The GOP breaks its 'Pledge to America'
By Dana Milbank
Copyright by The Washington Post
Thursday, September 23, 2010; 5:07 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/23/AR2010092305199.html
It took the Republicans just three minutes to violate their Pledge to America.
In a lumber yard near Dulles International Airport Thursday morning, House Republicans handed out copies of their pledge, which, among other things, promises to rein in an "arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites."
Yet moments after taking the stage to face the cameras, Republican leaders appointed themselves arrogant elites. They compared themselves to the founding fathers and likened their actions at Tart Lumber Co. to the signing of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia.
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told the reporters he would speak slowly and with clarity, "just as John Hancock boldly signed his name to the Declaration of Independence so even Britain's King George could read it."
McCarthy, who led the pledge initiative, piled on the sentimentality, declaring: "We pledge to uphold the model for our country our founders envisioned, a grander America, the exception among the nations of the earth, where promise of liberty refreshes the hopes of mankind!"
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) then read passages from the GOP pledge that paraphrase the Declaration of Independence: "Every American citizen is endowed with certain rights from their creator. When our government charts a course that endangers those rights, the people -- indeed, the people! -- have the right to demand a new agenda from their government."
The 45-page booklet outlining the pledge uses some archaic fonts reminiscent of the founding texts, and it is filled with random snippets of historical phrases such as "consent of the governed" and "bearing true faith and allegiance." The Republicans illustrated their own importance with a full-page photo of Mount Rushmore facing a full-page photo of Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) working at a meat counter.
Yet for all the grandiosity, the pledge is small in its ambition. The policy goals are banal ("Support the troops! Fight the terrorists!), and the prescriptions are often narrow and procedural (weekly votes on proposed regulations).
The flaws quickly became apparent Thursday morning when the lawmakers made the mistake of taking questions. "There are not many specifics in here about how you would get to the balanced budget if you plan to extend all the tax cuts and expand defense spending," the AP's Julie Hirschfeld Davis pointed out. "So can you give us some more details?"
John Boehner, the man who would be House speaker if Republicans win, responded that "by having the spending cap at 2008 levels, we can save $100 billion a year."
"What percentage of the problem in terms of our deficit is being taken care of by this plan?" Slate's John Dickerson inquired.
Boehner only repeated that Republicans would be "saving $100 billion a year" by returning spending to 2008 levels.
For the record, with a budget deficit of $1.3 trillion this year, the GOP pledge to cut $100 billion would take care of not quite 8 percent of the problem.
Getting rid of earmarks? Not in the pledge. Dealing with the millions of illegal immigrants? Not in the pledge. Reforming Social Security and Medicare? Not in the pledge. And on social issues such as marriage and abortion, "we are not going to be any different than what we've been," Boehner asserted.
When it comes to the really tough problems, all Boehner would say is that "it's time for us as Americans to have an adult conversation with each other." But an adult conversation was not to be had at Tart Lumber. Instead came a collection of campaign slogans aimed at President Obama: "tyranny..... future hangs in the balance..... road to bankruptcy..... disastrous policies of the current administration."
The lawmakers lost more altitude with their awkward regular-guy routine. They eschewed neckties, and most rolled up their dress-shirt sleeves. GOP Conference Chairman Mike Pence arrived wearing suit pants but changed to khakis before facing the cameras. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) wore blue jeans. Boehner, a heavy smoker, appeared to be chewing gum on stage, then rushed outside for a smoke.
It was an official, taxpayer-funded event, and Boehner called the pledge a "governing agenda." But that pretense fell apart when, after the rollout, he crossed the street to join a group of Tea Party demonstrators who offered him a stainless-steel tea kettle.
"Can I keep this as a souvenir?" the minority leader asked. He carried the cookware back to his Suburban, but before his security detail could whisk him away, Boehner was intercepted by a liberal blogger trying to implicate him in a sex scandal.
This was no way to treat a founding father.
danamilbank@washpost.com
Editorial: The GOP's 'Pledge to America': Deficits can rest easy
Copyright by The Washington Post
Friday, September 24, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/23/AR2010092304841.html
IF REPUBLICANS are serious about governing responsibly, they have an odd way of showing it. And for politicians who purport to hate the deficit -- odder still. The House Republicans' "Pledge to America," unveiled with fanfare Thursday at a Sterling hardware store, mixes irresponsible tax cuts with implausible spending caps and unspecified actions to control entitlement spending. The resulting concoction is a profile in cowardice.
"Our debt is now on track to exceed the size of our economy in the next two years," their document notes. "The lack of a credible plan to pay this debt back causes anxiety among consumers and uncertainty for investors and employers."
Good points. Sadly, the "Pledge" contains no credible plan to reduce this debt. On the contrary, it would increase the debt by $4 trillion -- yes, trillion -- by extending all the expiring Bush tax cuts and adding new ones, including a poorly conceived deduction for small businesses. Talk about picking winners and losers; the tax code is already laden with special benefits for small business. This latest deduction would cost $50 billion over two years.
The Republican plan promises dramatic spending cuts. It would roll back non-security discretionary spending to 2008 levels and cap future growth. But it shirks the politically sensitive task of explaining where the savings would come from. It tosses out a few, relatively small-dollar ideas -- "cutting Congress' budget" and "imposing a net hiring freeze on non-security federal employees," saving $35 billion over 10 years -- and then resorts to the old waste, fraud and abuse dodge. Minority Leader John Boehner crowed that the rollback would save $100 billion in the first year alone. Yes, but from where? Anyone can make that promise; tell us which NASA programs you will end, which national parks you will close. The proposal would require cuts of more than 20 percent in discretionary funding, the deepest in recent history. Leave aside the upside-down claim that cutting spending by this amount in the midst of an economic downturn would help create jobs. What, exactly, do Republicans propose to cut?
The biggest dodge of all involves entitlement spending. The Republicans would repeal the Obama health-care plan, a plan that at least holds out the prospect of slowing the growth of health-care spending in general and Medicare in particular. An earlier proposal by Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) at least had the honesty to outline major, if unwise, changes in Medicare; he would turn it into a voucher program. By contrast, the "Pledge" vows grandly to "make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs for today's seniors and future generations. That means requiring a full accounting of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, setting benchmarks for these programs and reviewing them regularly, and preventing the expansion of unfunded liabilities." Asked about this big fat asterisk, Mr. Boehner promised "an adult conversation." When? What was this, the children's hour?
Democrats haven't been any clearer about dealing with entitlement spending -- the party's hands-off Social Security caucus is growing ever louder -- and their position on extending tax cuts looks good only in comparison to Republicans' greater irresponsibility. But if this is the Republican case for taking control, the national debt can rest easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment