Rep. Ralph Hall, R-Texas, is our Congressional representative. In a press release after the House vote on Monday, Hall said, “While I respect the Leadership for their efforts in getting us the best deal they could in this debt negotiation process, a deal which is better than I thought possible, I could not, in good conscience, vote in favor of a bill that the majority of my constituents who contacted me did not support.
“This new bill weakens the possible passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment, and also presents serious risks to Defense funding, which could endanger our troops and our national security. However, there are good provisions in the bill, including immediate spending cuts and no tax hikes. The bill does not affect Medicare, redirects our country slowly to a path of more fiscal responsibility, and also avoids the potential impact of a federal default.”
As one of his constituents, I would have appreciated him voting for the package. I believe the government should get control of its spending.
Where Mr. Hall and I disagree is this bill should have had some tax reform that included loophole closures and tax increases. No country is exempt from simple arithmetic, and the U.S. needs to raise revenue. As conservative economist Ben Stein said, “Low taxes are not an American birthright.”
However, this means every Sherman household will pay water, and the Grayson County Appraisal District spent the summer raising property valuations, so the city should have more money to spend. I would argue most people don’t see these moves as tax increases, but that is exactly what they are. And I suspect that when it is time for those in the council to run for re-election, they will say they did not raise taxes.
They may not have raised taxes, but they did enhance revenue. But when I drive down decent streets, enjoy our city parks, and watch the police patrolling our city, I feel pretty comfortable about the way the money was spent.
This debt-ceiling bill isn’t perfect. I thought Congress should have attacked this in two parts, raising the debt ceiling first and then working on the budget. We learned a few things about Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, the tea party, and the Democratic and Republican hardliners. My feeling was Boehner quit on the process on Saturday, and then turned it over to the Senate because he’s an ineffective speaker. Sens. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Harry Reid, D-Nev., were responsible for helping pull the U.S. back from the brink of default by working this end run around the tea party and a largely ineffective House of Representatives who voted their own interests instead of what was best for the country.
Mr. Hall has to know we cannot continue these massive expenditures in defense spending, Social Security, and Medicare without bringing in additional revenues.
He also needs to forget the balanced budget amendment. While in theory this should work, in actual practice, governments need to partake in deficit spending for the greater good. For example, if Franklin Roosevelt had not been able to fund the Works Progress Administration, that built roads, bridges, dams, and infrastructure projects including Bearcat Stadium, then the United States may not have been poised to reap the fruits of prosperity after World War II. Remember, government and household spending are two different things.
Mr. Hall needs to be smarter than his constituents and that sometimes means voting against what they want and voting for what’s best. As my father used to say, “Just because your friends carry cow pies in their pockets, that doesn’t mean you need to carry one, too.”
Comments ... 39 found!
I meant to say : 8/16/2011
...to agree or disagree. Sorry for the mistake.
Todd Hutchinson, Web Editor
Todd...the news people... : 8/16/2011
Like yourself are to ask the tough questions of those running for office, not give your personal opinions. America is doomed if the so-called "free press" doesn't do their job. If they lean one way or another, that's bad for the country. Tim Russert was a Democrat but he was not only the best interviewer, but the most fair one. Case in point. When Obama said "he would fundamentally transform the U.S.", no one asked him what he meant. We are seeing it play out with no thanks to you news guys.
Need a Free Press
Whata Country : 8/16/2011
"Columns and blog posts are opinions of the writers. I am sharing my opinion and you are free to agree."...and DISagree. Don't forget that part, Todd ;-)
Foru Andme
Just Wondering : 8/16/2011
Columns and blog posts are opinions of the writers. I am sharing my opinion and you are free to agree.
Todd Hutchinson, Web Editor
Lliberals : 8/16/2011
Why is an editor of the HD so big on pushing his own liberal agenda? Why can't he just write normal, unbiased stories like a decent reporter sahould be doing?
Just Wondering
You work toward a goal? : 8/15/2011
Todd, seriously what kind of ultra-high velocity whacky tobacky are you toking? For the goal the Democratic Party of America has been working full tilt boogy toward since at least 1968 has been the "fundamental CHANGE" of the USA I was born and raised in. Would you like to examine carefully the definition of the word "fundamental", especially when used in combination with any word like CHANGE. ...
