Introducing the people's budget
- 04/08/11 02:58 PM ET
As I mentioned in an op-ed in The Hill earlier this week, I have been working with my Congressional Progressive Caucus colleagues, economists and tax policy experts to develop a budget that eliminates the deficit (which Ryan fails to do), puts America to work building a competitive economy, invests in our schools, brings the troops home, protects social security and represents a fair deal for working families. We make the tax code fair, asking the wealthiest individuals, corporations hiding money overseas, oil companies raking in record profits and Wall Street banks that gambled away our money to pay their fair share. We fix roads, bridges and waterways, we build a world-class high-speed rail system and broadband, we end our addiction to oil and the endless wars that come with it, we meet our obligations to seniors and we educate our children for the global workforce. Our budget does all this while eliminating the deficit, cutting nearly $1 trillion in waste, and reducing debt burden.
Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are introducing this “People’s Budget” next week, which world-renowned economist Dr. Jeffrey Sachs just endorsed. Dr. Sachs, whom CNN’s Fareed Zakaria this week called “one of the world's leading economists, the go-to man for guiding countries out of economic crises, ”explains the need for the “People’s Budget” in this morning’s column on the Huffington Post. In addition to eliminating the deficit, Dr. Sachs calls it “humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy.
Here’s what Dr. Jeffery Sachs said about the “People’s Budget”: “Just when it seemed that all of Washington had lost its values and its connection with the American people, a bolt of hope has arrived. It is the People's Budget put forward by the co-chairs of the 80-member Congressional Progressive Caucus. Their plan is humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy. Unlike Paul Ryan's almost absurdly vicious attack on the poor and working class, the People's Budget would close the deficit by raising taxes on the rich, taming health care costs (including a public option), and ending the military spending on wars and wasteful weapons systems.
There are now four budget positions on the table. Far to the right is Paul Ryan's plan, an artless war on the poor that would take a meat-cleaver to Medicaid (health care for the poor), food stamps, support for child care, the environment, and the rest of government other than the military, Social Security, and Medicare (that is, until 2022, when the slashing would begin on Medicare coverage as well). Ryan would keep taxes below 20 percent of GDP (specifically, 19.9 percent of GDP in 2021), at the cost of destroying entitlements programs and other civilian spending.
Then there is President Obama's budget, which is really a muddled proposal in the center-right of the political spectrum. It would keep most of the Reagan-era and Bush-era tax cuts in place. Like the Ryan proposal, Obama's tax proposals would keep total taxes at around 20 percent of GDP. The result is a major long-term squeeze on vital programs such as community development, infrastructure, and job training. Also, Obama's plan never closes the budget deficit, which remains as high as 3.1 percent of GDP in 2021.
In the progressive middle is the People's Budget. Like Ryan's plan, the People's Budget would cut the budget deficit to zero by 2021, but would do so in an efficient and fair way. It would close the budget deficit by raising tax rates on the rich and giant corporations, while also curbing military spending and wrestling health care costs under control, partly by introducing a public option. By raising tax revenues to 22.3 percent of GDP by 2021, the People's Budget closes the budget deficit while protecting the poor and promoting needed investments in education, health care, roads, power, energy, and the environment in order to raise America's long-term competitiveness. The People's Budget thereby achieves what Ryan and Obama do not: the combination of fairness, efficiency, and budget balance.
The fourth position is the public's position. The Republicans often say that they want Congress to respect the voice of the people. The voice of the people is crystal clear. In one opinion survey after the next, the public says that the rich and the corporations should pay more taxes. The public says that we should tamp down runaway health care costs through a public option, one that would introduce competition to drive down bloated private health insurance costs. The public says that we should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and reduce Pentagon spending. (Just yesterday, Defense Secretary Gates let loose the predictable Pentagon canard that we should stay in Iraq if the Iraqi government asks for it. Better yet, we should respond to what the American people are asking for: to bring our troops home).
