FLASHBACK: House Members Who Voted Against This Supercommittee Sham

It's worth remembering that 66 Republican House members did not succumb to Speaker Boehner's high pressure tactics and voted against putting the American people through this sham they're calling the Supercommittee. Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, who led the charge against the debt ceiling deal, was threatened with the loss of his seat through redistricting for his defiance of Boehner. We will never know what kind of arm-twisting other members faced behind the scenes.

Some of these members may yet face retribution from "The Party" in the form of loss of support when it comes time for re-election. If your representative is on this list, it might be a good time to call or email to thank him for doing the right thing and if you're able, send a donation. If your Congress member voted for the debt deal, you might want to take a minute to let her know you haven't forgotten that she voted for this scam that everyone knew would accomplish absolutely nothing.

Todd Akin MO-2
Justin Amash MI-3
Michele Bachmann MN-6
Rob Bishop UT-1
Mo Brooks AL-5
Paul Broun GA-10
Ann Marie Buerkle NY-25
Dan Burton IN-5
Jason Chaffetz UT-3
Chip Cravaack MN-8
Geoff Davis KY-4
Scott DesJarlais TN-4
Jeffrey Duncan SC-3
Jeff Flake AZ-6
Chuck Fleischmann TN-3
John Fleming LA-4
J. Randy Forbes VA-4
Trent Franks AZ-2
Scott Garrett NJ-5
Phil Gingrey GA-11
Louie Gohmert TX-1
Trey Gowdy SC-4
Tom Graves GA-9
Morgan Griffith VA-9
Ralph M. Hall TX-4
Andy Harris MD-1
Vicky Hartzler MO-4
Tim Huelskamp KS-1
Randy Hultgren IL-14
Duncan D. Hunter CA-52
Timothy V. Johnson IL-15
Walter B. Jones NC-3
Jim Jordan OH-4
Steve King IA-5
Jack Kingston GA-1
Raul Labrador ID-1
Doug Lamborn CO-5
Jeff Landry LA-3
Tom Latham IA-4
Connie Mack FL-14
Tom McClintock CA-4
Mick Mulvaney SC-5
Randy Neugebauer TX-19
Devin Nunes CA-21
Ron Paul TX-14
Steve Pearce NM-2
Ted Poe TX-2
Bill Posey FL-15
Ben Quayle AZ-3
Denny Rehberg MT-1
Martha Roby AL-2
Todd Rokita IN-4
Dennis Ross FL-12
Steve Scalise LA-1
David Schweikert AZ-5
Austin Scott GA-8
Tim Scott SC-1
Steve Southerland FL-2
Cliff Stearns FL-6
Marlin Stutzman IN-3
Scott Tipton CO-3
Michael R. Turner OH-3
Joe Walsh IL-8
Lynn Westmoreland GA-3
Joe Wilson SC-2
Kevin Yoder KS-3

Two things we can salvage from this deal

It has been 274 days since the historic 2010 election swept a a new wave of Republicans into Congress - many of them professing to be fiscal conservatives who embraced the values of the Tea Party.  Many of us worked hard to elect legislators who represented our values and we expected something in return. Speaker Boehner promised us fiscal responsibility and transparency. What we got was a deal crafted behind closed doors (perhaps even on the golf course - so much for that 72 hours rule) and budget cuts that amount to a few grains of sand on the beach of our massive federal spending which will do little to curb our crushing federal debt.  Pardon my cynicism, but we sent these people to Washington to change the trajectory and by most accounts, this "deal" is all smoke and mirrors, gimmicks and accounting tricks.


When they were campaigning last year, these avowed conservatives told us that if they were elected we should "hold their feet to the fire" and demand that they keep their promise to get spending under control. The time has come. Although The Budget Control Act of 2011 is now a done deal,  they can still redeem themselves in our eyes and demonstrate some semblance of fiscal responsibility in this process.  Here's how:


1.  Vote on the Balanced Budget Amendment before the 2012 election.
Every single member of Congress needs to be on record about the BBA before voters go to the polls in November. The text of S. 365 says:

"After September 30, 2011, and not later than December 31, 2011, the House of Representatives and Senate, respectively, shall vote on passage of a joint resolution, the title of which is as follows: ‘‘Joint resolution proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.’’