Thanks Todd for leaving no doubt in all of this about your being a LemmingOCrat.
J.W.
Crisis Averted? : 8/14/2011
Let's avert all of these future crisis's in 2012 and send Obama back to Chicago where he belongs. I'm sure his ol' buddy Rahm Emmanuel can put him to work as a community organizer or something really useful like that!
Barbara
Joey, I agree with a lot... : 8/13/2011
Of what you say especially the part about congress people talking big but doing nothing about it. If you watch "Greta", she makes the same comments you make to the congress people that they talk about it but when they get up there, they do nothing. My guess is you and I could find total departments that contribute nothing to the benefit of Americans and eliminate them. Yes, there isn't a department that couldn't be cut from 1-5%. That would be a start. We do want the safety net for the truly needy. Now defense industries do profit but I'm sure you don't oppose that. We need the best to make what we need. As previously stated, our government has to hire someone to do things that we need as a people. Section 8 may not be the best example but someone has to do it. I'm sure there are a lot of things you and I would eliminate and believe me, I bring this up when calling congressional people. I simply think you misunderstand those of us who talk about excessive government spending. We actually want what you want based on your latest post. Thanks.
Keep Taxes Low
Correct! : 8/11/2011
"However, if a concerted effort was made to actually cut waste and fraud, we could cut expenditures far, far more, and still retain the safety net for those who are truly in need!" Hear, hear!
Liberal conservative
HELLO! : 8/11/2011
I don't know how many ways I have to say it before some of you understand. Huge segments of the private sector depend on government spending for their survival. It's a fact, it isn't an endorsement. If a weatherman tells you it's 115 degrees outside, he's not saying he's happy about it, nor is he saying he wants it to go up to 120. Anyway, this arrangement continues because it is in the interest of those with the political influence to see to it that it does continue. Sure, "the private sector could adjust" over time if certain programs were severely cut or eliminated. However, it's not a matter of "could", it's a matter of "want to", and those who depend on their particular cash cow program don't want to. The investment consortium that owns a string of substandard houses they rent out under Section 8, doesn't particularly care if the food stamp program gets cut, but they'll fight like hell to see to it the Section 8 program doesn't get cut. Then there is the waste and fraud issue. Do you not wonder why when just about every politician, both liberal and conservative talk about eliminating fraud and waste during every election cycle that nothing, and I mean nothing, is ever done to actually cut fraud and waste? We never hear, nor demand any specifics. If a candidate can come up with a few soundbites that appeal to our political philosophy, we support that candidate. Yet with all the talk about fraud and waste, we continue to have fraud and waste no matter who gets elected. And it's not just the social programs, it's in the defense industry, construction, whatever. It amazes me that when pols crow about implementing across the board cuts of a few percentage points, everyone takes their congratulatory bows as if they really did something. However, if a concerted effort was made to actually cut waste and fraud, we could cut expenditures far, far more, and still retain the safety net for those who are truly in need! There has got to be a reason for this disconnect, and the best reason I can come up with is that those with political influence... those who profit the most...don't want to cut waste and fraud, because they profit from waste and fraud.
Joey
Have you noticed that... : 8/11/2011
Joey and Hafta...and Miguel, always have a "but" or some analogy as to why government spending is necessary. Yes, some of it is but not the wasteful kind. The lefties have drank this "it's the rich's fault, they aren't paying their fair share...it's those corporate owners fauls, etc, etc." for so long that they believe it. Folks, we see the violence over seas and we hear the same mantra from those who are burning, breaking and stealing TV's off store walls. If you are on the government dole, you will have your benefits cut as we simply can't afford them any longer. You need to start helping yourself more. There is a job if you have the integrity to go to work and try to improve yourself. As long as you listen to those who make excuses for you and blame others, you will never improve your lot in life. Get busy. Have some personal pride.
Be Constructive
Joey, government... : 8/10/2011
Programs like those discussed, usually depend on the private sector to run them. Government isn't capable of doing so effectively. Just because a private sector business benefits from these g'ment services doesn't mean they are worth while. If the g'ment closes them down, then the private sector can go find something else to do. This really is very simple stuff. G'ment give a ways simply keep people in bondage to entitlements. Not good!