The fact is that the People's Budget is the public's position. That's why it is truly a centrist initiative, at the broad center of the US political spectrum. Ryan reflects the wishes of the rich and the far right. Obama's position reflects the muddle of a White House that wavers between its true values and the demands of the wealthy campaign contributors and lobbyists that Obama courts for his re-election. Many Democrats in Congress have also gone along with the falsehood that deficit cutting means slashing spending on the poor and on civilian discretionary programs, rather than raising taxes on the rich, cutting military spending, and taking on the over-priced private health insurance industry. Only the People's Budget speaks to the broad needs and values of the American people.
The current budget negotiations have been a dialogue among the wealthy. The big debate has focused on which programs for the poor should be axed first. There has been no discussion of raising taxes on the rich, and quite the contrary, the White House and the Republican leadership agreed to further tax cuts last December. Obama has repeatedly expressed regret at slashing community development, energy support for the poor, and other programs, but he is not fighting the trend, only regretting it.
Most of Washington has stopped listening to the people. Campaigns are now so expensive that most politicians do anything to court the favor of the rich. Yet ultimately the public will prevail. Twice before in American history - during the Gilded Age of the 1880s and in the 1920s, just before the Great Depression - big corporate money effectively owned Washington. But in both eras great progressive leaders (including the two Roosevelts, Theodore and Franklin) came along to restore the true meaning of American democracy: a government truly of the people, by the people, and for the people. With public protests against government by the rich now spreading in Wisconsin, Ohio and beyond, and with the launch of the People's Budget by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a great national movement to restore American democracy has begun.”
Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are introducing this “People’s Budget” next week, which world-renowned economist Dr. Jeffrey Sachs just endorsed. Dr. Sachs, whom CNN’s Fareed Zakaria this week called “one of the world's leading economists, the go-to man for guiding countries out of economic crises, ”explains the need for the “People’s Budget” in this morning’s column on the Huffington Post. In addition to eliminating the deficit, Dr. Sachs calls it “humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy.
Here’s what Dr. Jeffery Sachs said about the “People’s Budget”: “Just when it seemed that all of Washington had lost its values and its connection with the American people, a bolt of hope has arrived. It is the People's Budget put forward by the co-chairs of the 80-member Congressional Progressive Caucus. Their plan is humane, responsible, and most of all sensible, reflecting the true values of the American people and the real needs of the floundering economy. Unlike Paul Ryan's almost absurdly vicious attack on the poor and working class, the People's Budget would close the deficit by raising taxes on the rich, taming health care costs (including a public option), and ending the military spending on wars and wasteful weapons systems.
There are now four budget positions on the table. Far to the right is Paul Ryan's plan, an artless war on the poor that would take a meat-cleaver to Medicaid (health care for the poor), food stamps, support for child care, the environment, and the rest of government other than the military, Social Security, and Medicare (that is, until 2022, when the slashing would begin on Medicare coverage as well). Ryan would keep taxes below 20 percent of GDP (specifically, 19.9 percent of GDP in 2021), at the cost of destroying entitlements programs and other civilian spending.
Then there is President Obama's budget, which is really a muddled proposal in the center-right of the political spectrum. It would keep most of the Reagan-era and Bush-era tax cuts in place. Like the Ryan proposal, Obama's tax proposals would keep total taxes at around 20 percent of GDP. The result is a major long-term squeeze on vital programs such as community development, infrastructure, and job training. Also, Obama's plan never closes the budget deficit, which remains as high as 3.1 percent of GDP in 2021.
In the progressive middle is the People's Budget. Like Ryan's plan, the People's Budget would cut the budget deficit to zero by 2021, but would do so in an efficient and fair way. It would close the budget deficit by raising tax rates on the rich and giant corporations, while also curbing military spending and wrestling health care costs under control, partly by introducing a public option. By raising tax revenues to 22.3 percent of GDP by 2021, the People's Budget closes the budget deficit while protecting the poor and promoting needed investments in education, health care, roads, power, energy, and the environment in order to raise America's long-term competitiveness. The People's Budget thereby achieves what Ryan and Obama do not: the combination of fairness, efficiency, and budget balance.
