Dems
The road to economic prosperity is in part defined by our ability to manage the federal deficit.
Our nation can choose from two starkly contrasting plans to reduce the deficit. George Bush’s plan will “miraculously” cut the deficit by drastically increasing expenditures on tax cuts and projects lacking transparency and accountability.
The Kerry plan will bring fiscal discipline to the debt-crazed White House by capping federal spending to the rate of inflation and by rolling back the tax breaks allotted to the top 2 percent of Americans.
It is a shame that during the course of the Bush administration we have gone from considerable budget surpluses to the greatest deficit in U.S. history. The U.S. deficit has gotten so high that the International Monetary Fund recently came out with a major report stating that it poses a significant risk to global financial stability.
The same man who created our deficit is now claiming he will reduce it by half in just five years.
With the war in Iraq spiraling out of control in both human and monetary cost, Bush finds it fiscally responsible to make his tax cuts permanent, send a mission to Mars, and erect a costly and unproven “Star Wars” missile defense shield.
Perhaps Bush should get his head out of the heavens and down to earthly reality.
How does he intend to cut the deficit by reducing revenues and spending huge sums of money on projects whose cost will undoubtedly fly out of control?
Not only does Bush defy economic theory but he also faces a credibility issue.
Medicare’s chief actuary, Rick Roster, reported he felt pressure from above not to reveal the true cost of adding a drug benefit to Medicare. Foster was told that if he revealed the fact that the cost would be $134 billion more than the $400 billion price tag, “the consequences for insubordination are extremely severe.”
How is the intelligent voter supposed to believe that Bush will contain spending when his administration is misrepresenting the cost of its programs?
The second plan to restore fiscal discipline belongs to John Kerry. Understanding the danger posed in Iraq and the growing deficit crisis, Kerry has proposed a new, broad, deficit-reduction policy.
Whereas the Bush administration refuses to change course, Kerry understands that because of the worsening deficit situation the nation cannot afford all of its desired projects.
As a result, Kerry has promised to cap spending increases to the rate of inflation except for national defense, entitlement spending, and education.
Kerry would also roll back the tax cuts slotted for the top 2 percent of Americans.
His plan calls for freezing of the federal travel budget, cutting the number of federal contractors, cutting corporate welfare and using the savings to reduce the deficit.
If his plan is adopted it will cut the federal deficit by half in just five years.
Whereas Kerry strives to practice fiscal discipline, Bush’s attitude to new spending is “bring ’em on!” For the first time in history the federal government is forced to spend 1 billion dollars more EACH DAY than it takes in.
Our economic policy should be grounded on Earth and not in the stars. President Bush created this deficit and cannot be trusted to dispel it. Only Kerry can restore fiscal discipline to the United States.
————————————————————————————-
GOP
A growing federal deficit and the resulting enlargement of the federal debt is a concern to everyone.
There are all sorts of complicated macroeconomic scenarios that show large debts and deficits are generally not good for the long-term economy. However, in times of drastic change and tremendous progress, it is sometimes necessary to spend more now to receive more in return later on.
This is a common business tactic employed by the most successful of business leaders as well as our national government.
But, extended periods of deficit spending should be largely avoided, and so we have found ourselves in a debate over the best way to remedy the current situation in which we are spending more than is being brought in.
Once again, as seems to be the case in every issue, the Republican Party is the party of ideas and progress and the Democrats continue to refrain from posing solutions and remain committed to Bush-bashing. Let us begin by examining John Kerry’s stance on how to “fix” our current revenue shortfalls. Raise taxes. While claiming to have a tremendous economic package that will spur the growth of the American economy and add over 10 million jobs, Kerry has supplied no evidence to back-up these claims.
In fact, the only idea he has put forth is to raise taxes on the wealthy and give it to the poor in some close-your-eyes-and-hope effort that they will save it and prosper. He has proposed cutting corporate tax rates, but when asked, nearly all corporations say they don’t want their tax rates cut.
What they really want is for consumers to be getting the tax breaks so that they will spend money or invest in companies.
This gives the corporations a far better source of revenue and helps the American public. Most importantly, when companies prosper, they create jobs. Lots of jobs. Kerry’s “plan” is nothing more than rhetoric. His tax hikes of over $900 billion will do more to stifle the economy than any other possible course of action.
President Bush, on the other hand, has a vision of how to remedy the situation in five years. Much of his plan revolves around the tax cuts that have already been passed by Congress and put into affect, but that expire shortly. These cuts have proven on multiple fronts that Bush’s strategies are working and should be made permanent by Congress. In March alone over 300,000 jobs were created, bringing the total number of jobs created since November 2001 to nearly 1.5 million.
The economy is now predicted to grow at close to or above 5 percent in the first quarter of 2004, thus supplying more jobs and higher paying jobs to Americans which in turn will raise revenues and decrease the budget.
While raising revenue is a good start, we must at the same time cut expenses. In addition, President Bush plans on eliminating 65 government agencies and restrictive his discretionary spending in areas outside defense and homeland security to less than 1 percent growth. Combined with the new revenue brought in by his tax cuts through economic growth, the deficit will be eliminated in five years and work on paying down the federal debt can begin.
Once again, Kerry provides the rhetoric but no action or true solutions, while President Bush continues to lay out his vision for America’s future and act on it.
