Skip to comments.Bush, GOP lag on economy
Posted on 10/29/2002 9:32:49 AM PST by AfronautEdited on 04/13/2004 1:40:03 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
We need immediate and real solutions to the economic challenges we face. But President Bush and House Republicans are, instead, planning more corporate and special-interest tax breaks for 2003 without even addressing the nation's needs.
In the 1990s, Democrats proved that sensible, bipartisan action could help unleash the potential of the American people. Today, in the face of rising economic challenges, we need to take a page from what has worked, act on a bipartisan basis and restore economic growth while promoting fiscal responsibility over the long term.
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
WILL IT STILL BE HER SENATE?
Dontcha just love the "code" words....."working" families and for "company investment." Why not tax cuts for TAXPAYERS according to what they pay? These people make me sick.
Gephardt doesn't realize that he's part of the problem.
I absolutely love this one. He'll be extending unemployment benefits for people who'll be laid-off from their jobs since employers can't afford them to pay them the higher wage. Don't forget about the people who'll be locked out of jobs since employers can't afford to hire them.
* Short-term stimulus to invest in school construction, domestic anti-terrorism infrastructure and health-care assistance. And one-time tax cuts immediately to working families and for company investment.
A kickback to our supporters in the Teachers Unions, and an agenda of social spending which can also be interpreted by some as a give back. The taxes to pay for all of this "giving back" have yet to be determined.
* A long-term, fiscally responsible plan of corporate-welfare cuts, a ban on foreign incorporations, the elimination of overseas tax loopholes and a bipartisan-summit agreement to ensure long-term balanced budgets and economic growth.
A short sighted attempt to grab more money from those who are earning it in a fashion specifically designed to get more votes. Our own supporters would tear us limb from limb if we actually tried to pass this stuff, but the class warfare stuff sounds good in the election commercials. We'll lose in committee it after we get elected.
* Corporate-responsibility measures that require CEO stocks to have the same limitations as employees' and mandate that CEO ''golden parachutes'' be treated in the same manner as employee pensions when companies face financial difficulties.
See "class warfare" reference above.
* Pension reform instituting the immediate portability of pensions for employees who move from one employer to another and long-term implementation of a universal pension system.
We think it's important that your pension benefits not be managed by someone chosen for their competence, but by someone chosen by us. I'm sure there are a few of our supporters who are tired of working in the department of Motor vehicles that need a new job. They'll do a fine job ensuring your future.
* A new living wage for working Americans of $6.65 per hour by January 2004 and an extension of unemployment insurance for those who have lost jobs.
Never mind that there hasn't been a respected Economist in the last 50 years who favored an increase in the minimum wage, we think it plays well for the election. Class warfare may not be much, but it's all we've got.
if I were Dick Gephart I'd be embarrassed to put my name on this obvious pandering.