More

Rand Paul: I Don't See Extending The Bush Tax Cuts As 'A Cost To Government' (VIDEO)


First Posted: 10/03/10 11:36 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:55 PM ET

Kentucky Senate candidates Jack Conway and Rand Paul faced off in a debate on this week's edition of "Fox News Sunday," with host Chris Wallace challenging them to explain inconsistencies, vague statements and flip-flopping.

One of the sharpest exchanges came on the issue of spending. Both men support extending all of President Bush's tax cuts. Republicans have accused Conway of changing his position, first saying that he would extend the "majority" of the Bush tax cuts and later saying he would extend all of them.

"I was talking about the special interest provisions that allow companies to ship our jobs overseas," Conway told Wallace on Sunday. He added that the country shouldn't be "raising taxes in a time of recession" and noted that he was one of the few Democrats to support the Bush tax cuts in 2002.

Wallce challenged Paul to reconcile the fact that extending the Bush tax cuts would add approximately $4 trillion to the national deficit. "If you're so concerned about the national debt, how are you going to pay for a $4-trillion loss of revenue from the tax cuts?" Paul argued that it wouldn't actually be costing the government anything:

PAUL: I think first of all, you look at whose money it is. It's the people's money, who earn the money, and we give up some to pay taxes. So I'm not seeing that as a cost to government. But I will immediately introduce bills to reduce spending. I think we should offset it. So I'm not opposed to introducing bills to reduce spending.


WALLACE: There's no way you're going to get $4 trillion by spending cuts.

PAUL: We're going to introduce legislation that will reduce spending. I'm going to introduce legislation that will balance the budget. We will have a balanced budget amendment introduced if I'm elected. We will also have a balanced budget that will be introduced if I'm elected.

Wallace then pushed the two men to name specific measures they would take to reduce the spending in entitlement programs. "Tell me of a single benefit you would reduce, any eligibility you would change, any tax you would increase on either Social Security or Medicare to deal with the entitlement crisis," he said.

Conway said that the country needs to have Medicare bulk purchasing, meaning the program would be allowed to use its large size to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs. "I think it was wrong during this health care debate to take PhRMA out of it," he said. "We ought to let Medicare negotiate for lower prices, the way we let Medicaid and the VA [Department of Veterans Affairs] do it. That would save about $200 billion." When Wallace pointed out that President Obama and Democrats in Congress tried to arrange this but were blocked by the drug companies, Conway said it would still be the first bill he introduces if he is elected. He also called for Medicare fraud units in every state, an end to offshore tax loopholes, a pay-as-you-go system and a bipartisan debt commission.

Paul said he wouldn't change Medicare or Social Security at all for anyone who is currently receiving benefits from the programs. When Wallace asked whether he would support raising the retirement age, Paul replied, "There may have to be for younger people, yes." He also said there would also likely be higher deductibles and premiums for younger workers.

On health care, Paul reiterated his belief that health care reform should be repealed. Wallace pointed out that more than 600,000 people in Kentucky are now uninsured. "How are they going to get coverage under your plan?" Wallace asked Paul. The Republican from Kentucky claimed that one of the problems with the Affordable Care Act is that it covers undocumented immigrants. "No, no, that's not true, sir," said Wallace. Paul then jumped in and replied, "I know, but it's illegal to ask them if they're illegal. So the thing is, it's sort of a catch-22."

WATCH:


*************************

What's happening in your district? The Huffington Post wants to know about all the campaign ads, debates, town halls, mailings, shenanigans, and other interesting campaign news happening by you. E-mail us any tips, videos, audio files, and photos to election@huffingtonpost.com.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Kentucky Senate candidates Jack Conway and Rand Paul faced off in a debate on this week's edition of "Fox News Sunday," with host Chris Wallace challenging them to explain inconsistencies, vague state...
Kentucky Senate candidates Jack Conway and Rand Paul faced off in a debate on this week's edition of "Fox News Sunday," with host Chris Wallace challenging them to explain inconsistencies, vague state...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,313
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (63 total)
  1 of 20  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
goodog 04:58 PM on 10/03/2010
Ran Paul abandoned his charade of small-government deficit hawk as soon as it impinged on his government paycheck.
Early in his campaign, Dr. Paul, the son of the uncompromising libertarian hero Ron Paul, denounced Medicare as "socialized medicine." But this spring, when confronted with the idea of reducing Medicare payments to doctors like himself — half of his patients are on  Read More...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/210904
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sean777
01:56 PM on 10/06/2010
Rand Paul can be compared to Fidel Castro, like most Tea Baggers, Paul just wants to be in Power for his own personal benefit. Tea Baggers want the government to work for them but they don’t a government working for anybody else.
photo
Beercandyman
Never deny to someone else, the rights you enjoy.
04:29 AM on 10/05/2010
The story of the real tea party.

