On today's episode of Washington Week, Speaker John Boehner was reported as saying: "If you talk to job creators around the country, like we have, they'll tell you that the overtaxing, overregulating, and overspending that's going on here in Washington is creating uncertainty and holding them back."
That's the Republican economic plan in a nutshell: Cut, Cut, Cut. Cut taxes, cut government regulation, and cut government spending (on social programs, like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, education, and programs for the poor; certainly not on defense, or on subsidies to Big Oil, Big Pharma, or Big Ag). Then the "job creators" -- where have they been since the Clinton administration, anyway? -- will no longer feel uncertain or held back, and those piles of money they've been sitting on will finally start to trickle down, as foretold 30 years ago by St. Ronald of Reagan. Cake and ice cream for everyone!
You think?
Me neither.
Obama's budget, on the other hand -- though it, too, includes some serious cuts -- according to a CNN analysis, proposes increasing by $3 billion to $28 billion funding Elementary and Secondary Education Act programs; $1.35 billion for the president's Race To The Top program, extending it to more school districts; a $17 billion increase for Pell Grant funding; increasing by $3.7 billion to $61.6 billion for civilian research and development; more than $100 billion in funding for state and local infrastructure projects; $4 billion for infrastructure developments in national and regional projects; $6 billion to fund research and development of clean energy technology.
Which is the better choice for America? Putting people back to work on education, research and development, infrastructure, and clean energy -- or Cut, Cut, Cut? Which plan is courageous, bold, and optimistic, and which is timid and weak?
0 comments:
Post a Comment