DEMOCRATS BELIEVE TAX INCREASES EQUAL FISCAL DISCIPLINE

The Democrat No-Budget Road To Out-Of-Control Spending Is Paved With Budget Deficits And Tax Increases

GREENSPAN ON FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY: "History suggests that an abandonment of fiscal discipline will eventually push up interest rates, crowd out capital spending, lower productivity growth and force harder choices upon us in the future."
(Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan quoted by Joseph Guinto, "Greenspan Warns Of Runaway Deficits, But Rejects Efforts To Repeal Tax Cuts," Investor's Business Daily, September 13, 2002)

GREENSPAN ON LOWER TAXES: "And should current economic weakness spread beyond what now appears likely, having a tax cut in place may, in fact, do noticeable good."
(Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, Senate Budget Committee, Testimony, January 25, 2001, www.federalreserve.gov, Accessed September 12, 2002)

THE NEW YORK TIMES CALLED SENATOR TOM DASCHLE'S (D-SD) BUDGET PERFORMANCE "SHAKY." "Mr. Daschle's performance in the spotlight has been shaky. He failed to round up the votes to pass a bill providing prescription drugs for the elderly. He could not win passage of an overall budget resolution to set spending levels for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. The worst part, for him, was that these defeats came as much at the hands of Democrats as Republicans."
(Editorial, "Congress's Mixed Handiwork," The New York Times, August 3, 2002)

THE FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE DEMOCRAT SENATE IS UNABLE AND UNWILLING TO PASS A BUDGET

In 1998, North Dakota Democrat Senator Kent Conrad Described Passing A Budget Resolution As A Congressional "Responsibility." "We have no budget resolution passed by this Congress. For the first time in 24 years, there has been a failure to pass a budget resolution. That budget resolution was due by April 15. The President plays no role in a budget resolution; that is the responsibility of this Congress. . . . It is purely the responsibility of this Senate and the House of Representatives, and these bodies have failed in their responsibility, and they have failed for the first time in 24 years."
(Senator Conrad, Congressional Record, October 12, 1998)

Senator Daschle Promised A Budget Earlier This Year. "Well, we're going to have a budget plan that constrains spending. That will happen. . . . [W]e are going to get to it. That is going to be something that will happen."
(NBC's "Meet The Press," May 26, 2002)

As Of September 13, 2002, The Democrat Senate Still Had Not Approved A Budget, In Violation Of The Budget Enforcement Act Of 1974.
(S.Con.Res. 100, Approved By Budget Committee, April 11, 2002)

Daschle Blamed Lack Of Budget On A Razor-Thin Majority. "[O]bviously we're in a divided Senate and a very, very close membership count. And this has not been easy."
(NBC's "Meet The Press," May 26, 2002)

DNC Chairman McAuliffe Said The Democrats Need "Nine More United States Senators" To Pass A Budget. "[W]e could pass a budget. We need 60 votes for a budget. . . . [G]ive us nine more United States Senators. . . and we can have a budget."
(CBS' "Face The Nation," September 1, 2002)

The Republicans Passed A Bipartisan Budget When The Senate Was 50-50. The budget resolution established congressional spending for fiscal year 2002, revised the FY2001 budget, and set spending levels for fiscal years 2003 through 2011. Fifteen Democrats joined with Republicans to pass the resolution by a vote of 65-35. At the time, the Senate was divided 50-50 (with Vice President Cheney giving the Republicans a majority).
(H.Con.Res. 83, Roll Call #86: Passed 65-35: R 50-0; D 15-35, April 6, 2001)