Taxes on tea went down because the East India Company got a break (http://www.boston-tea-party.org) while the American importers kept the old tax rate. The right thinks that taxes went up hence "no taxation without representation" is about driving down taxes when it is really about "corporations must pay their share."

It's funny how history gets twisted in the wrong hands.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bllnsinchnge
peace, markets, freedom
01:22 PM on 10/05/2010
Tea was only symbolic. Colonies were taxed to pay for foreign wars and the British Empire. Revolution
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim Pasterczyk
Banned!
02:30 AM on 10/05/2010
So Randy, you're OK with passing a $4 trillion extra debt onto the unborn, those who you say are so deserving of the government's protection?
02:27 AM on 10/05/2010
For not being a politician, Paul is a pretty good speaker and debater. He makes excellent points if you listen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Levinson
04:24 AM on 10/05/2010
he only wants to cut ss and medicare and not tax the richest 2% which point is excellent ,clue me in he is full of crap and wants to make usa a 3rd world country like tha appalachian part of kantuckee
11:41 AM on 10/05/2010
He wants to tax the richest 2% LESS (as a percentage of income) than they are currently paying, which would still be MORE (as a percentage of income) than everyone else.

If you can't understand that or type in complete sentences then this discussion is a waste of my time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sean777
02:11 AM on 10/05/2010
The Economy is not in the hands of the President alone; we need the Senate, the House of Representatives and the Congress to act; the biggest danger we are facing is the Tea Party, a movement that suppose to be about fiscal responsibility has emerged as an obstructionist force against Democrats and true Republicans; instead of resourcing on economists to move a fiscal responsibility agenda the Tea Party is based on racism, hooliganism and predatorily politics we need to stop them on November.

Tea Party Bullies:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/04/whos-crazier-orly-taitz-o_n_251270.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S38VioxnBaI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb_yqcxiVlY&feature=related

We can live with true Republicans in power but we can not allow Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Joe Miller, Mike Lee, Ron Johnson, Jim DeMint, Ken Buck, Pat Toomey, Tom Emmer, Nikki Haley, Dino Rossi, Marco Rubio or Sharron Angle take a seat in the Senate. The Tea Party does not necessarily stands by Republican or as a matter of fact American values. The Tea Party is like dealing with a TERMINATOR: “It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever,” until we are deep into an economic depression.
02:26 AM on 10/05/2010
Calling the Tea Party racist only discredits you and everything else you say.
photo
Beercandyman
Never deny to someone else, the rights you enjoy.
03:47 AM on 10/05/2010
not %100
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Candide33
I heart Bernie Sanders
08:35 AM on 10/05/2010
The thousands of pictures, the hundreds of articles, all the videos prove that the Tea-Party is racist and elitist ... you have no proof to the contrary.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mitsie
11:11 PM on 10/04/2010
A good question for Rand, you propose changing Medicare and Social Security, specifically the young people. If they don't pay into Medicare/Social taxes, how is there enough money to take care of us Seniors, esp. when the baby boomers will retire soon. Also what is going to happen to he youngerr people who get seriously ill, or the disabled child who are now eligable for social security. Just how is he going to suggest these people get covered. Many disabled will have life threatening conditions develop if they aren't cared for,or they need this money to live in their own homes and be as productive that they can do. Why can't these radicals see this or are they the ones who are disabled with some kind problem that causes him to be incompetent. These people who wear their religeon on their sleeves and don't believe in trying to help those less fortunate then them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mr Anonymous
Mumpsimus, I am not entertained!
10:07 PM on 10/04/2010
Wow, and that was on Fox News
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mrrobinson2u
Respect for Marriage Act NOW! Repeal DOMA NOW!
08:54 PM on 10/04/2010
Good for Wallace calling him on the fact that what he was saying about illegal immigrants was NOT true. Good clip. Paul came off sounding like he had no idea what the hell he was talking about. Made Conway look even smarter than he already did.
01:58 AM on 10/05/2010
Do you have selective hearing? Paul explained that providers aren't allowed to ask if they are illegals or not. Effectively, illegals are covered as long as they don't volunteer the info that they are illegal.
photo
Beercandyman
Never deny to someone else, the rights you enjoy.
03:50 AM on 10/05/2010
DADT?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Candide33
I heart Bernie Sanders
08:38 AM on 10/05/2010
That is only in hospital emergency rooms, at the Medicaid office they have to have a ton of documentation to qualify... so he lied again.
photo
paleoimage
I'm happy to live in a fact based world
06:14 PM on 10/04/2010
and I don't understand why I can't start my own certification board when the American Board of Opthalmology won't recognize me anymore. I can whatever I want... I'm Rand Paul and I approve of what I want, when I want.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mr Jake
05:40 PM on 10/04/2010
Let me address the elephant in the room. What is fair and balanced about Chris Wallace referring to health care reform as "Obamacare"? We need a federal law cracking down on propaganda on prime time television.
01:59 AM on 10/05/2010
1st Amendment silly wabbit.
photo
Beercandyman
Never deny to someone else, the rights you enjoy.
03:55 AM on 10/05/2010
I think "Obamacare" will be a positive phrase in 2-4 years. The right is so short sighted. They will cut their liberty off despite their security.
JNarragansett
Check your premises
04:04 PM on 10/04/2010
Tax cuts are a cost to government in the same way that you leaving early from work (if you're paid by the hour) is a cost to government. Make sure to work as much overtime as possible so that you are not costing the government anything by depriving them of revenue.

