Less than three months after being carried to power on the shoulders of the Tea Party, House Republicans have decided to literally spit in the eye of their benefactors -- by using their first major vote to advance a huge deficit-increasing bill.
That's right. The Republicans plan to vote to increase the deficit by $230 billion -- that's billion, with a "b" -- in their first official vote of this new Congress.
Cloaked in the guise of a repeal of the national health care plan, the GOP's efforts, if successful, will only serve to drag our nation into greater fiscal distress. Increasing the federal budget deficit by $230 billion, all in pursuit of a knee-jerk, right-leaning ideology that opposes anything President Obama does, seems immoral and backwards -- and will most certainly incur the wrath of the very Tea Partiers who lifted the GOP to majority status.
Can House Republicans really be so tone-deaf? Talk about the audacity of nope!
I'm not saying I'm surprised. But this attack on health care reform is truly abominable - and shows the true hypocrisy of the Republicans. It's not just the increase of the deficit. Take Rep. Steve King of Iowa, a vocal opponent of Obama's health care reform law. King said yesterday that he has no plans to give up his own federally subsidized health care plan, even as he publicly discusses his desire to dismantle President Obama's plan to extend affordable health care to millions of uninsured Americans.
In an interview with CNN, King was asked about fellow Republican Rep. Joe Walsh, who reiterated on Tuesday that he will forfeit his insurance coverage because it presents a conflict of interest with his own hope to kill Obama's reform plan. When asked whether he would follow in Walsh's footsteps, King's utter lack of self-awareness was on full display:
I don't intend to pull off of it, but I give [Walsh] a lot of credit for that... I went to Chicago to help him in the campaign, and I give him a lot of credit for standing on this principle.
Incredible.
Unfortunately, guys like King are calling the shots now -- and this is a harbinger of the uphill climb facing all advocates for rational, commonsense policies that will help everyday Americans through hard economic times.
But they tell us this is politics, I guess. Get elected by saying you'll cut the deficit -- then immediately vote to explode it. Oppose a plan that allows millions of Americans to get the same health care you receive as a member of Congress -- but make sure you keep your Cadillac insurance plan for yourself.
This is why, when possible, we need to find solutions that start at home. We need to circumvent politics and get real results where they matter: on the ground in communities across America.
This approach is working with clean energy and energy efficiency, both commonly lumped together as contentious "issues" that are dissected in debates and campaigns. But they're really consumer issues. When we take them out of Congress and put them into terms that make sense to American consumers, they become tools for expanding the clean energy marketplace and creating new jobs for those who desperately need work.
Why circumvent Congress? Because even if the climate bill hadn't sputtered out last year, who's to say that Boehner and Co. wouldn't be on the House floor promising to repeal it right this very minute? If we keep putting our entire clean energy future in the fickle, changing hands of government, all it takes is an election to change the tide.
So 2011, we'll be working harder than ever to keep the tide rolling in the right direction -- in cities, towns and communities across America. While the GOP divides and dissembles -- and neglects our energy challenges -- we'll be working to break down barriers to clean energy and energy efficiency understanding and adoption. I truly believe that this is the best way to make America's clean energy future a reality.
After all, we won't accomplish much if we wait around for Rep. Boehner and Rep. King to get the job done. Unless the job is reversing economic recovery in America, that is.
Follow Brian Keane on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SmartPower_org
“CBO says the deficit will approach $1.5 TRILLION. “ (W. Post 1/27)
Perhaps this should not be to much of a shock but for most of us it is.
Much of the discussion about the causes of this fiscal crisis in my view is a sham to a large extent, political chicanery and dodge ball. It has come about to a large extent because of the George W. huge tax cuts and extension of same through Republican, taking our middle class hostageâ€. Then we have tremendously bloated open ended health care provider and administrative costs, bloated “earmarked†military expense, Medicare, etc.
Medicare: it was created not as an “insurance†program or self financing, partly because the tremendous and artificial bloating of provider costs was not foreseen. We need to impose a tax on earnings to resemble that on Social Security.
Social Security: Over time and by political design the word “SOCIAL†has been all but forgotten, notwithstanding that SSI provides income to the severely disabled. It becomes increasingly apparent that is not. It is and has always been a “social†program. Face it.
Not very painful to remedy if done wisely. With medical costs inflation and burgeoning longevity, the Social S. tax must be modestly increased, exemptions removed and benefits means tested for beneficiaries making over whatever amount.
As the ELDER Geo. Bush came to realize in respect to taxes, we can’t have out cake and eat it too. Wise up America. Where is Paul Revere!?
RE: Remedy the Medicare cost deficit: "It becomes increasingÂly apparent that is not.
I intended to say: " - -that is is not SELF FINANCING."
Wall Street Journal:
The CBO's Fuzzy ObamaCare Math By BETSY MCCAUGHEY January 8, 2011
It is NOT THE CBO'S math which is "FUZZY". It is, if any, someone else's. You can decide whose.
"The need to balance the budget over some time period determined by the movements of celestial objects is a myth. When a country operates on a fiat monetary regime, debt and deficit limits and even bond issues for that matter are self-imposed, i.e. there are no financial constraints inherent in the fiat system that exist under a gold-standard or fixed exchange rate regime. But that superstition is seen as necessary because if everyone realizes that government is not actually financially constrained then it might spend “out of control†taking too large a percent of the nation’s resources. "
http://wallstreetpit.com/35933-the-myths-about-government-debt-and-deficit-as-told-by-carmen-reinhart-and-kenneth-rogoff
It is past time for American voters to end this two-faced one-party racket, yet it is going to take a great deal of pain before most will figure this out.
I also wouldn’t assume that insurance companies’ profits would decrease if the Court rules the mandate is unconstitutional. However the bill might be revised or replaced could produce even greater profits. No?
I mean, the "Teabagger" fiscal plan is completely unworkable. They want a balanced budget, and they don't want any deficit. But they also want reduced taxes, and don't touch their Social Security or Medicare, darn it! They also don't want defense spending cut, and if you start mentioning areas that could definitely stand to be trimmed - farm subsidies, for example, I'm quite sure that a lot of Tea Party members would get very upset.
I think that they believe if we cut welfare and Medicaid entirely, that will fix everything. Well, they're wrong, and their new representatives can't change facts for them.