Of course, there will be resistance, particularly in the Senate. The 20 Democrats who have supported the BBA in the past will have to explain why they won't vote for it now.  But the bill anticipated that.  The BBA can originate in either the House or the Senate and the bill demands that the other chamber must act on it quickly:

(b) SENATE CONSIDERATION.—(1) If the Senate reeives a joint resolution described in section 201 from the House of Representatives, such joint resolution shall be referred to the appropriate committee of the Senate. If such committee has not reported the joint resolution at the close of the fifth session day after its receipt by the Senate, such committee shall be automatically discharged from further consideration of the joint resolution and it shall be placed on the appropriate calendar.

There are also rules to prohibit maneuvers that would kill or table the bill:

"Consideration of the joint resolution and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than 20 hours, which shall be divided equally between the majority and minority leaders or their designees. A motion further to limit debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment to, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit the joint resolution is not in order. Any debatable motion or appeal is debatable for not to exceed 1 hour, to be divided equally between those favoring and those opposing the motion or appeal."

Speaker Boehner should put a carefully crafted, clean Balanced Budget Amendment on the schedule as the first order of business upon returning from summer recess. Pass it and then send it immediately to the Senate.  Forcing members to vote on it before the election will increase the chances of it passing. Each and every member of Congress who votes against it should be held accountable on election day.

2.  The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction must include serious Constitutional conservatives.


Stacking the committee with namby-pamby moderate Republicans will not be acceptable. The Democrats will not reciprocate - they will not send their moderates.  Actually, in the context  of our desperate need to cut spending, can anyone think of a single Democrat who would be considered a moderate?  Note that a recent Rasmussen poll showed that  49% of Americans think the Tea Party movement is good for America and 45% believe that Tea Party members have a better understanding of our country's problems than members of Congress do.  It would be unconscionable to exclude their views from this important debate.
Appointments to the committee are to be made by the following:

(i) The majority leader of the Senate shall appoint three members from among Members of the Senate.  (ii) The minority leader of the Senate shall appoint three members from among Members of the Senate.  The Speaker of the House of Representatives shall appoint three members from among Members of the House of Representatives. (iv) The minority leader of the House of Representatives shall appoint three members from among Members of the House of Representatives.

Three for Senator McConnel and three for Speaker Boehner.  The GOP must choose wisely.
In an interview with Greta Van Sustern, Senator McConnel indicated that his main goal was reaching a consensus rather than fighting for spending cuts and reducing the deficit:

"I'm looking for someone who is solid philosophically but also interested in getting an outcome. You know, I think if everybody puts on our most partisan members, nothing happens. We need to get an outcome. Our country is looking for an outcome. We need to save entitlements. It's absolutely essential. They're not going to be there in a few years. And we've had a difficult time getting that done sort of doing things the way we always do it around here so it's time to try something different. And that's what the joint committee is about."

When Greta suggested that strategically it might be a good idea to wait to see if the Democrats stack their side of the committee with partisans before choosing his members, McConnell said he's still going blindly, recklessly for consensus-building:

"I'm going to pick three people that I think are serious, responsible people who want an outcome for the country in a way that Republicans believe in and I'm not going to pay any attention to who anybody else puts up. I"m only responsible for my three and I'm going to make sure they're serious, constructive people who have the same vision for the future of America that I do and that most party members do."

Once again, we're going to get rolled by the Democrats. The Democrats are certainly not going to sit in the dugout waiting to see if the Republicans are going to send "non-partisans" to the plate before choosing their lineup. They're going to send in the heart of their order to get the best deal possible before the election. And McConnell will send in the team from the Old Timers game.

And in the House, Mr. Boehner should be reminded of his recent statement when allegations were made that he would retaliate against Rep. Jim Jordan for his lack of support for Boehner's plan in the House:

“Jim Jordan and I may not always agree on strategy, but we are friends and allies, and the word retribution is not in my vocabulary."

A vote against Boehner's plan should not be grounds for disqualification from committee membership.
I'd also like to remind the Speaker of something he said just a few days before November's historic election at a campaign event for Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH).