Jason
Thank you... : 8/9/2011
Mr. Jenkins. Your comments are in deed thought provoking. At times I use sarcasm to make a point. With respect to the phrase to which you refer, it is of course, perposterous on its face. Nevertheless, it speaks to the heart of my point. Even those who are not receiving public assistance cannot overlook the fact that the $ spent on those programs is spent in the private sector. Even those who think they aren't affected, actually are. When there are cuts, it is not only the recipients that feel those cuts. And LibCon, you just have to understand from reading my posts that I in no way favor allowing the undeserving to receive benefits. My position on fraud prevention has been made clear. Oh we hear every pol saying we need to cut fraud and waste, but the tools to do that are never forthcoming. Actually, they are always the first to be cut when cuts are made, and the end result that even more of the undeserving end up getting benefits, and even more provider fraud occurs. The grocer isn't particularly concened that 20% of his food stamp customers may be deadbeats as long as the stamps are spent in his store. The guy that owns the section 8 house isn't particularly concerned if his tennat may not be truly disabled, as long as the rent checks from uncle Sam are certainly appreciated. But whether its government spending on welfare programs, defense spending, research, highways, whatever, there is a private business interest of one kind or another that benefits from and depends upon that spending. Case in point. Denison 1970, approx 35,000 in population. Shortly thereafter a decision is made to close Perrin Field. It wasn't needed as a military base any longer. Please note that my remarks have nothing to do with the right or wrong of that decison vis-a-vis our military preparedness, they pertain only to the fact that the base was closed. Well, here we are, over thirty years later, and one can still see the impact of that particular cut back in government spending. Denison has thousands fewer living and doing business here. Some of the places are gone, torn down, whatever, but for sure the base closing had long lasting adverse impact on the Denison economy. It wasn't just the civilian staff who worked at the base who were affected, but all the surrounding busineses that did business with the base and all the personnel there. Additionally, the MKT left town, and we all know how cooperative the relationship between the government and railroads has been. The railroads have not been strangers to government subsidy. The bottom line is there are consequences of cutting programs that impact those far beyond the direct recipients of government funds. The appitite for a piece of that pie is tremendous, and political influence determines who gets the crust and who gets the filling. Any way you cut it however, there are more people getting a piece of that pie than what immediately meets the eye. My remarks are not an endorsement of the system, they are an observation. Mr. Jenkins, I'll try to do better.
Joey
Section8 Housing, LLC : 8/8/2011
"We have the most modern, well equipped welfare system in the world, we have spent enough on welfare recipients to destroy the war on poverty 10 times over. Yet we continue to spend more and more on various welfare programs."
Same idea, same outcome, status quo, but of course the folks living on my street don't mind, as long as you keep paying their rent, they'll keep living here...with no incentive for betterment...caught in YOUR welfare trap...dependant on the good graces of the government. Why you won't offer them an incentive to better themselves is beyond me.
Liberal Conservative
Repeated poos choice of words, Joey. : 8/8/2011
You know Joey, I've been reading your comments here for over a year and there are times where your remarks to folks who do not understand our philosophies and beliefs, such as "It's no sweat off my back. I don't rely on government spending for my living. Six or seven families on your block may, but not me." really make it hard for the rest of us to support you. Time and time again you end up taking a perfect explanation of our side of the story and end up trying to belittle those who don't agree with you, or us for that matter. We're never going to educate them if we can't be civil ourselves. So please stop being the stereotypical liberal. It's embarrassing to those of us who truly care and are trying to explain views to others.
