Congressman Moran: CUT SPENDING!

| 4 Comments | 3 TrackBacks

As a resident of the district represented by Democratic Congressman Jim Moran, I've just received an email from his office. The email includes a survey with the following multiple choice question:


1-Which statement best fits your views on our country's fiscal situation?

The President's tax cuts should be fully repealed in order to reduce the deficit and pay for the war on terrorism.

The portion of the President's tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest two percent of Americans should be repealed in order to reduce the deficit and pay for the war on terrorism.

We should keep the current tax cuts intact and continue deficit spending required by the war on terrorism.

We should cut taxes further and continue even more deficit spending required by the war on terrorism.

Notice the missing option: I would like for you to cut federal spending on everything but defense issues.

3 TrackBacks

I save a lot of links in my blog surfing, thanks to FeedDemon's NewsBin feature. Too many. But see, I usually have no time to blog. Thus, these entries are filed away in my newsbin, ported back and forth from home to office computers and back again, ju... Read More

I save a lot of links in my blog surfing, thanks to FeedDemon's NewsBin feature. Too many. But see, I usually have no time to blog. Thus, these entries are filed away in my newsbin, ported back and forth from home to office computers and back again, ju... Read More

I save a lot of links in my blog surfing, thanks to FeedDemon's NewsBin feature. Too many. But see, I usually have no time to blog. Thus, these entries are filed away in my newsbin, ported back and forth from home to office computers and back again, ju... Read More

4 Comments

um...
how about we move the troops out of south korea and japan and germany where they're not wanted and are of no use and move them into iraq or to saipan (us soil) and save an estimated $50 billion a year that way....

Seems like it makes more since than to cut spending on old grandma's and whatever else

Actually, I'd like them to cut spending on me.

On the plus side, I recently departed the repulsive Jim Moran's district for the more agreeable Duncan Hunter's. On the minus side, I now have to contend with the revolting Democrat-dominated California legislature.

Andrew, moving US troops from overseas to elswhere doesn't get you much in the way of savings (certainly not $50bn). See the CBO study, Options for Changing the Army's Overseas Basing (May 2004):

"- Because the United States has invested heavily over the past 50 years in base infrastructure for its troops stationed overseas, any major shifting of forces--either between overseas locations or to the United States--would require significant spending to provide that infrastructure somewhere else.


- There would be limited annual savings to offset the large initial investment needed to restation U.S. forces, unless U.S. presence overseas was greatly reduced. In that case, annual savings could exceed $1 billion, but the net up-front investment would be substantial--on the order of $7 billion."

How about just sending them to Iraq then!?
Wouldn't that improve the situation considerably?

Pages

Powered by Movable Type 5.02

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Kevin published on August 6, 2004 10:14 AM.

Woodchip Stamps was the previous entry in this blog.

Union Busting is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.