"And so, Mr. President, I've got a word for those people, those people who oppose your policies, those people who love our Constitution, who love freedom and who love the principals that America was built on. You know what I call those people?  Not enemies - they're patriots!"

We must insist that both the Speaker and the Minority Leader each appoint at least one Constitution-loving patriot who represents the values of the Tea Party to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction.  Because the President and the Democrats are vowing tax increases, it is the only way to assure those of us who worked tirelessly this past election cycle that the committee is little more than Congressional Theater Redux or a rubber stamp for the President.  In addition, such a move heading into 2012 would build a bridge between the GOP establishment and the Tea Party. To exclude these members would be bowing to the ugly rhetoric and accusations of those calling us terrorists and hostage-takers. They should not be permitted to silence and marginalize the views of a majority of Americans.

Clearly, Senator McConnel is not inclined to go this route. To my knowledge, Speaker Boehner has not given us a peek at his lineup card yet.  If conservatives launch an all-out effort to demand representation on the committee, perhaps they will be swayed.  If Obama can Tweet-stalk Congress, conservatives can do it to Boehner and McConnell, I suppose.

It's quite simple. If  the end game of this deal is higher taxes and no Balanced Budget Amendment, we will take these legislators at their word and "hold their feet to the fire."  They can be replaced. If 2010 showed us anything, it demonstrated that everything has changed and no seat is safe. We the People have spoken and we will not be silenced with a tiny bone here and there.  We want to see real, measurable change in the way Congress does business. Complacency is not an option.

 Crossposted at Red State

Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI): American Dream for her grandkids includes WIC and Head Start

In a rare moment of overt frankness, Rep. Gwen Moore (Socialist-WI) searched her soul and ended up giving away the Democrats’ end-game plan in her one-minute speech on the House floor Monday. In what was likely intended to be a rant against Tea Party constitutional conservatives who see the cliff we’re driving our grandchildren off, Moore shared the startling, depressing vision she has for her own grandchildren (and likely yours as well):

“So, I wanted to go on record talking about what I want for my grandchildren. I want Head Start for my grandchildren. I want WIC programs and early childhood education programs…I want jobs where they invent things like new energy sources, and yes, I want them to be contributing citizens and pay taxes and I want a safety net for them in case they’re disabled and when they become elderly and when they get cold in the cold winters of Wisconsin that they’ll have some energy assistance. I want my grandchildren to get the American Dream.”

At least give her credit for admitting the truth. The American Dream for the DemoSocialcrats includes an income of $20,050 (the WI Head Start cut off) to $40,793 (the WI WIC maximum income) for a family of four.

Every single day, when Congresswoman Gwen Moore and others of her ilk get out of bed in the morning, they vow to work tirelessly to fulfill their dream of every child on WIC. Every child in Head Start. Every child dependent on the government. This is the best they can hope for in their Utopian Collective.

And then maybe, if the social welfare programs are really, really successful and her grandchildren are really lucky, they can someday aspire to become “contributing citizens and pay taxes.” The irony that being a taxpayer and being dependent on the government are fundamentally incompatible is lost on Ms. Moore. The absurdity of the American Dream and and WIC in the same paragraph would be laughable if the ideology wasn’t day-by-day, dollar-by-dollar destroying our county.

I hope the Honorable Congresswoman Moore’s grandchildren (and their parents) have higher ambitions and aspirations for their own lives than the low bar she has set for them. We must not let this ideology win.

Cross posted at Red State

Who let the Moonbats out? Democratic demagogues on the House floor

The House debated (in theory) the rules for the debate on the Boehner plan for raising the debt ceiling.  In reality, the debate was mostly Democrats lambasting the GOP for their unwillingness to compromise (read: do exactly what the Dems want).   The speeches devolved into absurdity and demonstrate the deep divide in ideology between the two parties.  One party believes that we must reign in spending and demonstrate to our creditors and the markets that we are fiscally responsible. The other side believes that we must provide an equal share of the American Dream for everyone.  Inequality is a greater evil than massive federal debt.   The primary debate tool for the Democrats is fear-mongering.  Throwing nursing home residents into the streets.  Holding social security checks hostage.   Throwing veterans under the bus. 