Deficits are created when spending outpaces revenue. W. increased spending from the traditional 21% of GDP to 25% of GDP. This was wrong, and the driving force behind the deficit. Current plans are to increase spending to 40% of GDP by mid century. This is even worse. If you're worried about deficits, look to spending rather than revenues.
05:21 PM on 10/04/2010
Tax cuts are a loss in tax revenue, which in turn creates deficits....remember, these were tax CUTS, not the standard progressive tax scale that was changed....the government offered a reward to jump start the economy...at what point do you write it off as not working? The tax cuts have been in place for nearly 10 years, and have created LESS jobs than the stimulus package....
JNarragansett
Check your premises
05:33 PM on 10/04/2010
I look at other factors, including the creation and bursting of the dot com and real estate bubbles and how that had an impact on the economy. Do you think those things had an impact? We still have one of the highest marginal tax rates around.

Looking at the facts above concerning spending as a percentage of GDP. Remembering that deficits are created when spending outpaces revenue, how can you claim that revenue is the problem?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Omnix
Hey, Karma, I have a list of a few you missed...
06:34 PM on 10/04/2010
Nice... F & F
06:40 PM on 10/04/2010
When the tax cuts passed the government was already running a deficit. Taking revenue away is supposed to change that? CBO, CBPP, Concord Coalition, Brookings Institute, Mankiw, Bush`s head of the Council of Economic Advisers, and that "leftist" publication, The Wall Street Journal, all say the tax cuts blew up the deficit, and the debt. What are your qualifications to refute these experts?
JNarragansett
Check your premises
07:24 PM on 10/04/2010
As I said, deficits are created when spending outpaces revenue. All of those experts would agree with this point. Do you dispute the dramatic increase in spending started by Bush and increased under Obama? If not, then you should be more concerned with doubling spending than a slight dip in revenues.
03:58 PM on 10/04/2010
Kentucky you deserve better than Rand Paul!!
photo
homer winslow
Truth in Beauty, Beauty in Truth
03:41 PM on 10/04/2010
"I know, but it's illegal to ask them if they're illegal. "

Sort of like it's stupid to ask Rand if he is Stupid.
photo
DrBlunt
Telling it like it is....
03:19 PM on 10/04/2010
"I Don't See Extending The Bush Tax Cuts As 'A Cost To Government'"

~~ HELEN KELLER IN DA HOUSE ! ~~
photo
robbob35
preserve liberty
05:08 PM on 10/04/2010
Are all liberals economically and philosophically illiterate? Let's start at the beginning. Who's money is it?

When you go to work and get a paycheck, is it your opinion that all of that money really belongs to the government and they just let you keep some subsistance level amount? If so, you are not a free man and further, you do not even deserve to be.

It's not that extending tax cuts is an expense to the government, it's that raising taxes is an expense to the taxpayer.
photo
psmarc93
Mean people suck
05:21 PM on 10/04/2010
My, you ARE confused. No one is suggesting that those of us who work for a paycheck will have their taxes raised. We're talking about those whose income is over $250,000 and the richest top percentages of the country -- the vast majority of whose wealth does not come from work, but investments and inheritance. If a few "workers" who "earn" several million a year will have an increase in taxes, or have their Bush tax vacation cut short, I'm not crying. However, the Democrats are fighting for those of us who will make the best use of the increase in income by spending it back into the economy (not saving, or investing it, or investing in overseas economies).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tangelan
"We don't believe you!" Alright, alright.
10:42 PM on 10/04/2010
If we had to borrow money to get money then its not ours.
03:05 PM on 10/04/2010
If Paul wants to reduce US spending I suggest that we start by eliminating Oil and Gas subsidies, Coal subsidies, mining subsidies, agricultural subsidies, lumbering subsidies etc.

Let's get rid of all corporate welfare first !
photo
Beercandyman
Never deny to someone else, the rights you enjoy.
04:29 AM on 10/05/2010
That is the story of the real tea party. Taxes on tea went down because the East India Company got a break (http://www.boston-tea-party.org) while the American importers kept the old tax rate. The right thinks that taxes went up hence "no taxation without representation" is about driving down taxes when it is really about "corporations must pay their share."

It's funny how history gets twisted in the wrong hands.