The fourth position is the public's position. The Republicans often say that they want Congress to respect the voice of the people. The voice of the people is crystal clear. In one opinion survey after the next, the public says that the rich and the corporations should pay more taxes. The public says that we should tamp down runaway health care costs through a public option, one that would introduce competition to drive down bloated private health insurance costs. The public says that we should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and reduce Pentagon spending. (Just yesterday, Defense Secretary Gates let loose the predictable Pentagon canard that we should stay in Iraq if the Iraqi government asks for it. Better yet, we should respond to what the American people are asking for: to bring our troops home).
The fact is that the People's Budget is the public's position. That's why it is truly a centrist initiative, at the broad center of the US political spectrum. Ryan reflects the wishes of the rich and the far right. Obama's position reflects the muddle of a White House that wavers between its true values and the demands of the wealthy campaign contributors and lobbyists that Obama courts for his re-election. Many Democrats in Congress have also gone along with the falsehood that deficit cutting means slashing spending on the poor and on civilian discretionary programs, rather than raising taxes on the rich, cutting military spending, and taking on the over-priced private health insurance industry. Only the People's Budget speaks to the broad needs and values of the American people.
The current budget negotiations have been a dialogue among the wealthy. The big debate has focused on which programs for the poor should be axed first. There has been no discussion of raising taxes on the rich, and quite the contrary, the White House and the Republican leadership agreed to further tax cuts last December. Obama has repeatedly expressed regret at slashing community development, energy support for the poor, and other programs, but he is not fighting the trend, only regretting it.
Most of Washington has stopped listening to the people. Campaigns are now so expensive that most politicians do anything to court the favor of the rich. Yet ultimately the public will prevail. Twice before in American history - during the Gilded Age of the 1880s and in the 1920s, just before the Great Depression - big corporate money effectively owned Washington. But in both eras great progressive leaders (including the two Roosevelts, Theodore and Franklin) came along to restore the true meaning of American democracy: a government truly of the people, by the people, and for the people. With public protests against government by the rich now spreading in Wisconsin, Ohio and beyond, and with the launch of the People's Budget by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a great national movement to restore American democracy has begun.”
Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
we just want our country back, and to not go to bed today and wonder if we will be able to afford tomorrow
jessica cervantez
NVBY on 04/08/2011 at 16:49
jessica cervantez
NVBY on 04/08/2011 at 16:49
This sounds very interesting, Rep. Honda, and I look forward to seeing it and hearing critical evaluations. A few obvious flaws present themselves in just what you've hinted at and I hope you can address this one at least. As you raise taxes on the rich, what will stop them from shifting their businesses and wealth to overseas shelters as happened in England in the 70s-80s and elsewhere since? And assuming you can't stop that exodus, what might this do to your calculations? And if I may, since you think Pres. Obama is "middle-right" (almost cheek-to-cheek with the Tea Party) will the Progressives support him again, knowing he dances to our extremist tune?BY on 04/08/2011 at 17:05
If we pass "The People's Budget" can we also change our name to "The People's Republic"?BY on 04/08/2011 at 17:23
I'm sorry to keep asking questions, this one is serious, though. Are you saying that when my ancestors left
Kentucky to clear land and build cabins in the Ohio wilderness that what they were really hoping is that the government would come along soon after and provide them with a free doctor? Or earlier, when the same leader of this clan left home to join Roger's Rangers what he was really fighting for was the right of politicians in Pennsylvannia to regulate his farm and take half of it when he died to give to poor widows in Boston?BY on 04/08/2011 at 18:27
Kentucky to clear land and build cabins in the Ohio wilderness that what they were really hoping is that the government would come along soon after and provide them with a free doctor? Or earlier, when the same leader of this clan left home to join Roger's Rangers what he was really fighting for was the right of politicians in Pennsylvannia to regulate his farm and take half of it when he died to give to poor widows in Boston?BY on 04/08/2011 at 18:27
Gentle Readers,
The so-called ' peoples budget ' does not serve the American people for the following reasons:
#1: This budget confuses TAX RATES with TAX REVENUES. Our historical experience of the past 50 years in the United States has been that reductions in TAX RATES in the Kennedy, Reagan and GW Bush administrations all led to increased TAX REVENUES by
increasing the rate of economic growth and job creation.