Bob Jenkins
You just don't get it! : 8/8/2011
Let me go over this real slow. There is a business segment that benefits hugely from section 8 housing. Section 8 functions as cash cow for that segment of business as well as functioning as a welfare program. A budgetary assault on section 8 would bring an outcry from that sector of the business community. Do not take my remarks about section 8 and these other programs as a blanket endorsement. I am trying to illustrate to you that there is enormous political support for these programs within the business community itself. Any bugetary attack on these programs would be met with resistance not only from those who represent the poor, but those who represent these business interests. Sure, your average Joe is more likely to see welfare fraud than he is to see fraud in medical billing, so what? You must be under the mistaken impression your average Joe has more political influence than the lobbyists that are funded by those who profit from these programs. As Jason indicated, there are means by which fraud and corruption could be stopped while maintaining a safety net for the truly needy and deserving. Yet he points out that there is not the political will to do that. Why is that? Because those who benefit from these programs are just as likely to be wearing an Armani suit and sitting in a board room than wearing a hand-me down sweatshirt from Goodwill and sitting in front of the TV. You refuse to acknowledge that. Government spending is such so intertwined with our economy as a whole. For example, consider for a moment how many trillions of dollars we have spent on defense over the past few decades. We have the most modern, well equipped military in the world, we have enough missles to destroy any enemy 10 times over. Yet we continue to spend more and more on various weapons programs. We do so not because what we have already isn't more than adequate, we do so because those who profit from these programs convince politicians we need more, and in many cases, convince the average Joe as well. Certainly you heard of instances when even our military leaders insist they don't need a particular weapons system, but we buy it anyway? More often than not it is because of a carefully crafted lobbying effort by those who produce the stuff, and alawys, ALWAYS in the name of jobs. So cut, cut, cut. It's no sweat off my back. I don't rely on government spending for my living. Six or seven families on your block may, but not me.
Joey
Joey's latest post... : 8/8/2011
Is typical liberal stuff. There is always some excuses as to why we can't find the waste and fraud in the government and eliminate it. It can be done without hurting those who really need help. There simply isn't the political will in Washington to do the prudent things. After this S&P downgrade, they better start thinking differently. Back to Joey. He seems to be an expert at everything but no common sense. His last statement that the averages of those using the system ie the lazy and business cheats are about the same. Really? 50-50 huh? What are your sources?
Jason
The public face of fraud is welfare. : 8/8/2011
Joey, I've been in the healthcare billing industry for over 30 years. Get THIS through YOUR thick skull. I've forgotten more about medical billing fraud then you will ever know and while it IS a HUGE brain on the economy, once again let me state, Medicare fraud in NOT something the general public sees on a daily basis. Welfare fraud, however, is. A penny saved is a penny earned. The EASIEST way to put your "section 8 housing equals jobs" is to simply begin drug testing EVERYONE who receives governmental sponsored welfare. It would give jobs to companies who do drug testing as well as testers, rent to the landlords of the testing facilities. My gosh, going by your "Section 8 equals jobs!" theory this is just money waiting to be found, but I'm sure you're wrong about that too...as to "bilking the system", which system? The "tax system"? I pay them. The "medical billing system"? We follow the law, to the letter, The "welfare system"? While my family has help build 3 Habitat for Humanity houses in the last 5 years, we only pay INTO that system.
Liberal Conservative
LibCon : 8/7/2011
Unlike you, I do not have the crystal ball that tells me that particular persons iphone was paid for by me (or you). Nevertheless, your ilk constantly whines about the underserving welfare recipients, but seldom utter a word about those who routinely bilk the system in amounts that you cannot begin to imagine. Try to get this through your thick skull, I am all for, 100%, totally in favor of removing the undeserving from the welfare rolls. I know how it can be done, but it would cost $ to hire and train sufficient personnel to investigate fraud, it would involve allowing agencies ready access to information from financial institutions, and require improved and updated IT systems with which to work. When folks blindly talk about "cutting", that which gets cut is not the benefits, but the personnel to which I refer and the IT support. Simply cutting does not weed out the undeserving. It's like saying the way to cut our insurance fraud is to decrease the amount paid out in legitimate claims. Do some reasearch. You'll find that when it comes to welfare programs recipient fraud pales in comparison to provider fraud. Just as you seem so ready to brand contributors to these threads as lazy leeches, the chances are just as likely you are one of many who bilk the system as a routine business practice. And Lawrence, yes there are plenty of good people out there. There are folks who have met with undue hardship that are deserving of assistance, just as there are those who practice business in a honest and upright manner. The percentages are about the same.