No one knows what cuts will be made under Boehner's plan.   The buck has been passed down the road to the hands of the joint committee formed by this bill.   So the threats made by the Democrats are completely speculative, at best.  Nevertheless, they persist in scaring seniors and the most vulnerable to sway public opinion, a tried and true strategy. 


Here are some choice quotes form the speeches on the floor of the House this morning:

"We have the Constitutional power to create money and invest in jobs"  Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).  

This, my friends, is the root of the problem.  Congress has no power to "create" money (presumably, out of nothing) unless Kucinich is just straight-out talking about printing currency, which technically, Congress may do under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  Is he proposing that we go Weimar Republic?  Note that Kucinich claims to have seen aliens on more than one occasion, so the thought that he can create money out of thin air isn't a stretch for him. It's a good thing he's a Moonbats and no one listens to him. 

~~~~~

From the Groundhog Day file...

"Heads up America! This isn't just about raising the debt limit.  This is about fundamental change about all the things that we hold dear here in America. If you care about Medicare for your parents or you happen to be 65, pay attention to what's going to be on this floor in the next couple of hours. If you think social security's important to you or to your parents and to your future as the foundation of your pension, pay attention to what's going on here. Because have no doubt America that the Republican Party is putting forth using the debt ceiling as a lever putting in place fundamental change in Medicare basically looking to terminate Medicare as we know it and changing the social security so that it's no longer the foundation for your pensions. Heads up America because the Republican party is going right at the very heart of the stable and most important part of every retirees future. Pay attention. Pay attention.  Because this is a critical moment"  Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA).

Perhaps the Congressman got this speech mixed up with his speech in opposition to the Paul Ryan budget plan?  

~~~~~

"Yes, we absolutely must avert the looming crisis that could force the Federal government to default and put our ailing economy into a tailspin" David Dreier (R-CA).

