By Stark
U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen, Democratic congressman representing the district that includes Whatcom County, has issued a press release saying he voted for the debt ceiling compromise because it averts a federal debt default and mostly protects Medicare and Medicaid.
“Now we need to start creating jobs,” Larsen said. “We must protect investments like college loans, research and development and other efforts that will help America maintain a cutting edge economy. These investments will help America stay ahead of the competition and set the foundation for future economic growth.”
He also observes that the federal government will eventually need to raise more revenue if national leaders are serious about balancing the budget.
Here is the full text from Larsen:
“Today I voted to avert a default crisis. The impact of default on the low-income, middle class, and seniors would have been far worse than any of the cuts that are found in this bill.
“The people I represent asked me to protect Social Security and assistance programs for the poor, and this bill does that. This package totally protects Social Security, Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, food stamps and other critical programs from the draconian cuts some members of Congress wanted to see.
“The package largely takes changes to Medicare off the table. It protects Medicare from becoming a voucher system – a serious threat that would have ended the guaranteed benefit and program as we know it. But providers could take an overall two percent cut in reimbursement.
“Compromise is never perfect.
“I am disappointed that revenue is not a part of the final package. A truly balanced approach to balancing the budget over the next ten years requires revenue.
“On the other hand, the package does not exclude revenue in the future, and the President still retains veto authority over extension of the Bush-era tax cut for the top income earners.
“This bill forms a bi-partisan congressional committee to identify a minimum of $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next ten years. The committee must provide recommendations to both chambers of Congress for a clean, up-or-down vote.
“If the committee fails in its task, a trigger that is more like a hammer, will result in $1.2 trillion in across the board cuts. Half of these cuts will come from domestic programs and half from defense and security spending. That is a clear incentive for the committee to reach a compromise.
“Now we need to start creating jobs. We must protect investments like college loans, research and development and other efforts that will help America maintain a cutting edge economy. These investments will help America stay ahead of the competition and set the foundation for future economic growth.”
End press release
Rep. Larsen. Please tell us the truth. In fact over the next 5 years the budget is forecasting that revenues will increase by an average of 12% a year and with those increases we will still add over $4 trillion to the national debt. Do you really think that revenue is going to increase by 12% a year based purely on economic growth? Either the forecast is overly optimistic and we are in far deeper trouble then you have been telling us, or taxes will have to go up substantially just to meet our current commitments and then what do we do, raise them even more. The current plan calls for the Bush tax cuts to expire for everyone and includes all of the Obamacare tax increases, and we still are running deficits close to $800 billion a year. The implication is that if the Bush tax cuts are extended for everyone but high earners (which no doubt you would advocate) then the deficit goes up even further. What should the tax rates be for everyone so that we have a “balanced plan” and do you really think the current budget is sustainable and if not what are you going to do to make it more sustainable?
I belonged to the Democratic Party and voted for democrats because I hold humanitarian values and want to live in a civilized society with just, caring and sustainable practices. The “bi-partisan” compromise Larsen so proudly waved at me in his reply to my complaint about his vote reduces my choice to nothing; by being both democrat and Republican, he is nothing. There was no need to succumb to this bluff. It was just a dog and pony show to continue to make draconian cuts to our public programs. The math related to this is very simple: taxes in, infrastructure paid for. Our elected officials have created increasingly large corporate tax breaks while allowing most of our employment to be outsourced and most of our goods to be imported undercutting the little we do produce. This is unacceptable. I am looking for a candidate that will actually represent the 98% of us who are not millionaires. Recall Larsen.
Rick Larsen supports corporatism and the military industrial complex. So does John Koster. Vote for none of the above in 2012.
Very interesting… When Bill Clinton left office, we had a budget surplus. When Barrack Obama took office we were Trillions in debt.
Republicans ran up the National debt and then held our entire economy hostage over raising the debt ceiling… but to read these comments, you’d think it was all Rick Larsen’s fault. What a batch of knuckleheads, GEEZ!