NO BUDGET MEANS DASCHLE'S DEMOCRAT SENATE HAS A GREEN LIGHT FOR OUT-OF-CONTROL SPENDING AND BALLOONING DEFICITS

Spending Responsibility Goes "Out The Window" Unless A New Budget Is Passed Before October. "Less than a month before an Oct. 1 deadline, Congress has passed exactly zero of the 13 required spending bills. The Senate, for the first time in years, has not even adopted a budget. . . . Without a budget and the rules that go with it, the door could be opened to a flurry of sticky Senate legislative fights. . . . The House adopted a budget figure of $759 billion for the fiscal year 2002-2003, which starts on Oct. 1. While the Senate has not adopted a budget plan . . . ."
(Carl Hulse, "As Deadline Nears, Congress Slogs In A Fiscal Quagmire," The New York Times, September 4, 2002)

The Democrat Plan For Economic Growth Is Increased Spending And Higher Taxes. "While Senate Democrats have failed to pass a budget, they have endorsed several trillion dollars in additional spending beyond what President Bush requested, which would increase the debt and guarantee permanent deficits. Some Democrats have even proposed raising taxes, but as our economy is struggling and many Americans are out of work, raising taxes is exactly the wrong thing to do. Additionally, eliminating last year's tax relief would not solve the short term deficit problem, but would raise taxes on low and middle-income workers."
(The White House, "CBO Budget Update Confirms Fiscal Restraint," August 2002)

The End Of The Sixty Vote Threshold Means Democrats Are Free To Spend Without Restraint Or Bipartisan Support. "Unless the Senate takes action, some of the rules governing Senate budget procedures, including this 60-vote requirement (called a 'supermajority' to distinguish it from the 'simple majority') on certain issues, will expire October 1, 2002. . . ." As of October 1, 2002, the 60-vote points of order requirement can be waived with only a simple majority vote. This includes budget resolutions and "legislation that would increase total spending above the levels in the most recent budget resolution. . . ."
(OMB Watch Website, www.ombwatch.org, July 31, 2002)

Greenspan Supports The Preservation Of The Budget Rules To Prevent Budget Deficits. "The budget enforcement rules are set to expire on September the 30th. Failing to preserve them would be a grave mistake, in my judgment. For without clear direction and constructive goals, the inbuilt political bias in favor of budget deficits likely will again become entrenched. We are all too aware that government spending programs and special tax benefits can be easy to initiate or expand but extraordinarily difficult to trim or shut down . . . The bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is that if we do not preserve the budget rules and reaffirm our commitment to fiscal responsibility, years of hard effort could be squandered."
(Alan Greenspan, House Budget Committee, Testimony, September 12, 2002)

DEMOCRATS PLAN A "DECEMBER SURPRISE" OF HIGHER TAXES AND OUT-OF-CONTROL SPENDING

House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-MO) Thinks It Would Be A "Mistake" To Reveal The Democrats' Economic Strategy. "I think we make a mistake if we announce ahead of such a possible meeting what are our bottom lines or what we think ought to be done. . . . We need a different kind of meeting to come up with a new [economic] policy that will move us in the right direction."
(CNN's "Inside Politics," August 13, 2002)

Instead Of Answering Tim Russert's Question On Freezing The Tax Cuts, Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY) Called For An Economic Summit To "Talk." Russert asked Lowey, "[S]hould the Democrats be in favor of freezing the Bush tax cut?" Lowey responded, "[W]hat Dick Gephardt and I and others have called for is an economic summit . . . . We should get Democrats, Republicans together, have a bipartisan summit to talk about the economy, to talk about a budget. It can't be 'one way, my way, and that's what we're going to do.'"
(NBC's "Meet The Press," September 1, 2002)

Representative Adam Smith (D-WA) Wants All Options "On The Table." "We've asked for a meeting with the President where everything is 'on the table,' and we're ready to go to work on getting our economy back in shape."
(New Democrat Coalition, Press Release, July 16, 2002)

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan Credited Republican Tax Relief For Spurring Increases In Household Spending. "Household spending was boosted by ongoing increases in incomes, which in turn were spurred by strong advances in productivity as well as by legislated tax reductions and, in recent months, by extended unemployment insurance benefits."
(Alan Greenspan, Senate Banking, Housing, And Urban Affairs Committee, Testimony, July 16, 2002)

