https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...ms-compensation-fund-citing-national-debt.amp Let me get this straight? Rand claims to be concerned about our national debt, but yet he voted yes on the President’s tax cut that are adding to the debt at unprecedented rates? Hypocrisy has a name and his name is Rand Paul.
Mike Lee R Utah also put a hold on this bill, for some reason about oversight, which I'm SURE is covered in the bill... As you point out, Kentucky is incredibly ill-served by their 2 Senators... I hope Amy McGrath gains some traction there, but I'm assuming the deplorables rule the back woods.... Republicans are provably anti-American... every single day....
How so? You do know Rand Paul has been for cutting spending since day one right? As an example http://www.freedomworks.org/content/rand-paul-introduces-five-year-balanced-budget-plan or this https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...the-budget-every-year/?utm_term=.d04e69291705 or this https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...stitutional-amendment-proposal-fails-in-house
Really?? How much of this was Paul able to get accomplished?? In other words, what spending has he actually cut in his time in the Senate? But even if he gets some credit for attempting things, why stop this? @Yulee is right... anybody who voted for the Trump Tax Scam will never again ascend the pedestal of spending champion in Washington. Hypocrite!
Rand approves of measures that put more money in the pockets of the already wealthy. He opposes measures that benefit folks who work for a living. This is especially sad when you realize how many first responders lost their lives initially and they rushed right in. Shame on Rand Paul and Mike Lee.
I think he was grandstanding... Yes we do need to get spending under control but I personally don't think 9/11 victim funding is the bill to make that point. All just my personal views
Not at all. The purpose of the tax cut was to make American companies more competitive with those of other countries. Neither he nor the law required government to continue spending at nonsensical levels. The debt covers spending, not tax cuts.
While I applaud his call for fiscal responsibility I find it strange that this is where he plans to start it. This administration promised to get rid of the entire nation debt in eight years. So far in has done nothing but increase.
Why did wealthy people need such a large tax cut? They didn't spend it You do know that Trump raised taxes on the middle class.
Rand Paul is Right! Add a tax to pay for it. Uber Rich add on tax. Sales tax. Oh I know a tax on Trade with Saudi Arabia. Osama was one of theirs. It isn't the idea of the 9/11 fund that is wrong. What Rand and Moi, both M.D's, find wrong is not provision to finance this bill. Moi my HOA is run the same way now. Dues triples in a few years.
The tax cut was for businesses. The purpose was to help them be more competitive in the international marketplace.
The entire premise of your post as flawed. Tax revenues are up it is SPENDING that is the problem as Paul notes. He also attaches this amendment to EVERY new spending bill. This is a bad bill passed because a comedian went before Congress and made an emotional appeal. We should find the money to pay for it and then require a Congressional review every 3-5 years a reauthorization at needed levels.
Why does the economy need lower rates on successful businesses and people? You do know Trump lowered income taxes on the lower and middle classes and the lower and middle income earners are seeing their incomes rise faster than the higher incomes. We have to control spending. This program has worked well and should continue tonrun with the same oversights as before. Putting such programs on autopilot is why the deficits have soared. Offset the spending and keep proper management in place.
So if you want to control spending why sign the tax cuts without making sure there is spending cuts attached to the bill? It seems hypocritical. We lower what we bring in but don’t mess with what we spend? I thought having a business man in the White House was supposed to fix this!
Because it is a tax bill not a spending/budget bill. And as with previous tax rate cuts revenues are up. You do realize tax rates and tax revenues are two different things. But this is about SPENDING. And as we see with government spending bills all they do is spend more and more and more and can never be stopped or cut. This bill authorizes what ever necessary funds as determined by the officials running, a blank check and no further revenues. And Gillibrand proved the point when she complained about finding spending offsets and cried about that would mean HEADSTART oh the poor children Paul must hate children. The fact is Headstart has been a failure from the getgo. The government's own studies have shown by the time students reach the end if the 1st grade there is no difference in educational levels or achievement. "Head Start, the most sacrosanct federal education program, doesn’t work. That’s the finding of a sophisticated study just released by President Obama’s Department of Health and Human Service Created in 1965, the comprehensive preschool program for 3- and 4-year olds and their parents is meant to narrow the education gap between low-income students and their middle- and upper-income peers. Forty-five years and $166 billion later, it has been proven a failure..... The bad news came in the study released this month: It found that, by the end of the first grade, children who attended Head Start are essentially indistinguishable from a control group of students who didn’t. What’s so damning is that this study used the best possible method to review the program: It looked at a nationally representative sample of 5,000 children who were randomly assigned to either the Head Start (“treatment”) group or to the non-Head Start (“control”) group. https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/head-start-tragic-waste-money But just try to hint at cutting back that spending and using it for say helping these first responders and hold on for the attacks.
