The budget that Senate Budget Committee Chair Patty Murray released yesterday stands in sharp contrast to the one that her House counterpart, Paul Ryan, released on Tuesday. Hers is more appropriate to meet the nation's economic and fiscal challenges.
Given the extent to which this part of the budget is already shrinking, there's simply no way to cut it by more than an additional $1 trillion without causing significant harm both now and in the future.
I have trouble with putting policy glosses on proposals that would deny health care coverage to millions of people and make care much more expensive to millions more. Because when more people lack health coverage, more people die.
A budget isn't just a bunch of numbers; it's a set of values that shows us a political party's vision for our country. It reveals whose side our leaders are on. And once again, Paul Ryan has made it crystal clear that he's not on the side of women and families.
It is a vicious circle that those who still espouse 19th-century free market economics do not want to recognize. What applied to a rural America where 70 percent still lived on farms cannot apply today to an urbanized U.S.
It's not just about numbers. It's not just about programs. It's about a philosophy that is fundamentally opposed to the values and principles upon which our country was founded. Let's face it. We are not a polarized nation. We are a nation at war with itself.
America can and should be better than Paul Ryan envisions it. Our nation should be a place where we are our brother's keeper, our sister's keeper. We are not a morally bankrupt nation, and so we must oppose Paul Ryan's proposals.
Is it courageous to camouflage hundreds of billions in cuts for the poor and disadvantaged in broad budget categories without identifying the programmatic cuts, so that analysts, journalists, and other policymakers can't identify the specific cuts and assess their impacts?