Posted on 12/12/2012 4:51:59 AM PST by LD Jackson
Senator Tom Coburn, R-OK, has long been a voice of reason in the United States Senate. He was the same voice of reason in the House of Representatives, causing Speaker Newt Gingrich major headaches by not going along to get along. He has long been advocating a balanced approach to reducing the national debt and the deficit and it is worth mentioning that Coburn's approach is much more balanced than the proposals President Obama and the liberal Democrats have put forth.
Coburn is called Dr. No in the Senate for a reason. The number of bills he has blocked because they contain wasteful spending can not be counted. He believes in cutting the size of government and he is not bashful about calling his fellow Senators to task for failing to get that done. Democrats and Republicans alike have felt his scorn for their lackadaisical approach to their jobs. It is worth noting now that Coburn is no longer being silent on the issue of the fiscal cliff. As usual, he is not following the expected party line, but neither is he giving Democrats a pass. He says we have to raise new revenues and he would rather see that done by raising tax rates on the wealthy, instead of trying to cap deductions. At the same time, Coburn says raising taxes isn't something he wants to see happen, but is something he feels has to be done. It is not avoidable, but should also be accompanied by cuts in spending.
(Politico) In an interview, Coburn said the GOP should swallow hard and accept a smaller tax hike that would have the least effect on the economy. Without a deal, he warned, it’s “inevitable” all Americans will face an increase to their income tax rates when the 2001 and 2003 George W. Bush tax cuts expire Dec. 31.A lot of people may believe Senator Coburn has gone off the deep end and is siding with the Democrats, but that couldn't be further from the truth. I am not a fan of raising taxes and have said repeatedly that the GOP leadership should draw a line in the sand and refuse to raise taxes, unless those tax increased are accompanied by cuts in spending that are real and substantial. Coburn is advocating the same thing and is doing it from a strategic standpoint.And polls show Republicans would shoulder most of the blame if the two sides fail to strike a deal.
“I’m for raising revenue because we have to — it’s not because we should but because we have to,” Coburn told POLITICO. Republicans can say they refuse to support any tax hikes, “but it’s still going to happen. That’s what the law is.”
Last week, Coburn acknowledged on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that Republicans “have to raise revenue” and that he preferred that rates go up for families making more than $250,000 rather than capping deductions. On Sunday, he told ABC’s “This Week” that he was willing to accept a tax increase as part of a deal to solve the nation’s debt crisis.
I wholeheartedly wish the "real world" Coburn is referring to didn't exist, but the political reality is that it does. We have to deal with it, regardless if we like it or not. I just hope the GOP leadership can follow Coburn's lead and find it in themselves to stand their ground and refuse to raise taxes, unless spending cuts are forthcoming from the Democrats.Coburn has also privately been making the “tactical argument” to Republican senators and his former House colleagues that the GOP’s best option is to agree to the rate hikes, then extract spending cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, said one Senate source. And while Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other GOP leaders publicly oppose any tax hike in the fiscal deal, they haven’t tried to silence Coburn, sources said. But the former three-term congressman is perhaps freer to speak his mind than most Republicans: A proponent of term limits, he has pledged not to run for a third Senate term in 2016.
“The reality is there is a Democratic president, a Democratic Senate — and the only way you’re going to start doing something to save Medicare, to save Social Security is to give them revenue,” Coburn told POLITICO. “It’s wrong, but that’s the real world we live in.”
That’s interesting. The way elections go is no longer about misinformation or media bias. That’s now a given. The electorate is truly socialist and voting for what they want. The problem can’t be fixed through voting, save at a state level.
If we’re okay with socialism, that’s what we’re getting. If not, it’s going to take blood. We have lost the debate. Liberty is no longer on the negotiation table. If we want it, there needs to be an ultimatum. Congress isn’t going to secure it for us and there’s no reason to think they have any interest in our liberty. No. Socialism is here, the bill or rights is void. If we want it back, we will have to take it by force.
What I’m trying to say is we don’t need to get all worked up about debates in DC. We have no say in what happens there. We either need to get comfortable within socialism or take our liberty by force.
“Sadly, no. More Americans voted for a Democratic House of Representatives than voted for GOP candidatess. By about a million votes actually. It is only through gerrymandering that the Republicans kept such a strong majority in the House. Based on this election cycle, the public does not seem to be with us - at least at the national level. What passes for the American public these days is more and more dependent, more and more like Europe, and increasingly buys into leftist populism.”
If this is truly the case, I’m predicting that the Republicans are going to have a difficult time “holding their position” in the House in 2014.
They’ll have to claw and scrape just to retain their majority. If things go badly for the party nationally (and considering the way they’re going now, how could they get much worse?), the Pubbies might even lose the House in ‘14.
I realize this flies in the face of conventional wisdom (that being that the party of the president always loses seats in the midterms), but didn’t Obama’s re-election in November turn that “conventional wisdom” upside down, as well? (that being that no president presiding over an economy as abysmal as Obama’s had been re-elected in modern times.)
In the Divided America (land of the free.... phones), the old rules and truisms just don’t apply no mo’.
I disagree with your assessment of Coburn. He is certainly no fool. He is just trying to further the betterment of our country in the best way he sees possible.
I disagree. Coburn is no idiot. He just sees the inevitability of what we are facing. If you will take the time to read the entire interview on Politico, you will see he is not conceding that more revenue is needed. He just realizes that is the only way we are going to reach an agreement.
You’re probably right.
Balanced? This is the same silly agreement the Republicans have made before. The word 'then' implies taxes first, cut later, and the cuts never appear.
The budget jumped up $1T/year the last year of GWB, and has been kept there. Cut that first, and then the Republicans can talk about changing the tax profile.
The purpose of the demanded tax increase isn't to raise revenue, but to kill the private sector, and to force the Republicans into saying that it's the right thing to do.
Boehner and company might figure out that the game in DC is no longer patty-cake, but I fear it will be too late.
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.