Monday
Feb042008
Senator Kent Conrad, (D-ND) the Senate Budget Committee Chairman and Rep. John Spratt, (D-SC) the House Budget Committee Chairman discuss the deficiencies of President Bush's Fiscal Year 2009 budget
Monday, February 4, 2008 at 3:52PM
Sen. Kent Conrad and Rep. John Spratt held a press conference today regarding the release of the President’s Fiscal Year 2009 budget.
Held in the House Radio/Television Gallery Studio, the conference had a largely negative tone toward the budget. Their message was repeated multiple times; as Spratt stated, “today’s budget bears all the hallmarks of the Bush legacy – it leads to more deficits, more debt, more tax cuts, and more cutbacks in critical services.”
Sen. Conrad opened up the hearing declaring that one of the biggest problems with the proposed budget is that nowhere has there been discussion on the debt, which is going to go up $700 billion, about 5% of GDP, in the next year. Furthermore, he declares that under the Bush Administration’s proposal, we would simply be building a wall of debt.
One of the most interesting factors pointed out by Sen. Conrad was the fact that President Bush has more than doubled the US’s Foreign Held Debt in the eight years of his 0presidency – something that has not occurred in the 224 years we have had a presidency. In addition, through his calculations, Sen. Conrad claims that all of the savings President Bush intends to incur from cuts in Medicare and Medicaid will be more than wiped out by his tax cuts.
When asked whether the budget would be dead on arrival, Sen. Conrad claimed, “No, it would not be dead on arrival, but debt on departure.”
Following Sen. Conrad’s speech, Rep. Pratt made a humorous comment about President Bush intending to have guns and butter and tax cuts too. It is this policy which has turned a $236 billion surplus into a $410 billion deficit. One of the more interesting aspects of the budget pointed out by Rep. Pratt was that today’s budget includes only a $70 billion request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is curious because it will most certainly fail to fund the full cost of the Administration’s policy for 2009.
The bottom line is that a more realistic Bush deficit shows that the Administration’s budget never actually reaches a balance by 2013, and that the President has left the country in a debt of stunning proportions.
Held in the House Radio/Television Gallery Studio, the conference had a largely negative tone toward the budget. Their message was repeated multiple times; as Spratt stated, “today’s budget bears all the hallmarks of the Bush legacy – it leads to more deficits, more debt, more tax cuts, and more cutbacks in critical services.”
Sen. Conrad opened up the hearing declaring that one of the biggest problems with the proposed budget is that nowhere has there been discussion on the debt, which is going to go up $700 billion, about 5% of GDP, in the next year. Furthermore, he declares that under the Bush Administration’s proposal, we would simply be building a wall of debt.
One of the most interesting factors pointed out by Sen. Conrad was the fact that President Bush has more than doubled the US’s Foreign Held Debt in the eight years of his 0presidency – something that has not occurred in the 224 years we have had a presidency. In addition, through his calculations, Sen. Conrad claims that all of the savings President Bush intends to incur from cuts in Medicare and Medicaid will be more than wiped out by his tax cuts.
When asked whether the budget would be dead on arrival, Sen. Conrad claimed, “No, it would not be dead on arrival, but debt on departure.”
Following Sen. Conrad’s speech, Rep. Pratt made a humorous comment about President Bush intending to have guns and butter and tax cuts too. It is this policy which has turned a $236 billion surplus into a $410 billion deficit. One of the more interesting aspects of the budget pointed out by Rep. Pratt was that today’s budget includes only a $70 billion request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is curious because it will most certainly fail to fund the full cost of the Administration’s policy for 2009.
The bottom line is that a more realistic Bush deficit shows that the Administration’s budget never actually reaches a balance by 2013, and that the President has left the country in a debt of stunning proportions.
Rockefeller Introduces Public Option Amendment To Finance Committee Bill
The biggest debate on the fifth day of markup of the America’s Healthy future Act focused heavily on the “public option.” Liberal Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.) introduced his amendment to Senate Finance Comittee Chairman Max Baucus' (D-Mont.) mark providing for a “public option,” or what he calls the “Consumer Choice Health Plan.”
The debate began with Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) criticizing Rockefeller's amendment, calling it a “Trojan horse for a single payer program [that] would lead to Washington controlling health care and monitoring prices."
Rockefeller kept a stern attitude on his amendment stating that, “It would not be a government takeover." However, the West Virginia Democrat refused to answer questions put to him by Hatch.
Heavy debate ensued on non-profit insurance programs from Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and how well they have worked in his state, and how poorly the US as a whole compares to other nations. Conrad made a compelling argument for the “Mutual” based system with non-profit companies that would attempt to provide for universal healthcare coverage.
Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) further argued that Medicare rates would be fixed during the first two years under Rockefeller's amendment - Rockefeller proudly held up two fingers. After the two years though, explained Bingaman, rates would be further negotiated, which would essentially adjust prices to fit in line with private companies.
Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) compared the health care plan to universities, saying that "There’s both a private university and public university...there should be a choice."
Democrats agreed that Rockefeller’s amendment would build competition within the open market, while Republicans contended that it will bring price adjustments along with a government-run, single payer takeover of the entire healthcare system.
“This is a slippery slope to go down… it will lead to a government-run single payer option,” said Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.).
Markup is scheduled to continue late Tuesday night and will reconvene Wednesday morning.