So there is jockeying around who is to be appointed to the deficit reduction committee (Republicans and Democrats begin Jockeying Anew in Next Phase of Budget Fight. New York Times, August 4, 2011: A1, A14).
We know that many Republican legislators have taken Grover Norquist's No Tax Increase pledge. This should automatically disqualify them from serving on the supercommittee.
For the sake of the Nation, I would hope that all members of the Committee would sign a pledge that between now and the end of November they will not meet with, talk with, read e-mails and text messages from, or receive legislative suggestions from lobbyists.
Sent to New York Times
Search This Blog
Showing posts with label spending cuts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spending cuts. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
Read My Lips: No New Taxes
Mr. Norquist is eloquent in telling us that spending is out of control (Read My Lips: No New Taxes, New York Times, July 222, 20111: A19). However he does not tell us where to make those cuts. Even Tea Party members want to bring the pork home to their states (Cost Cutters, Except When the Spending Is Back Home. New York Times, July 19, 2011)..
He also loses credibility in his crusade when he argues against reducing tax loopholes because he defines them as "tax increases." I, for one, would define removing loopholes as "spending cuts." It has the same effect on the deficit whether a dollar is sent in the mail to a social security beneficiary or whether it is deducted from the taxable income of an oil company.
It is the big subsidies to agro-business (corn, sugar), to hedge-fund managers, and to the oil companies that we need to cut, not the welfare of the inhabitants of Main Stree.
Sent to New York Times
He also loses credibility in his crusade when he argues against reducing tax loopholes because he defines them as "tax increases." I, for one, would define removing loopholes as "spending cuts." It has the same effect on the deficit whether a dollar is sent in the mail to a social security beneficiary or whether it is deducted from the taxable income of an oil company.
It is the big subsidies to agro-business (corn, sugar), to hedge-fund managers, and to the oil companies that we need to cut, not the welfare of the inhabitants of Main Stree.
Sent to New York Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)