Monday, November 21, 2011
CD1 Candidate Eric Griego Asks Us to Choose
From the Eric Griego for Congress Campaign:
The Congressional “Super Committee” failed to reach an agreement today on reducing our national debt because the Republican members won’t let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% expire while insisting on making steep cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
What a disgrace. What Speaker John Boehner and his Republican Congress have done again is to put tax cuts for the rich ahead of the 99% of us and the economy. Unfortunately, my Tea Party Republican opponents in this race are running on the same pro-millionaire agenda to take from our seniors and the middle class to give to the richest 1%.
That’s why I’m starting a new petition today calling on the leading Republican candidates in this race to choose between keeping the Bush tax cuts for the richest 1% or protecting Social Security and Medicare from cuts. This should be a simple choice, but let’s put them on notice.
I’ll deliver your petitions to the leading Republican candidates in this race. And I’ll invite the media to come along like when I delivered more than 35,000 petitions to Speaker John Boehner a month ago calling on him to “stand with the 99%” and pass the President’s jobs bill.
Griego is, of course, accepting the erroneous republican framing and asking for the wrong choice in order to answer the wrong question.
He is accepting the completely false claim that the deficit is a problem now. It's not. The Republicans have been crying for three years or more that the deficits will cause massive inflation, higher interest rates, and other economic disasters. Obviously they've been wrong for more than three years, and are continuing to be wrong. It may be a problem in three more years or ten more years, but if it's a problem then, we should deal with it then.
Right now we have a wonderful co-incidence of three factors:
1. People are desperate to lend money to the US. We're selling ten year bonds that pay essentially zero interest.
2. We have a desperate need to upgrade our infrastructure - roads, internet, sewer and water, schools, etc.
3. We have a lot of unemployed people, who we can hire (with the money from selling bonds) to fix the infrastructure.
That will pump up demand, get the economy moving, put in place the infrastructure necessary to sustain the next economic upturn - and in the mean time people will have jobs and money.
So the choice is not tax cuts vs safety net - it's saving the country with deficit spending to stimulate demand, or continuing to go to hell in a handbasket.
Posted by: Michael H Schneider | Nov 22, 2011 4:36:21 PM
I should also point out that I'm still supporting Eric.
His opponents are both making this same mistake, so holding it against him would be silly.
Michelle's web page says that "we must address the "big picture" issues facing our country such as the federal budget deficit" (no, we mustn't).
Marty, at the DFNM meeting, also said we must balance the federal budget, and his idea was to reduce unemployment by firing a bunch of federal military contractors and reducing the military budget. Obviously firing people (unless they are Iraqis) won't reduce unemployment, and reducing purchases of MREs and military vehicles and other things, so that those factories fire people, won't help unemployment either.
So this is no reason to not support Eric - but supporting him doesn't mean I feel obliged to praise every asinine idea he has. That's the thing about being a Democrat. I feel entitled to praise the good ideas, and reserve the right to disagree when my candidate is wrong.
Posted by: Michael H Schneider | Nov 22, 2011 5:28:18 PM