The Congressional Budget Office Reported That The Past Economic Recession, Not Republican Tax Relief, Put The Federal Budget Back In Deficit. "CBO reported August 13th that 80% of the change in revenue projections for FY 2002 was due to economic and technical changes, not tax relief. OMB agrees that a continued sluggish recovery could cause receipts to decline even further in future years than recently projected in the Mid Session Review. CBO's numbers also show that if there never had been a tax cut, the budget would still be in deficit today."
(Congressional Budget Office, "Budget And Economic Update," August 2002)

The Congressional Budget Office Projects A $1 Trillion Surplus And Brightening Fiscal Picture In The Near Future. "We can return to surpluses in a few years by sustaining economic growth and following the President's fiscal discipline: fully fund the war on terror and homeland security while slowing spending growth in the rest of government. Like OMB, CBO projects an improving budget picture with a very slight deficit in FY 2005 and a return to balance in FY 2006, but only if spending is restrained."
(Congressional Budget Office, Budget And Economic Update, August 2002)

The Council Of Economic Advisers Describes Tax Relief As An Important Tool For Raising Personal Savings, Attracting Business Development And Creating Jobs. "Reduced tax rates raise workers' take home pay, facilitating household purchases of housing and autos, raising saving[s], and aiding entrepreneurs. Business expensing makes it more attractive for businesses to invest and create jobs."
(CEA, Economic Forum Talking Points, August 12, 2002)

Council Of Economic Advisers Chairman Glenn Hubbard Argues That Repealing Republican Tax Relief Will Hurt Future Economic Growth. "If we rescinded the President's tax cut, we would probably hurt economic growth by about 2/10 of a percentage point over the foreseeable future. That's $1,000 for every man, woman and child in the country over a decade."
(CBS' "Face The Nation," August 18, 2002)

VOTE REPUBLICAN IN NOV 2002
Take Back the Senate
Keep the House
TOSS OUT THE DASCHLE/CLINTON OBSTRUCTIONISTS DEMOCRATS!

As Of September 13, 2002, The Democrat Senate Still Had Not Approved A Budget, In Violation Of The Budget Enforcement Act Of 1974.

So who serves some jail time - Daschle?

Democrats need brain transplants !!

Cut taxes, cut spending, remove democrats from office, NOW !!

Let's give GWB a majority in the House and the Senate !!

Snuff Saddam, now !!

Death To all Tyrant's !!

The Second Amendment...
America's Original Homeland Security !!

Molon Labe !!

"violation of the Budget enforcement act of 1974"

Shouldn't Daschel go to jail for this violation?

Words mean something. I wondered about the absurd expressions "Most of the tax cuts GO TO the rich" and "Tax cuts COST the government." Many low income people who get taxpayer funded checks every month just might believe that the rich get much bigger checks than they do. The fact that "the rich" provide them their checks does not compute. Republicans are really stupid for not interrupting every time the above two expressions are used.

Tax & Spend ! Tax & Spend ! 'Rat's think it's their money and they know how
to spend it more wisely than we do ! What Porkers !

The al Qaeda cRats under Da$$hole are like the old barbers a couple of hundred years ago who used bleeding to "cure" the ill.

The al Qaeda cRats under Da$$hole with their tax and spend agendas are no different.

Please forward this to all of your lists! We need to get this information out and circulating around the net. As MeeknMing says -- refer to the DemocRATS as TAX & SPEND!

Justshe: Thanks for sending out!

Democrats used to believe in maximum spending, to hell with deficits. Now they pretend to care about deficits. I liked them more when they were more honest.

I'm sorry to say it, but I think Bush Sr., Newt, and Kasich share much of the blame for the sorry propaganda that passes for economic discourse these days. They went away from Reagan's growth ideas to a balanced budget fetish that I suppose they thought would sell better. Of course the Democrats idea is to balance the budget by taking it all and spending it all.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.