CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 04, 2014 12:06 PM UTC

The faux-outrage of deficit reduction and spending.

  • 1 Comments
  • by: Urban Snowshoer

Question: what does deficit reduction have in common with local control ( and free-markets to some degree)?

Answer: Most people only support it when it benefits them.

 

All too often deficit reduction is what the party out of power uses to attack the party in power, rather than to have a constructive dialog about balancing the budget: e.g. Democrats citing the deficit to oppose the Iraq War, Republicans citing the deficit to oppose the Affordable Care Act, etc.

When the Republicans are ready to accept the reality that defense spending needs to come down and more revenue needs to come in (along with entitlement reforms of course), I’ll take their calls to reduce the deficit and outrage of spending seriously. The same goes for the Democrats: you’re going to have swallow the bitter pill of entitlement reforms—reductions in defense spending and more revenue won’t balance the budget alone.

 

Both parties have a credibility problem on the deficit. Anyone expressing outrage over spending, who is unwilling or unable to come clean about what really needs to be done (i.e. reductions in both entitlement and defense spending, along with bringing in more revenue, is nothing more than a cheap hustler looking for a backdoor way to cut or eliminate programs they oppose, rather than having an honest conversation about balancing the budget.    
 

Comments

One thought on “The faux-outrage of deficit reduction and spending.

  1. Didn't we have a Bowles-Simpson bipartison plan to cut entitlements, defense and raise revenue. What the hell happened. Everybody's pet program's have to take a hit and we need more revenue. That is why we have a deficit. We are spending to much on everythin and not collecting enough taxes. A tax cut and spend economic plan is fiscally irresponsible. To start with cut defense, how much Social Security you collect will be determined by your wealth, and all income will be taxed. Also, all elected officials at the federal level will rely solely on Medicaid for their health insurance until they leave office.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

247 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!