If you look at the debt like driving a car, W sped it up to 64 mph but O put it into top gear at 174 mph, and Rick, he was along for most of the ride.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yxFtTwDcc&feature=player_embedded
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Steve,
Bill Clinton ran a deficit of $300B during his term, Bush had a deficit of $2 trillion and if Obama is president for 8 years then he will run up a debt of at least $8 trillion and likely will top $10 trillion. The 2 trillion Bush ran up is one of the reason his approval ratings was so low by the time he was done. But I am not sure it is logical to say that because Bush ran up a 2 trillion deficit it is OK for Obama to run up a $10 trillion deficit.
I never blamed Larsen for the deficit, I personally do not think he has a clue and therefore it is hard to blame him. I was intentionally (through this blog) asking Larsen as my elected representative what he thought of the unrealistic revenue forecast and given that taxes are going to go up for everyone already how much more he thought everyone should pay to have a “balanced” plan. I would have sent him a private email but I know that it would have been ignored and I suspect his staff is monitoring this blog so I thought it was a better way to get my questions heard.
I do love that Larsen, Obama, Reid and others say that the rich need to pay more and have more skin in the game, which may be a reasonable solution, but they never say how much they want them to pay. We could probably have a more reasonable dialogue on taxing the rich if there were actually a number. Is the right marginal tax rate for over 250,000 in income 34%, 37%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 70%, which is it. How much should everyone pay? Once you know that then you can add it up and see what revenues would be and then you could figure out what spending is reasonable and then we would now whether our worst fears are true, that spending is out of control. Given that you are fairly active in local politics and I doubt we would get a real answer out of any politicians, I will pose the question to you. Below is the current tax rates by income level, what would you set them at if you were President so that it was fair and we had a balanced approach. Keep in mind the numbers are taxable income and not total income so it is total income minus any deductions:
Not over $17,000 10%
Over $17,000 but not over $69,000 15%
Over $69,000 but not over $139,350 25%
Over $139,350 but not over $212,300 28%
Over $212,300 but not over $379,150 33%
Over $379,150 35%
We need to think outside the box to find ways for the American people to take back their democracy. We are being controlled by a Corporatopracy. This needs to stop. Now is the time to put the good of the people over any loyalty to political parties, union affiliations or friendships.
We now have a failed congress and a failed president. There are no heroes or heroines at the eleventh hour. If our Washington square along with other members of congress had acted and voted in a responsible manner we would not be in this invented crisis.
What did the “Washington Four” do to increase the revenue by closing the tax loop holes and tax the super rich and the big companies? What did they do to stop or cut the huge military budget? Look at their voting records. What did they do to prevent the huge cuts to human services at the last budget session?
I agree with the person who wants to recall Larsen. I wish to add the other three of the Washington Square to this.
Obama: No second term
Murray: Recall
Cantwell: vote her out
Larsen: recall.
The idea that Democrats would destroy the economy by raising tax rates into the stratosphere to keep up with skyrocketing spending increases is pure and utter hogwash spewed by the likes of Paul Ryan to scare citizens into supporting their nefarious budget plans. Don’t buy into the hype and spin!
President Obama has only called for modest tax increases on the richest Americans, by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire on those at the very top of the income pyramid. A few members of Congress, such as Kent Conrad, and others who served on the Bowles-Simpson Bipartisan Fiscal Commission, have called for the elimination of corporate tax loopholes, overseas tax shelters, and corporate subsidies. And, instead of taxing dividends and capital gains at the extremely low, special rate of 15 percent, many representatives (and even billionaires) argue that we should tax such sources of unearned income at normal rates, just like we always did before the Bush presidency. But, no. The GOP won’t hear of it.
Taxes are NOT “going to go up for everyone.”
Republican leaders in the House and Senate have made it clear that there will be no tax increases, not for even the rich, whereas many, many others agree that we will not be able to solve our long-term fiscal problems without additional revenues.
Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for the rich, as President Obama has proposed, would be a modest and important step in the right direction toward getting our fiscal house in order. Doing so would only increase the top marginal tax rate from 36 to 39 percent (historically, it was much, much higher).
Trying to broad-brush Democrats as irresponsible, big tax and spend liberals has been a useful political ploy, but it is wholly unsupported by the facts.
To hear Paul Ryan’s nonsensical spin on taxes, tune in at the nine and half minute mark: http://youtu.be/XdVODFombco