No to Irresponsible Spending Proposal

Below is a message I sent to my Representative and Senators:

This is to demand you oppose Obama’s “American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan.” He said in his inaugural address that it is time for a “new era of responsibility.” Then he proposes the most irresponsible fiscal package in my lifetime! He was right in what he said in his speech. He is absolutely wrong for refusing to lead us into that new era, and instead going in the opposite direction. Obama proposed massive spending without saying how it would be paid for.

Public debt in this country is already 45% of GDP. We are bankrupt! And the national debt amounts to a massive income transfer program. Future generations of ordinary taxpayers will have large amounts of their income transferred to holders of the debt (currently mostly foreigners, as is the case with any bankrupt country). You may not be around then, but how can you sleep at night condemning them to misery because of the irresponsible policies approved by the U.S. Government now?

Democrats rightly criticized President Bush for being fiscally irresponsible. The answer to that is not for Democrats, when in power, to be far more irresponsible. Democrats used to look back at the Clinton years, and note that he moved the Federal budget into surplus. That was a good thing! You should imitate the fiscally responsible policies of the Clinton era instead of seeking to outdo Bush in irresponsibility.

Much of the proposed spending in the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan” is for good things. But it has to be paid for. It could be, but you would have to make hard choices which would enrage interests which give large amounts in campaign contributions. Do you have the courage to do so? Here are some areas where we might get the money to pay for selected portions of the proposed spending:

  • the bloated military budget, over half of the relatively controllable portion of the budget, and larger than that of all other countries combined. Rep. Barney Frank in October proposed a 25% cut in the military budget, which would be a good start.
  • repealing tax breaks for wealthy individuals and corporations.
  • repealing subsidies for corporate farms and animal-based agriculture (cause of 18% of global warming, according to the UN).
  • repealing subsidies for corn-based ethanol, which have caused world grain prices to skyrocket resulting in poor people dying of starvation according to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, and which is environmentally irresponsible.

The only responsible choice is to refuse to vote for any massive spending plan which is not matched with means of financing it. I urge you to vote responsibly.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

One Response to “No to Irresponsible Spending Proposal”

  1. Mike Morin says:

    I agree totally and wholeheartedly.

    Here is what I wrote about the “Stimulus” Plan and about Obama.

    Tuesday, January 20, 2009
    Let’s See What Happens…

    Blooger’s note: I posted the following here ( on the day of Obama’s inauguration. Let’s see if the man who should be known on this day as the USA’s “great promise” actually is independent and bold enough to become a real agent of hope and change for the world.

    I originally posted the following about a week ago to the “Public Input” website. Whether or not, such is only public realtions (I very strongly believe) and/or the gold can be discerned from among the common rock, remains to be seen.

    I refer you also to the other essays on this web log, especially “Updated Reforming Financial Systems” and “Demand Side Management and Transportation Planning”.


    Written to Change.Gov – Obama Public Input Website

    Let’s not rush headlong with a “stimulus” package that would be similar to a shot of adrenaline to a dying organism. Let’s give a redevelopment program much more thought and care and transition away from the simplistic Keynesian notions that assume that “the growth imperative” is true, and simply try to pump prime a moribund automobile (culture).

    I have specific plans. We need to set the time frame for ecological economic re-development, including fossil fuel demand side management and goods and services supply side reallocation, equitably rebuilding neighborhoods with amongst the goals to be reduction of use of the automobile over the span of the next 20 to 50 years. Money spent now, should also be drawn from the funds from the financial bailout fund to begin the planning process and, as soon as possible, get the actual physical work started that will lead to an equitable, sustainable culture rather than another hit of heroin to a fossil fuel and other energy squandering supply side massive centennial and generational blunder, respectively.

    You can get more info. on my work at the “Peoples Equity Union” web log, and feel free to contact me directly at (541) 343-3808.

    Mike Morin

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.