Please stop saying that. No one believes that we will default on our debt obligations unless the President irresponsibly, for political reasons, chooses to do so

~~~

"After a hundred years, almost, of protecting the full faith and credit of the United States, by raising the debt ceiling without pause, the majority has decided to hold the debt ceiling hostage to drastic cuts and place the burden squarely upon the shoulders of the middle class.  This unprecedented effort to put ideology above country has led us to the brink of default, a prospect that is all too real as we vote today."   Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY)

Because of course, the Democrats have no ideological skin in this game. They are in this game for purely altruistic reasons and they're all about compromise and bipartisanship:

"Compromise is part of the democratic way....Let me me read the roll why senators are not voting - the other body is not voting. Democrats recognize this is not the way to go:

•  You will lose your Medicare.

• Pell grants will not be available for young people.

• Medicaid will see in its loss seniors being put out of nursing homes. 

• And then we'll have Social Security, our nation's safety net, being trampled on. 

• The loss of America's savings. The DOW went down 200 points yesterday. Just wait 'till we do it again and again.

• The American dream of buying a home will be lost. 

• And all of our mobility systems - America's railroads, airports and airlines will be jeopardized.

"Pay our bills! And if we cannot pay our bills Mr. President, use our Constitution and use the 14th amendment if we cannot pay our bills.  For my friends on the other side of the aisle, many of us have already voted for a clean debt ceiling.  We're willing to do it again, but we will not suffer the idea of a one-sided government that takes away entitlement, that caps spending for those who are in need and that balances the budget on the backs of those who are suffering from devastating disasters like states like Missouri, states like Alabama with all of the flooding.  This is not the way to go. Vote 'no' this rule and vote 'no' on the underlying bill.  Pray for America"  Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX)

Even the liberal San Francisco Chronicle doesn't buy that fear-mongering, offering this assessment:

"Both plans would dump all the hard decisions on taxes and entitlements on a bipartisan super-committee that could end up just as deadlocked a few months down the road....Republicans will have sacrificed a rare chance at entitlement reform to freeze in place a terrible tax code and save a bloated and overextended military. Democrats will have protected an out-of-control Medicare program from even the slightest trims and sacrificed domestic spending on real investments in transportation, education, the environment and the rest of the domestic agencies that are not the source of chronic deficits. President Obama, who talked the game of deficit reduction from his first days in office but was AWOL at every turning point -- most especially when he dismissed the findings of his own Bowles-Simpson deficit commission -- will emerge not as the centrist savior he hoped to be, but a weakling to his own faithful."

Which party gave us the corporate jet tax loophole? Guess again.

Paul Ryan (R-WI) was on Fox News' Greta Van Susteren show last night to talk about  - what else - the debt ceiling circus.  I've been rather surprised that Ryan, the House Budget Committee Chairman has been mostly absent from the talks and debate.  He's been squirreled away in a dark room holding Medicare hearings.  Certainly, important work, but I'd love to see him out front on this issue because as a numbers guru, he's able to explain and articulate the rationale for the GOP's strong stand on cutting spending and not raising taxes. I'd much rather have him give the GOP response to Obama's  pep rally press conference pep rally tomorrow than Boehner. 


Finally, someone let Ryan out of the dingy House hearing room tonight and even though he coughed and cleared his throughout the interview with Greta, he brought up an important point that someone needs to scream from the rooftops.  Namely, that the so-called "corporate jet loophole" was a part of the Obama stimulus package. No kidding - it was the DEMOCRATS WHO GAVE US THE CORPORATE JET TAX LOOPHOLE!


Ryan told Greta:

'It was in the stimulus package. None of us voted for the stimulus package.  This was called accelerated depreciation. It's a tax policy that the president put into his stimulus package and passed. Now he's saying that it's a corporate jet loophole. It  applies to lots of things, airplanes included. What I find interesting about this one particular issue was it never came up in our debt negotiations, it never came up in discussions. The first time I heard about a corporate jet loophole, which was in the stimulus package, was when he mentioned it six times in a press conference. "

In February, 2009, Fox News reported:

"Just a few months after lawmakers scolded auto executives for flying to Washington in private jets, Congress approved a tax break in the stimulus package to help businesses buy their own planes. The incentive -- first used to help plane makers recover from the 2001 terror attacks -- sharply reduces the up front tax bill for companies who buy assets like business planes.

The aviation industry, which is cutting jobs as it suffers from declining shipments and canceled orders, hopes the tax break in the economic-stimulus bill just signed by President Barack Obama will persuade more companies to buy planes and snap a slump in general aviation that began last year.

