierks who wrote (34458)3/27/2009 12:42:05 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
House Republicans Present Outline of Alternative Budget

By Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 27, 2009; Page A06
washingtonpost.com


House Republicans yesterday laid out the federal budget that they would propose if they controlled Congress, but they were mocked by Democrats for putting out a document with almost no details or precise figures.

Looking to rebut criticism from President Obama that the GOP is attacking him but not offering proposals of its own, Republican lawmakers released an 18-page outline of an alternative budget that proposes to cut overall government spending except for defense, ban additional spending for bailouts of financial companies, and cut the maximum income tax rate to 25 percent from the current rate of 36 percent.

"Two nights ago, the president said we haven't seen a budget yet out of the Republicans," said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), waving a document titled "The Republican Road to Recovery." "Well, it's not true, because here it is, Mr. President."

Republicans said they will release actual numbers as an amendment to the budget next week when it comes to the House floor. But Democrats criticized their effort. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs joked that "it took me several minutes to read it."

"I think the administration is glad that the Republicans heard the president's call to submit an alternative," Gibbs said. "We just hope that next time it will contain actual numbers so somebody can evaluate what it means."

With Democrats in control of Congress, the House GOP budget has no chance of becoming law, and Senate Republicans rejected the idea of even offering an alternative budget but will instead offer amendments on the floor. House rules allow Democrats to limit the amendments offered, so Republicans in that chamber will offer only their complete budget alternative.

"Our economic plan amounts to less government, lower taxes and economic prosperity," the GOP document says.



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (34458)4/1/2009 1:43:28 AM
From: Peter Dierks  Respond to of 71588
 
The GOP's Alternative Budget
President Obama offers us the option of European big government.
APRIL 1, 2009

By PAUL D. RYAN
Today, the House of Representatives will consider two budget plans that represent dramatically different visions for our nation's future.

We will first consider President Barack Obama's plan. To be clear, this is no ordinary budget. In a nutshell, the president and Democratic leaders in Congress are attempting to bring about the third and final great wave of progressivism, building on top of the New Deal and the Great Society. So America is placed in a special moment in our history -- brought about by the deep recession, Mr. Obama's ambitious agenda, and the pending fiscal tidal-wave of red ink brought forward by the looming insolvency of our entitlement programs. If this agenda comes to pass, it will mark this period in history as the moment America turned European.



House Republicans will offer an alternative plan. This too is no ordinary budget. As the opposition party, we believe this moment must be met by offering the American people a different way forward -- one based on our belief that America is an exceptional nation, and we want to keep it that way. Our budget applies our country's enduring first principles to the problems of our day. Rather than attempting to equalize the results of peoples' lives and micromanaging their affairs, we seek to preserve our system of protecting our natural rights and equalizing opportunity for all. The plan works to accomplish four main goals: 1) fulfill the mission of health and retirement security; 2) control our nation's debts; 3) put the economy on a path of growth and leadership in the global economy; and 4) preserve the American legacy of leaving the next generation better off.

Under the president's plan, spending will top $4 trillion this year alone, and consume 28.5% of our nation's economy. His plan would mean a $1 trillion increase to the already unsustainable spending growth of our nation's entitlement programs -- including a "down payment" toward government-controlled health care and education; a $1.5 trillion tax increase to further shackle the small businesses and investors we rely on to create jobs; a massive increase in energy costs for families via cap and trade. Moreover, the Obama plan would result in an exploding deficit, a doubling of the nation's debt in five years, and an increase of that debt to more than 82% of our nation's GDP by the last year of the budget. This approach will ultimately debase our currency and reduce the living standards of the American people.

Instead of doubling the debt in five years, and tripling it in 10, the Republican budget curbs the explosion in spending called for by the president and his party. Our plan halts the borrow-and-spend philosophy that brought about today's economic problems, and puts a stop to heaping ever-growing debt on future generations -- and it does so by controlling spending, not by raising taxes. The greatest difference lies in the size of government our budgets achieve over time (see nearby chart).

While our approach ensures a sturdy safety net for those facing chronic or temporary difficulties, it understands that the reliability of this protection and the other functions of government depend on a vibrant, free and growing private sector to generate the resources necessary for it.

Here's an outline of what we propose:

- Deficits/Debt. The Republican budget achieves lower deficits than the Democratic plan in every year, and by 2019 yields half the deficit proposed by the president. By doing so, we control government debt: Under our plan, debt held by the public is $3.6 trillion less during the budget period.

- Spending. Our budget gives priority to national defense and veterans' health care. We freeze all other discretionary spending for five years, allowing it to grow modestly after that. We also place all spending under a statutory spending cap backed up by tough budget enforcement.

- Energy. Our budget lays a firm foundation to position the U.S. to meet three important strategic energy goals: reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, deploying more clean and renewable energy sources free of greenhouse gas, and supporting economic growth. We do these things by rejecting the president's cap-and-trade scheme, by opening exploration on our nation's oil and gas fields, and by investing the proceeds in a new clean energy trust fund, infrastructure and further deficit reduction.

- Entitlements. Our budget also takes steps toward fulfilling the mission of health and retirement security, in part by making these programs fiscally sustainable. The budget moves toward making quality health care affordable and accessible to all Americans by strengthening the relationship between patients and their doctors, not the dictates of government bureaucrats. We preserve the existing Medicare program for all those 55 or older; and then, to make the program sustainable and dependable, those 54 and younger will enter a Medicare program reformed to work like the health plan members of Congress and federal employees now enjoy. Starting in 2021, seniors would receive a premium support payment equal to 100% of the Medicare benefit on average. This would be income related, so low-income seniors receive extra support, and high-income seniors receive support relative to their incomes -- along the same lines as the president's Medicare Part D proposal.