Joey
Les Bower : 8/7/2011
There was an article in the Dallas Morning News yesterday about Les Bower and his wife. How she visits when allowed, the man on death row, that was accused and convicted of the hanger murders years ago in Sherman. It is very strange how Sherman avoids the subject. Nothing in this paper. Never any results of the DNA test that might set him free. It's like if we don't talk about this maybe it will go away. This has been the strangest case ever. Sure do wonder if he was guilty or if it is something that many in the area are embaressed to talk about for fear more facts might come out.
graymare
Everyone is guilty... : 8/7/2011
According to Joey. Every business person wants to make money any way they can, doctors purposely over bill Medicare, etc. Is there any good people out there Joey? Your posts are filled with hatred for anyone who might be successful. Yes, there are bad people in our world but I dare say there are more honest, ethical people than scumbags. As for government spending, if government needs something done, they hire the private sector. It's not all waste Joey and most of us understand that. It's the stupid projects and waste and yes, fraud, that the American people are upset about. One more time. Most people believe in government...not just big government.
Lawrence
Welfare state? : 8/7/2011
I hate it when you liberals harp about the conservative business leaders making a little money. So what, if I make enough money and become wealthy. You weenies will just want to tax me until I have to buy an ugly little car. Ralph Hall is a great American and a banker no less. People should learn to respect our leaders like Brother Hall. Ralph Hall provides countless opportunities to finance the businesses of North Texas through his position as a great banker from Rockwall Texas. Many would choose not to cut teacher, government worker, and Medicare pay. Ralph Hall takes the hard stance of defending banking and investment practices. By insuring that banks are able to loan the countries capital to the citizens of the country everyone benefits. The little guy can afford a car or a boat. The banks can compete in the emerging markets of China.
Viva Los Bancos
7 deadlies : 8/7/2011
Joey said "...but if she is one of the great undeserving among us, you can put her on the list along with the doctors who routinely overbill medicare, and the defense contractors whose cost overruns make welfare fraud look like a pimple on a fat cats a$$."
So instead of asking yourself WHY am I paying for this person to have an IPhone, it's related costs AND giving her, you choose to use the old "They're doing it, why shouldn't I? " defense? That stopped working on the 2nd grade playground, Joey. Grow up and hold yourself and her accountable for your sins. Her's is greed, yours is sloth. Help those who need it, stop rewarding those who don't. Quit patting yourselves on the back for perpetuating a welfare state. You're doing more harm to them than good.
Liberal conservative
Plain as day : 8/7/2011
"There is an entire industry built abound section 8 housing."...and you don't see the problem in that and how it relates to our country's present financial condition?
Temporarian
Hey... : 8/6/2011
Sorry Dan, but it is you who don't know how section 8 works. The government doesn't give the money to the tennant, it's given to the landlord. There is an entire industry built abound section 8 housing. I understand how it works, but do not assume that because I know how it works, that I agree with how it works. The amount of $ these slumlords receive in exchange for the shacks they rent out is outrageous. Yet, they are businessmen, and the name of the game is to get all you can, any way you can, and there is no better example of that than the section 8 game. You are just too stupid to realize just how many "private" businesses depend on government spending. You seem to think only welfare recipients benefit from government spending, and totally ignore the fact that defense contractors, road construction companies, building contractors, doctors and hospitals...the list is long...derive significant (and in some cases, all) their income from tax dollars. To Libcon: Did the story to which you refer happen to mention she got her iphone while she was working for a company who later sent her job overseas? No? Well, I don't know how she got her iphone either, but if she is one of the great undeserving among us, you can put her on the list along with the doctors who routinely overbill medicare, and the defense contractors whose cost overruns make welfare fraud look like a pimple on a fat cats a$$.
Joey
According to Todd, our Representatives/Senators ... : 8/5/2011
Are to vote what they think is best regardless of how their constituents want them to vote. Gee, and I thought we were a representative Republic. As for term limits, if anyone thinks these politicians will be accountable, you are stupid. The "lifers" are what's wrong with Washington today. I like Hall but it's really time for him to go. Same reasoning for a balance budget amendment, they can't police themselves so we have to put restraints on them. What bothers me is that Washington doesn't seem to care about our current financial affairs. As for defense, I'm sure some things can be cut but we have to maintain a strong fighting force. DEMS always want to cut defense. There is plenty of waste in government. Example, one thing holding up the FFA funding is $16 million for some kind of service to rural areas. Say what? If you move to a rural area, you know you don't have airline service when you move there. Drive to whatever city is closest. It was your choice. My god, what has happened to us?