Increasing tax rates is counterproducti ve in a Recession.
Any Keynesian economist will agree.
#2: There is no need to end our ' addiction to oil '. Should we end our ' addictions ' to refrigerators, washing machines, or fresh milk for our children?
Oil is simply a commodity used to provide the ordinary comforts of life.
The United States has at least 85 billion barrels of oil in our Outer Continental Shelf and 16 billion barrels of oil in Alaska which are currently off limits to production due to artificial legal constraints. Remove those constraints and there is plenty of oil
The United States has the worlds largest coal reserves and abundant natural gas, and large hydroelectric potential. Modern atomic reactors ( pebble reactors ) are literally 1000 times safer than the reactors damaged by the earthquake in Japan, and I would ask the reader to notice that no one in Japan died from radiation from those reactors even while thousands died in the earthquake and some died afterwards from exposure to cold.
#3. Maintainance of a powerful military is far less expensive than fighting wars. This plan fails to consider the cost should deterrence fail and a general war break out.
It costs money to support our allies, but having a powerful military and many allies helps the United States keep the peace.
The so-called ' peoples budget ' does not serve the American people for the following reasons:
#1: This budget confuses TAX RATES with TAX REVENUES. Our historical experience of the past 50 years in the United States has been that reductions in TAX RATES in the Kennedy, Reagan and GW Bush administrations all led to increased TAX REVENUES by
increasing the rate of economic growth and job creation.
Increasing tax rates is counterproducti ve in a Recession.
Any Keynesian economist will agree.
#2: There is no need to end our ' addiction to oil '. Should we end our ' addictions ' to refrigerators, washing machines, or fresh milk for our children?
Oil is simply a commodity used to provide the ordinary comforts of life.
The United States has at least 85 billion barrels of oil in our Outer Continental Shelf and 16 billion barrels of oil in Alaska which are currently off limits to production due to artificial legal constraints. Remove those constraints and there is plenty of oil
The United States has the worlds largest coal reserves and abundant natural gas, and large hydroelectric potential. Modern atomic reactors ( pebble reactors ) are literally 1000 times safer than the reactors damaged by the earthquake in Japan, and I would ask the reader to notice that no one in Japan died from radiation from those reactors even while thousands died in the earthquake and some died afterwards from exposure to cold.
#3. Maintainance of a powerful military is far less expensive than fighting wars. This plan fails to consider the cost should deterrence fail and a general war break out.
It costs money to support our allies, but having a powerful military and many allies helps the United States keep the peace.
Sincerely,John Lepant Brighton CO BY on 04/08/2011 at 18:37
Face it. People are tired of paying for the bloated military. What good is a strong country if it costs $100 dollars to see a doctor? What good is a strong country if I can't make a decent wage? What good is a strong country, if the food I eat and the water I drink are becoming polluted due to no oversight? You can take this military machine back as I want no part of it. I am glad to see a budget propsal that scales back this bloated military!BY on 04/08/2011 at 18:55
Enough of your 'trickle down' JOHN C LEPANT. We're heard all those GOP talking points a million times and none of them are true. We've lived with this 'trickle down' crap of giving tax cut after tax cut to the top 2% and have no jobs to show for it! Where are the jobs? We should have full employment if 'trickle down' worked. IT DOESN'T WORK! IT'S A SCAM. IT MAKES THE RICH RICHER AND THE MIDDLE CLASS POORER!
You've done your duty today JOHN. You can collect your paycheck at the RNC.
You've done your duty today JOHN. You can collect your paycheck at the RNC.
BY on 04/08/2011 at 18:56
reaganomics failed. as per reagan's own budget directorBY on 04/08/2011 at 19:15
Progressivism is a malignant cancer upon this country and has brought us to the breaking point where we find ourselves today. The Progressive Caucus it the epicenter of all that is parasitic within Congress. Take a hard look at the members of the PCC and you will see those who only pander to special interests rather than representing all of the people in their district. You will see Congress members who's sole objective is to feed at the trough of the taxpayer and re-distribute the earnings of the productive to the base to which they pander. Instead of upholding the constitution to which they pledge their loyalty they work to destroy it. No one group is more cozy with the globalist Marxists and their goals to bring down the USA than are the members of the Progressive Caucus.BY on 04/08/2011 at 19:29
Tax cuts have never produced revenue..that is factual. Tax extensions didn't produce jobs either. Oil is equated
to refrigerators or fresh milk as a comfort? Are you really serious? Maintence of a military is cheaper than a war.