"This is exactly the type of financial incentive that should be included in a stimulus bill," said Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., in an interview. His state lost at least 6,900 jobs at Cessna and Hawker Beechcraft, both based in Wichita."

Of course, rather than taking responsibility for the loopholes, Obama looked into the teleprompter and read, "It's the Republicans' fault, it's the Republicans' fault, it's the Republicans' fault."  Six times Obama repeated the fib about Republicans wanting to protect that tax loophole for millionaires. Apparently, TOTUS is stuck on that line. 



Paul Ryan expressed his frustration with the stalemate:

"Look, I understand it plays for good politics and class warfare and makes it look like all we care about is that corporate - who cares about that corporate jet loophole? It's - we want to get rid of all those loopholes in tax reform. And what people don't tell you is our Republican budget? That's exactly what we proposed doing! We're saying clear out the brush of loopholes and lower everyone's tax rates so we can create jobs in the economy.  That way the government doesn't lose any money but we clean up the tax code and we're not picking winners and losers in the tax code.  General Electric paid no taxes but made a lot of money.  UPS, another big company, paid about a 34% tax rate and their competitor, DHL, paid 24%. So there's something wrong with the fact that we're taxing a lot of our employers more. "

Everyone clear on that now?  Obama?  Obama? ....?  

Where are the rhetorical rock stars in the debt ceiling debate?

Freshman Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) was on the Rush Limbaugh show yesterday to discuss the looming debt ceiling "crisis" and the monstrous federal deficit.  Hands down, the 40-year-old junior senator from Miami possesses the best rhetorical skills in the senate.  Whether on social or fiscal issues, Senator Rubio articulates conservative values eloquently, yet without the high-pitched rancor that others bring to the conversation.  Here are some excerpts from his conversation with Rush yesterday [emphasis added]:

SENATOR RUBIO: "The debt limit is a symptom. It's not our problem. The core problem is our debt and the fact that our government borrows 40¢ out of every dollar and has no idea how it's gonna pay it back...

"...[I]nstead, we've got this President's obsession with raising taxes -- and what bothers me the most about it is not just that it will kill jobs and is bad for our economy. What bothers me the most is there isn't a single tax package out there that's reasonable and realistic that would even put a dent on this debt crisis. I mean, people have no idea what you'd have to raise in taxes in this country to just to begin to make a difference. Of course you never can raise it to that level because you won't be able to collect them because, you know, people aren't dumb enough to work for free. I mean, if you're gonna tax all their money they're not gonna keep working. So these are the things I just don't get and I wish we had done a better job earlier of outlining these choices to the American people..."

"...By every measure that you can measure a president by, things have gotten worse, and significantly worse, and that's what he has to be measured by, and part of it I think is a flawed ideology. His view of government and the people in his administration is a flawed view that takes us away from the things that have made America exceptional and part of it is, quite frankly, incompetence. I honestly believe, and I don't say this with any disrespect, I really don't know him, I have nothing personal against him but I honestly think there's a lack of competence in terms of being able to do the job and the ability to lead on some of these critical issues and the result is being paid by, you know, millions of Americans who can't find a job or are working twice as hard to make half as much, who see their country being bankrupted and no serious solutions being offered..."

"...But let me tell you one thing, Rush, that no one said yet or maybe they have, the fact that payments on Social Security and Medicare may stop is a stinging indictment and a wake-up call. What Americans should realize, "Hold on a second, my Social Security check and my Medicare benefits are borrowed? The money that you're using to pay for my Social Security are borrowed? I thought I paid into a trust fund. I thought I worked my whole life to pay into some system and now you're paying my money back and you're claiming that the money is being borrowed?" That's what they're basically conceding when they're saying this."

RUSH: Yeah. You know, that's exactly right. We always thought Social Security was in a lockbox.

SENATOR RUBIO: "Well, maybe a Chinese lockbox because that's what we're borrowing the money from. The point is if that comes to pass or he's threatening to do that, then the wake-up call and the message to Americans is, hey, your Social Security benefits, your Medicare benefits, what we're paying soldiers in the field, all these things that are being cut off, this is borrowed money. This is not money we have or money we saved for you. This is money we are borrowing from your children and your grandchildren, and we have no way of paying it back, and that alone should send a chill up the spine of millions of Americans."

I don't pretend to know the inner workings of the Congress - how someone like Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) maneuvers his way into the position of Speaker of the House and how someone like Sen. Mitch McConnel (R-KY), who seems to some observers to be weak and  ineffective, gets to be the senate minority leader.  I do know that when I hear Sen. McConnell trying to defend the GOP position on the debt ceiling debate I cringe and know that the battle is mostly lost.  And when I see Rep. Boehner trudging to the microphone looking like he's walking The Green Mile,  I wonder if he's going to burst into to tears, out of sheer despondence over the plight of social security beneficiaries whose checks will surely bounce if he doesn't make a deal with Obama. 