Former Democrat
Todd - You're so naive : 8/5/2011
BWB hit the nail on the head.
Todd, are you really so naive that you actually think corporations pay tax? We pay their tax Todd. Read this slowly – Corporations do NOT pay tax. They merely pass those expenses on to their consumers.
You, like our POTUS, are arrogantly trying to defend yourself and you're outgunned by real life.
a8cx2
BWB is spot on : 8/5/2011
I agree with 100% of what BWB says! Todd needs to do a little research in economics and the constitution. Then he needs to actually read the debt deal and how they super congress has just taken away his power of representation.
Joey....you are an idiot. What they hell are you talking about? Do you really understand how Section 8 housing works? They steal money from the US citizens and give it to people who can't afford housing. Cutting back on section 8 is not anti-business! It's anti-socialism! We the taxpayers are having money taken out of our pockets so they can live there.
The debt deal did create more debt for us. What they hell are you thinking. It increased our national debt! They borrowed all that money right after the deal was done! Pay attention! Now we owe more money because of interest on the new debt increases our debt more! You are just stupid! Now the government needs more money to pay their debt payments. Where do you think they are going to get it? They are going to tax you more! Good job for cheering them on for stealing more of your money!
Do you even know what government money is? It's your money that they stole from you! The government doesn't produce anything. They steal your money and give you some services while they keep it for working for you. You do realize that they are your employees don't you?
dan
Move the burden to the recipient : 8/5/2011
Joey, WHY do you think the “welfare state” is first and foremost in the taxpaying public’s mind when you begin talking about rampant government spending? It’s because this is the most blatant example seen by the taxpaying public on a daily basis. Example? Recently a local new outlet ran a story (now edited) regarding theft. The female stated “I lost everything. My money, my wallet, my IPhone, my food card.”! WHY did this person have the ability to purchase and use an IPhone while receiving government assistance to feed themselves and their family? A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
LibCon
Lately... : 8/5/2011
I've been seeing refernces to Section 8 housing. The drug testing issue vis-a vis various government safety net programs is interesting, but there are a few of points to be made. 1. Testing recipients would be costly (including setting up a new bureaucratic procedure to manage it), and new government expenditures don't seem to be on the play list these days. Increasing initial eleigibility determination accuracy and fraud investigation capabilities could cut down considerably on the undeserving getting benefits, but when cuts are made in budgets, the first to get the ax are those who determine eligibility and prevent fraud, and that just makes the problem worse. 2. Folks get drug tested on their jobs not because employers object to paying wages to drug users. Folks get tested because of liability, security, insurance, and safety concerns which could result in liability issues for the employer. 3. Keep an open mind, because this may seem odd to many: Cutting back on section 8 housing is anti-business. Who do you think makes all the money off section 8 housing? Answer: landlords (to be kind), building contractors, and maintenance firms. Most folks who read these threads wouldn't live in most section 8 housing either because they wouldn't want to live in the neighborhood or more likely, they would find the accomodations to be far below their standards. Whether it's food stamps, section 8, or emergency medical carte for illegals, there is someone who is not the "welfare recipient" that gets the money in the end...the grocer & farmer, the landlord, the doctor & hospital. This debt deal has very little effect on the deficit and national debt, but it will have a more significant affect on increased unemployment and the bottom line of all those private businesses that eventually receive all that "government" money. Too often folks immediately think of welfare recipients and government employees when government spending is discussed, but fail to realize that virtually every dollar paid in benefits or salary ends up going to private enterprises.
Joey
Todd, you're above your pay grade : 8/4/2011
Todd, you're above your pay grade in writing political comments. You need to go back to sports. You were much better and may have known more about that subject than this one.