We strengthen the Medicaid safety net by converting the federal share of Medicaid payments into an allotment tailored for each state's low-income population. This will enhance state flexibility and sensitivity to spending growth.

In one of the most valued government programs -- Social Security -- our budget begins to develop a bipartisan solution to the program's pending bankruptcy by incorporating some of the reforms advocated by the president's budget director. Specifically, we provide for a trigger that would make small adjustments in the benefits for higher-income beneficiaries if the Social Security Administration determines the Social Security Trust Fund cannot meet its obligations. This is a modest but serious proposal which would not affect those in or near retirement, but is aimed at helping develop a consensus, across party lines, toward saving this important retirement program. We also assure that benefits for lower-income recipients are large enough to keep them out of poverty.

- Tax Reform. Our budget does not raise taxes, and makes permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax laws. In fact, we cut taxes and reform the tax system. Individuals can choose to pay their federal taxes under the existing code, or move to a highly simplified system that fits on a post card, with few deductions and two rates. Specifically, couples pay 10% on their first $100,000 in income (singles on $50,000) and 25% above that. Capital gains and dividends are taxed at 15%, and the death tax is repealed. The proposal includes generous standard and personal exemptions such that a family of four earning $39,000 would not pay tax on that amount. In an effort to revive peoples' lost savings, and to create an incentive for risk-taking and investment, the budget repeals the capital gains tax through 2010 for all taxpayers.

On the business side, the budget permanently cuts the uncompetitive corporate income tax rate -- currently the second highest in the industrialized world -- to 25%. This puts American companies in a better position to lead in the global economy, promotes jobs here at home, and strengthens worker paychecks.

We hope the administration and Democratic leaders in Congress do not distort and preach fear about our Republican plan. Some may be tempted to appeal to the darker emotions of envy and insecurity that surely run high in times like these. Yet we know Americans are stronger, smarter and prouder than this ploy assumes.

In the recent past, the Republican Party failed to offer the nation an inspiring vision and a concrete plan to tackle our problems with innovative and principled solutions. We do not intend to repeat that mistake. America is not the greatest nation on earth by chance. We earned this greatness by rewarding individual achievement, by advancing and protecting natural rights, and by embracing freedom. We intend to continue this uniquely American tradition.

Mr. Ryan, from Wisconsin, is the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee.

online.wsj.com



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (34458)11/16/2010 4:07:17 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
A liberal accounting of defeat
By Ralph R. Reiland
Monday, November 8, 2010

Especially after bad days, liberals like to go to columnists like Maureen Dowd of The New York Times for some reassurance that everything's fine with liberalism and it's just the rest of us who are a bad mix of weird, greedy, ethnocentric, dumb and scary folks.

Like a lighthouse in a storm, Dowd unfailingly guides lost-at-sea liberals back to the safe port of bigger government, political sneering, higher taxation, centralized planning and economic envy.

Here is Ms. Dowd's analysis last Wednesday, the morning after the nation's voters delivered a stunning and nationwide defeat to Democrats: "Even though it was predicted, it was still a shock to see voters humiliate a brilliant and spellbinding young president, who'd had such a Kennedy-like beginning."

It's more accurate to report that the public's "spellbinding" phase ended two years ago when the balloons and canned stadium speeches were put away and the real job of governing had to begin.

Clearly, the thrill is gone.

Regarding the "brilliant" part, Dowd failed to acknowledge that President Obama was far from brilliant in putting the jobs issue, the top concern of voters, on the back burner while he wasted two years trying to ram an unpopular health-reform bill through Congress.

Ms. Dowd is arguing that Obama remains as brilliant and spellbinding as ever and the people are just too dimwitted and propagandized to recognize it.

"Republicans," she asserted, "outcommunicated a silver-tongued president who was supposed to be Ronald Reagan's heir in the communication department."

Obama is "Kennedy-like," and then Reaganesque. Simply the best!

In fact, President Obama delivered dozens of major speeches to promote the Democrats' version of health reform. His problem was that the more he talked, the more the public turned against what he was saying -- the opposite of the impact that President Reagan generally produced when he argued a position.

Rather than a matter of communication or being "outcommunicated," Obama failed because he and his congressional allies were trying to sell a bad product.

The nation's nasty Republicans, concluded Dowd, were "able to persuade a lot of Americans that the couple in the White House was not American enough, not quite 'normal,' too radical, too Great Society" -- and, further, that "All that Ivy League schooling had made them think they knew better than the average American folks, not to mention the Founding Fathers."

Dowd got it right about the perception of Ivy League arrogance. That seems to be the natural reaction to what Michelle Obama declared in 2008: "Let me tell you something -- for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country." A long-running lack of pride in America is simply not something that's felt by non-Harvard "average American folks."

Barack Obama, similarly, when asked while attending a European summit in 2009 if he believed in American exceptionalism, replied, "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that Brits believe in British exceptionalism and Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism." As political analyst Michael Barone put it, "In other words, not at all."

And Ms. Dowd's description of the previous night's political winners? Simply "a lot of conservative nuts." Quite a catty and bitter depiction of events by a top columnist at the so-called "paper-of-record."

I'm more positive about President Obama getting his wings clipped last Tuesday. I think it's healthy for people to increase their skepticism about someone who declared, speaking of himself, "We are the ones we've been waiting for."

pittsburghlive.com