How would we remember/know since we have been in wars continously?
John and Edwin seem to be in the same boat without a paddle. Narrow focus.
to refrigerators or fresh milk as a comfort? Are you really serious? Maintence of a military is cheaper than a war.
How would we remember/know since we have been in wars continously?
John and Edwin seem to be in the same boat without a paddle. Narrow focus.
BY on 04/08/2011 at 19:35
Totally amazes me to see someone write about re-distribution of wealth. The nation has had the highest wealth transfer in the history of the US during the Bush years. Progressives had nothing to do with it. Upholding the constitution I guess includes the Supreme Court making laws instead of upholding them. Marxists??
Jane, you have made every talking point right off the Beck
program. Why bother with this trash
Jane, you have made every talking point right off the Beck
program. Why bother with this trash
.BY on 04/08/2011 at 19:54
Jane, I suppose that you would like to go back to the days of a 12-hour workday, child labor, starvation, tenements, monopolistic business practices, and all of the other things that the progressives did away with. I mean, I guess you also think that locking the doors from the outside is a good way to increase productivity. People like you won't appreciate these things until they're taken away. I'm moving to France, and I hope you people get what you want, because you'll be the first up against the walls when the revolution starts.
BY on 04/08/2011 at 20:07
Gentle Readers,
Dear Lloyd C,
From 1981 - 1989 under what you call ' Reaganomics ' the US annual GDP doubled from $3 trillion a year to $6 trillion a year and the economy added 18 million jobs on a base of 55 million, the equivalent of over 30 million added jobs in the current US economy.
Jobs & Prosperity: You and Mr. Stockman are entitled to your opinions, yet most Americans would call that a policy that worked.
Dear DUH,
Oil provides the transportation fuels here in the U.S. and around the world that make the ordinary comforts of your life, including fresh milk for your children, available and affordable.
As to deterrence being cheaper than war, please visit the ARIZONA memorial at Pearl Harbor and ask the men interred in that ship about the cost of failed deterrence.
Dear Enough John,
I work for a living, thank you. Don't get anything from RNC.
Just another fed up American who just can't fathom the foolish policies coming from the Democrat Party today.
I used to be a Democrat. Honestly. Democrats used to be for a strong national defense and fiscal responsibility. The KENNEDY TAX CUTS brought full employment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU
When did prudent tax & fiscal policy become Republican?
If so, why should anyone vote for any Democrat?
Sincerely,
John Lepant Brighton CO BY on 04/08/2011 at 21:05
Dear Lloyd C,
From 1981 - 1989 under what you call ' Reaganomics ' the US annual GDP doubled from $3 trillion a year to $6 trillion a year and the economy added 18 million jobs on a base of 55 million, the equivalent of over 30 million added jobs in the current US economy.
Jobs & Prosperity: You and Mr. Stockman are entitled to your opinions, yet most Americans would call that a policy that worked.
Dear DUH,
Oil provides the transportation fuels here in the U.S. and around the world that make the ordinary comforts of your life, including fresh milk for your children, available and affordable.
As to deterrence being cheaper than war, please visit the ARIZONA memorial at Pearl Harbor and ask the men interred in that ship about the cost of failed deterrence.
Dear Enough John,
I work for a living, thank you. Don't get anything from RNC.
Just another fed up American who just can't fathom the foolish policies coming from the Democrat Party today.
I used to be a Democrat. Honestly. Democrats used to be for a strong national defense and fiscal responsibility. The KENNEDY TAX CUTS brought full employment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU
When did prudent tax & fiscal policy become Republican?
If so, why should anyone vote for any Democrat?
Sincerely,
John Lepant Brighton CO BY on 04/08/2011 at 21:05
Thank you for The People's Budget. Now if only our "representatives " would represent us people, instead of corporations and the top 1% of wealthy, we might actually get it passed and the US government might start working on real solutions to real problems.