You say you believe the government should get control of its spending. How do you propose to do that by increasing our borrowing limit? This is the same as a credit card raising our limit when we are have reached the limit. I personally know about that and had one to raise mine to $42,000. Guess what, my wife and I kept spending and reached that limit which led to financial difficulties. That is what happens when the debt limit of our government is raised, too. It does not get control of spending; it encourages more. The way to control spending is to stop raising the limit. By the end of the next day the debt was up to $14.53 trillion. In one day our leaders borrowed another $253 billion.
I am proud of Ralph Hall for listening to his constituents - the majority who called him.
Many of those who voted for it didn't like it but said it was the best deal they could get. In that case, they should not have voted for it. A bad deal which is not the worst deal is bad for our country. Thanks Ralph Hall for listening.
Your liberalism shows everytime you tackle a political topic. You say we we cannot continue these massive expenditures in defense spending, Social Security, and Medicare without bringing in additional revenues. Why is always defense and programs for the elderly you Democrats always name to be cut when someone speaks of cutting spending? There are many other departments or areas of government I could name to cut and it would not harm those who have paid for a lifetime of work into the system. If government would get out of the areas of our lives that are not specified in the Constitution, we would not be in this mess. The Constitution is very specific on what the government is to provide and the main one is defense of her citizens. The part I didn't like about the bill, besides raising the debt ceiling, is that if the "super committee" can't agree on cuts, the 50% of the cuts come from defense.
BWB
Tod, you sound : 8/4/2011
like a sensible guy to me. And I agree with you on the term limits issue. It's just a panacea like flat taxes and flag burning amendments.
Also bribery, I mean lobbying is something that really need to be looked at along with media consolidation.
Keep on writing!
Hafta B. N. d'Club
Liberal Conservative : 8/4/2011
I'll start with the term limits argument. I don't like term limits because the way government is set up now, it would take more than two congressional terms to learn how to help your district by getting appointed to various committees, etc. Politics has become almost a career, and the electorate need to treat it that way. Besides, if they are a good representative, let's keep them working for us. As for corporate taxes, GE spends about $100 million on tax lawyers to save billions of dollars in taxes. Who knows what they spend on contributions to candidates, too. I would like to see corporations pay a fairer share of what they owe. I also think there are individual taxes that could be simplified like the homeowner interest deduction should have a limit of how much a home can cost, say $500,000, and the interest should be deductible to that limit. As for lobbying, we all do that with letters, phone calls, e-mails, etc. We need to reduce corporate lobbying because it's been out of hand for years. The only way lobbying could be controlled is by telling Congress if it looks like a bribe, smells like a bribe, and quacks like a bribe, it's not a political contribution, and you will be held accountable and prosecuted for accepting a bribe.
Todd Hutchinson, Web Editor
To Former: : 8/4/2011
We need to change your status to Current HD Reader. I used to be the sports editor here from 1996-2005 when I became the news editor. Then I left to work as the Assistant Delivery Desk Editor at The Rockford Register Star in Rockford, Ill in 2006. I came back about a year and a half later and was hired as the web editor. I have a bachelor's degree in Political Science from Kansas State University, so I know a little something about how government and politicians work. I've found that sports and politics are surprisingly similar. You work toward a goal, you compromise with teammates and officials, you have to battle an opponent, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes you tie. All these years later, I am still active in sports. I referee rugby and umpire high school baseball. I encourage all of you to participate in sports as a coach, an official, or as a player.
Todd Hutchinson, Web Editor, Herald Democrat
Tax revenues : 8/4/2011
Todd, I really didn't see a single example of the Federal tax revenues that you would like to raise/end. Why don't we start with 3 easy ones. Let's cancel the mortgage deduction as I'm sure Ben Stein would also agree that "a House is not an American birthright" either...AND let's kill the EIC as once again "a tax "refund" is not an American birthright". Once those are done we can go after the corporations by placing a tariff on ALL imported products (this includes Fords from Mexico and Chevys from Canada) as well as modifying the tax code so GE never again pays ZERO dollars in Federal income tax. The SCoTUS says they are just like us, so they can be taxed just like us. Once we get the revenue stream up, let’s hit spending. Let’s drug test Section 8, welfare and SSDI recipients. Just like my employer test me, I demand they be drug free also. Last but not least, end all lobbying, require ALL politicians to be held accountable to the laws they pass, set term (2 terms only) and benefit limits (“Obamacare” for you and no “for life pensions”) for the senate and house and add a 10 year non-compete clauses for ex politicians. This won’t fix the entire problem, but it is a good start.