Neither of these leaders has the rhetorical skills needed to win this debate that is playing out before the eyes of the American people.  It brings to mind the Nixon/Kennedy debate, where Nixon "lost" in the court of public opinion because he hadn't mastered the art of television. 

So now again, the GOP is sending the Spirit of Nixon to the plate to fight for the economic survival of our very Republic.  Day after day, as McConnell drags himself to the floor of the senate and gives speeches that no one listens to and as Boehner tries (rather unconvincingly)  to convince us he's "in it to win it," we're plunging further into this economic suicide pact.  


Meanwhile, we have rhetorical rock stars in the House and Senate who can go toe to toe with Obama and win this battle of ideas.  Sen. Marco Rubio. Sen. Rand Paul.  Rep. Paul Ryan. Rep. Allen West.   Of course, most of us know in our hearts they're not on the same page as Boehner and the GOP establishment.  They stand with the American people who are tired of these backroom deals and fantasy bookkeeping tactics.   Which is why Boehner, et al cannot afford to hand them the microphone and give them a voice in this debate.  

Finally...someone explains the debt ceiling debate!

Finally...someone explains the debt ceiling debate! 

Today I am pleased to share a guest post from our friends at the Medina Tea Party Patriots. 

Amy and Jeff have done the hard work of analyzing the nuts and bolts details surrounding the debt ceiling in light of the fact that the government was expected to hit the $14.294 trillion debt ceiling yesterday.  They've managed to cut through a lot of the spin and have cited reputable sources in their research.  I encourage you to visit their website and subscribe to their e-mail list to keep up on legislative issues in Ohio and nationally.   I am grateful to them for giving me permission to post their report here today: 

The debt ceiling debate takes center stage
With the report that the government is expected to hit the $14.294 trillion debt ceiling today, we can assume that part of Congressman Renacci’s town hall tomorrow will focus on this critical issue.

In the past, we’ve expressed our opposition to raising the debt ceiling and our support for the Full Faith and Credit Act. We would like to share with you part of our research, so you can understand our reasons for the positions we’ve taken. When it comes to important debates like these, we ask that you do your own due diligence by looking at all sides of the issues to see what is most fiscally responsible for our nation


Debunking the dire consequences of Congress not taking action

According to the Reason Foundation, a non-partisan public policy research organization, the 2011 fiscal year revenue outweighs the net interest payments. [1]

 “If Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling, the federal government will still have more than enough money to fully service the debt. This year, for instance, about 6.1 percent of all projected federal expenditures will go to interest on the debt, and tax revenue is projected to cover about 60.1 percent of all government expenditures. With roughly 10 times more income than needed to honor its debt obligations, why would the government ever default?

Let’s sum it up: As long as the government continues to pay interest on the debt, then it technically is not in default. With tax revenues expected to be $2.2 trillion, interest payments amount to roughly $300 billion—this would still leave $1.9 trillion in revenues to pay for the government's most important priorities. For instance, lawmakers could decide to honor the promises made to people benefiting from entitlement spending, such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. In that case, even after paying for all of the entitlement spending, the Treasury would still have $300 billion left.”

In Heritage Foundation’s recent article, “Myth-Busting the Debt Ceiling,” they add to the argument, stating that dire predictions by the Left, who are claiming “double-dip recessions” and “worse financial crisis,” are not true. [2]:

“On the issue of the whether to raise the debt ceiling—allowing the government to borrow and spend even more money—President Barack Obama has resorted to dire predictions about what could happen if Congress does not take action. The Hill reports:

If investors around the world thought that the full faith and credit of the United States was not being backed up, if they thought that we might renege on our IOUs, it could unravel the entire financial system,” Obama said at a town hall meeting hosted by CBS last week but released Sunday.

“We could have a worse recession than we already had, a worse financial crisis than we already had.”

And, likewise, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner warned that if Congress does not raise the debt limit, the U.S. economy would likely enter a “double-dip recession” and added, “A default would inflict catastrophic, far-reaching damage on our nation’s economy, significantly reducing growth, and increasing unemployment.”

But Heritage Foundation Vice President of Domestic and Economic Policy David S. Addington notes that those dire predictions just aren’t true. In discussing J.D. Foster’s paper “Congress Has Time and Options on Debt Limit,” Addington writes:

As Dr. Foster’s paper demonstrated, there will not be a default on the Federal debt when the Treasury reaches the statutory limit on its borrowing of $14.294 trillion.  The Treasury just will not be able to borrow any more money.  The Treasury would still pay debts that come due, putting off temporarily payment of less important obligations as necessary to pay the maturing debt.”