BY on 04/08/2011 at 23:12
Well it would seem that we have a sort of budget voters but the question is where do we go from here. Continue down the road we are on or strike out in a new direction I wish i could say the choice was yours to make. But we both know the answer to that question however you can regain that choice through hard work. Both parties are infected with the same problem and you really can't tell the players without a score card. Let there actions define them boys and girls and that means paying attention.
BY on 04/08/2011 at 23:53
This proposal is the most sane and reasonable I've read in a long time. I think it should be a call to action for all progressives. We need to get familiar with the details and get on the offensive to get the public aware of it's existence. That makes more sense to me than just being on defense, trying to discredit the Ryan mess. I think most people who were aware of both would be easily persuaded to support this.
I am so tired of trying to combat the idiocy of the right wing. The latest things I've seen are that Beck left Fox because Murdoch has joined the Saudis to promote the caliphate and the Saudis made Ailes fire Beck. How do you deal with that mentality? It's a waste of time! We must give people something sensible to consider.
Progressives, lets get behind this People's Budget and spread it far and wide as quickly as we can. I am going to copy Rep. Honda's blog post and send it to every one I know. Also I'm going to contact his office to learn more about what we can do and offer a few suggestions about how to get this more widely known. Anyone else in?
I am so tired of trying to combat the idiocy of the right wing. The latest things I've seen are that Beck left Fox because Murdoch has joined the Saudis to promote the caliphate and the Saudis made Ailes fire Beck. How do you deal with that mentality? It's a waste of time! We must give people something sensible to consider.
Progressives, lets get behind this People's Budget and spread it far and wide as quickly as we can. I am going to copy Rep. Honda's blog post and send it to every one I know. Also I'm going to contact his office to learn more about what we can do and offer a few suggestions about how to get this more widely known. Anyone else in?
BY on 04/09/2011 at 01:36
Ahh, the 'People's Budget', another screed of greed … greed for the belongings of others, a paean to the insatiable appetite progressives have to dispossess others while empowering themselves.
You could tax 100% of every dollar over $250,000 made, in essence, abolish rich people in this country, liquidate the defense department and trust in the kindness of strangers not to attack us, confiscate the wealth of every Fortune 500 company (thus destroying them for a one-time payoff to sate left-wing covetousness), and you STILL would not balance the budget for ONE YEAR. This is not a revenue problem 'People's' budget. It is a spending problem.
'People's' Budget. That's an insult to people.
You selfish, selfish lefties. Stop stealing from my kids to feed your power bloc.
You could tax 100% of every dollar over $250,000 made, in essence, abolish rich people in this country, liquidate the defense department and trust in the kindness of strangers not to attack us, confiscate the wealth of every Fortune 500 company (thus destroying them for a one-time payoff to sate left-wing covetousness), and you STILL would not balance the budget for ONE YEAR. This is not a revenue problem 'People's' budget. It is a spending problem.
'People's' Budget. That's an insult to people.
You selfish, selfish lefties. Stop stealing from my kids to feed your power bloc.
BY on 04/09/2011 at 02:13
My dad told me about "Penny Health Insurance" or something which helped him to find a lower priced health insurance (with ALMOST similar benefits) he is recommending this to me. Any suggestion? What do you think of them?
BY on 04/09/2011 at 06:01
OK a$$ ache, where is the money supposed to come from? How will businesses have money to hire if you tax them to death? If you took every penny from every rich person in America, there still wouldn't be enough to fund your "Utopian dream."
Go ahead, raise taxes on businesses and the wealthy and they will flee this country in droves, leaving you no way to fund your "progressive" world. God you libs are dumb.BY on 04/09/2011 at 07:11
Go ahead, raise taxes on businesses and the wealthy and they will flee this country in droves, leaving you no way to fund your "progressive" world. God you libs are dumb.BY on 04/09/2011 at 07:11
Why do you keep calling your party progressive?why not just call it what it is.COMMUNIST
.BY on 04/09/2011 at 13:19
Comments