Liberal Conservative
More than one party.... : 8/4/2011
...can play the hostage game. Perhaps Obama could demand a single payer health care system by threatening to exercise his authority as commander in chief by shutting down all military recruiting offices, or by discharging 10,000 military personnel per month, or furloughing all DEA agents or border patrol agents until the Reps in Congress agree. Maybe the Dems in Congress could threaten to defund the SBA, or refuse to vote for any legislation until the entire interstate highway system is shut down for safety inspections, or maybe defunding all air traffic control support to all non-passenger flights, or defunding support to our ports. Make no mistake about it, it's just a matter of time, probably weeks, before the Teabaggers try their hand at yet another hostage situation. Well, they aren't the only ones who can play that game, and it can all be done in the name of budget balancing. The possibilities are endless. Of course, I am not proposing any of this be done, but who knows what may happen in Washington?
Joey
Sports : 8/4/2011
I thought you wrote about high school sports?
former HD reader
Thank you Ralph! : 8/3/2011
I admire a man who stands on principle like Ralph Hall! This bill was horrific! Raising taxes at this time of the economy would be one of the stupidest things they could do.
Ben Stein is not a conservative. He has been wrong about everything he has said about our economy and stocks! lol And he is wrong again! Taking away more money from the people to pay for government things like pension plans, jets, security, great vacations, and their salary increases they get every year is a great idea!! lol Geewhiz, why not just have your job send your paychecks to the government and then let them give you your allowance! lol Now that's freedom and liberty!
You forgot that this great balanced budget that the City of Sherman presented us is only balanced after we vote to increase our sales tax 7%. OH...did you not read the whole thing, or are you just trying to forget the important part where THEY DO RAISE OUR TAXES to balance their budget? Pay attention Todd, you are supposed to be an unbiased and informed reporter!
And...although they kept the property tax the same, they raised a lot of home prices for the evaluation...so essentially you are paying more for your property. Funny how that sounds. You are paying for your property. I though you already owned it? Hmmm.
They spent more money than they had, and our reserves are getting low. Appearantly you don't look at the financial sheets from the cities budget. Oh well, keep listening to and believing the government and soon your town can look like our federal government!
This bill also created a super congressional committee of 12 that will be able to bring legislation to the floor and not allow the other representatives in congress to discuss, change, or add amendments to the bill. It will just allow an up or down vote by other members. WOW!! I bet you didn't know about that either. That is highly unconstitutional and a great step to a dictatorship. Why do we even vote for representatives when they don't get a say except for an up or down vote? You, unlike Pelosi, should actually read the bill before you are for it! It might contain things that affect you. The so called Tea Party in the congress was actually trying to balance the budget and keep this country from spending more money, but I guess you like us to be in more debt than we can pay back. One thing you probably didn't notice was that we will have to revisit these talks before 2013 because the money they say we had to pay bills will be long gone by then. Way to get us in Trillions more debt and still have to tackle the problem in less than 2 years. Todd needs to understand that we give trillions to foreign aid and foreign wars and billions to the UN. We also give billions to illegal immigrants and trillions to the politicians. How about we cut some of that spending and we won't have to make the citizens pay more money and be poorer. Ever think about that?
Todd, you really need to inform yourself about the facts of this bill, the city budget, and the constitution. It's obvious you haven't so far. You are supposed to inform the people. When you leave out the important parts, you are part of the problem. You could learn a thing or two from Ralph Hall about being informed and standing on principal!
Me
Agree w/vote but not his logic : 8/2/2011
I'm no fan of Ralph Hall and never have been. He voted No. For what it's worth the bill still passed.
I would have voted 'no' too. This was a bad bill and things are going to get worse. The makeup of the "no" votes was quite interesting. It was similar to the "no" votes on the bank bailout.
Hafta B. N. d'Club
LOCAL AND WIRE 
RSS Feeds 