Even the Republican Study Committee’s policy briefing on the debt limit proves we can continue to make payments on the debt. [3]

“However, the Treasury Department will receive more than sufficient revenue during the remainder of fiscal year 2011, $1.114 trillion between April and September 2011, to continue making payments on the debt with only roughly $105 billion in interest costs projected over the same period.”

Stopping the spending cycle
Since 1940, Congress has raised the debt ceiling 98 times, and over the last 10 years, the debt limit amount has more than doubled, going from $6.4 billion to $14.3 billion. [4] It seems Congress’ solution to the debt ceiling issue is to raise the limit, so they can continue to spend more of our money. The reality is it’s time to stop this out-of-control cycle. If we don’t do it now, then we are doing exactly what the Republicans in the House said that they refused to do – just kicking the can down the road.

Standing with the majority of Americans
In poll after poll, the results are clear - an overwhelming majority of our country wants Congress to vote against raising the debt limit:

§  Zogby: 60% of all voters, 88% of Republicans and 61% of Independents oppose raising debt ceiling. [5]

§  Reuters/Ipsos: 71% of those surveyed oppose raising debt ceiling, while 18% support an increase. [6]

§  CBS News/New York Times: 63% Americans oppose raising debt limit, while 27% support raising it. [7]

§  Exclusive poll conducted for The Hill: 62% of likely voters oppose raising debt ceiling. [8]

§  Gallup: Americans oppose raising debt ceiling, 47% to 19%. [9]

Supporting the Full Faith and Credit Act
In his article, “The Truth about the Debt Ceiling and Default,” Senator Pat Toomy points out: [10]


“[A]s the Congressional Research Service has noted, the Treasury Secretary [Timothy Geithner] himself has the discretion to decide which bills to pay first in the event that a cash flow shortage occurs. Thus, it is he who would have to consciously, and needlessly, choose to default on our debt if the debt ceiling is not promptly raised upon reaching it. It takes a lot of chutzpah to preemptively blame congressional Republicans for a default only he could cause.”

Knowing that the responsibility lies at the hands of the Treasury Secretary, Republicans need to go on the offensive and pass the Full Faith and Credit Act, which requires that the government prioritize all obligations on the debt held by the public in the event that the debt limit is reached. In doing this, they ensure that our debt is paid and they remove the default issue as a manipulation tool, which the Left can use to scare the Republicans in to compromise.


The Full Faith and Credit Act has been introduced in the Senate (S. 163) and House (H.R. 421). The House bill has 94 co-sponsors. As of Monday, May 16^th, Congressman Renacci has not signed onto the bill yet. [11]


Voicing our concerns
Whatever your views are on raising the debt limit, Congressman Renacci is providing all of us a forum to hear our opinions. Let’s not waste this opportunity.


Town hall for Congressman Jim Renacci
Date/time: Tuesday, May 17^th from 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM
Location: John C. Myers Convocation Center at Ashland University, which is located on Claremont Avenue. Town hall will be in Heritage Room.
Map: http://www.ashland.edu/campus-map
More information: Visit http://renacci.house.gov/.

Finding the right solution

The Heritage Foundation has created an excellent report called, “Saving the American Dream: The Heritage Plan to Fix the Debt, Cut Spending, and Restore Prosperity.” Being one of the premiere conservative think tanks, the Heritage Foundation has helped shape the policy and ideas of many conservatives. We encourage you to read, “Saving the American Dream:” http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/05/Saving-the-American-Dream-The-Heritage-Plan-to-Fix-the-Debt-Cut-Spending-and-Restore-Prosperity.

Index of resources:
[1] Reason Foundation: “The Truth about the Debt Ceiling”:
http://reason.com/archives/2011/02/03/the-truth-about-the-debt-ceili/print
[2] Heritage Foundation: “Myth-Busting the Debt Ceiling”:
http://blog.heritage.org/?p=59649
[3] RSC Policy Brief: The National Debt and the Debt Limit:

http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_Policy_Brief_Debt_Limit.pdf

[4] Office of Management and Budget: Historical Table 7.3:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

[5] Zogby poll question on “The U.S. Congress Should Raise the Debt Ceiling”:
http://www.zogby.com/news/2011/03/30/ibope-zogby-interactive-voters-split-government-shutdown-concern-and-merits-partisan-battle-lines-cl/
[6] Reuters: “Public Strongly Opposes Debt Ceiling Increase”:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/12/us-usa-poll-spending-idUSTRE70B38620110112
[7] CBS News: “Poll: Most Americans Oppose Raising Debt Limit”:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20056258-503544.html
[8] The Hill Poll: “Voters Oppose Raising the $14.3T Debt Ceiling”:
http://thehill.com/polls/142369-voters-oppose-raising-the-143t-debt-ceiling
[9] Gallup: “Americans Oppose Raising Debt Ceiling, 47% to 19%”:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147524/Americans-Oppose-Raising-Debt-Ceiling.aspx

[10] Real Clear Politics: “The Truth about the Debt Ceiling and Default”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/04/22/the_truth_about_the_debt_ceiling_and_default_109633.html
[11] The Library of Congress: Bill Summary & Status of H.R.421:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:1:./temp/~bdE4Jv::|/home/LegislativeData.php?n=BSS;c=112|