Minnesota Values? I don't think so Mark!!!
Pressured by best friend George W. Bu$h, Congressman Mark Kennedy votes against the poor, and students!
In a tie breaking vote on Friday, Congressman Kennedy voted to cut $14 billion to student loan programs and voted to cut $12 billion in Medicaid funding (Medicaid is the health care program for the poor and disabled).
What does Mark have to say?
“Washington shouldn’t have a blank check, and as a CPA and businessman I’m happy to see us act to reduce our federal deficit. This bill reduces spending in a way that reflects our Minnesota values and sets priorities. We owe it to our children to lower the deficit." (from Mark Kennedy's campaign website)
So we can give the President a blank check for an unwarranted war? And instead of rolling back the tax breaks to the richest Americans, we'll reduce the deficit on the backs of the poor and our children??? THOSE MOST CERTAINLY ARE NOT MINNESOTA VALUES!!! They sound more like the Bu$h Republican's (DeLay, Bush, Cheney, Frist, Ken Lay, etc.) values!
14 Republicans had joined a unified Democratic front to stop these cuts to the poor and children. One of them, Jim Ramstad of Minnesota disagrees with Mark Kennedy's "priorities":
"We should cut the massive pork barrel spending instead of cutting health care for the poorest of the poor, the elderly and people with disabilities," Ramstad said.
According to Ramstad, the bill could cause 6 million children from low-income families to lose health care benefits under Medicaid. He also said student loan cuts would cost University of Minnesota students $6.3 million next year. (Star Tribune Article)
In this case I totally agree with Mr. Ramstad.
You have to wonder who Mark Kennedy is really working for in Congress and who he might be working for in Senate, if he's elected (Bu$h Inc.) - IT MOST DEFINATLEY WON'T BE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO HE SHOULD BE WORKING FOR - THE PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA!!! This is proof of it!
What others are saying:
"They are targeting programs for poor people to pay for tax cuts for rich people," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wisconsin.
MN Senate Candidate Amy Klobuchar issues statement following Budget vote (Here)
+++
And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
Matthew 19:24
+++
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., says:
“I wish (the needle) had a little bigger eye.”
... Ok, I took his quote out of context - but it's relevant here as well.
** Original Quote and context **
On drilling in ANWR:
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., says that resolving the drilling issue will be like threading a needle.
“I wish (the needle) had a little bigger eye,” Hastert said.
Comments
However, we should be careful when we criticize tax cuts, even if the richest 1% benefit. Many the middle and lower quintiles will benefit too. The top 1% of income earners pay over 35% of total tax reciepts. That's fine. The top 50% of income earners pay nearly 95% too the bottom 50% paying around 5% (latest IRS stats--I can link it later if you want). Those top 50%, like it or not, provide the capital accumulation that keeps our economy growing. Wages and income, for all earners, are tied to this process. Rich people invest, and they need to. It's not moral or immoral. It's the truth of how a capitalist economy works.
I don't mean to bloviate, if you feel that I am. But I just wish that left-of-center pundits would take economics into account sometimes when they criticize "the morality" of economic decision-making--especially when it is so easy to rally passions against rich people. Complaining that rich people benefit from something is no substitute for analysis. Thanks, and I look forward to hearing back.