Spokane7
65°
September 1, 2011 in City
McMorris Rodgers defends GOP line on economy, Medicare
Turns out that Spokane politics mirror the rancor in the other Washington.
More than 600 people jammed the Lincoln Center on Wednesday night to boo or cheer Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, whose role in the Republican leadership of the U.S. House of Representative has put her under closer scrutiny as the nation’s economy sputters and its politics sour.
She stuck closely to the popular Republican theme that government is the problem – a barrier to economic recovery and prosperity.
“The best thing the federal government can do right now is just get out of the way,” she said. Supporters cheered. The tougher her language, the louder the applause – especially when she targeted the Environmental Protection Agency, health care reform and “out of control spending.”
McMorris Rodgers, now in her fourth term, has been under pressure to host an unscripted town hall meeting in Spokane. When she did, she faced a crowd just as split as the Congress and the country.
When Walt Kloefkorn called McMorris Rodgers’ vote in favor of the House Republican budget bill an effort to replace Medicare with a voucher system for seniors, McMorris Rodgers defended her vote. She she was trying to save the popular program, not dismantle it. Many in the room groaned or jeered her answer. Kloefkorn asked her if she would exchange her congressional insurance coverage for a voucher system.
McMorris Rodgers never directly answered his question, and instead explained her own troubles with a government insurance program.
Retired food distributor and salesman Mike Coopersmith, of Mead, stood outside in the rain waving a McMorris Rodgers placard. He said he liked the congresswoman’s insistence that government be leashed.
He wore a shirt emblazoned with his views: “I’ll keep my guns, freedom & money … you can keep the ‘change.’ ”
In pushing back against those who criticize her refusal to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans, McMorris Rodgers attempted to cast herself as an average Eastern Washington person: raised on a family farm, college educated, employed by the family business for 13 years, wife and mother. She mentioned she still is repaying college student loans.
“I’ve lived the American dream,” she declared.
A critic, however, pointed out that her personal financial disclosures showed her family has a net worth exceeding $1 million.
She responded by saying that one of the best financial decisions she made was to marry retired Navy Cmdr. Brian Rodgers. When she arrived in Congress she was worth about $100,000, she said.
McMorris Rodgers said the federal government can’t cure its financial ills with more taxes. Rather, she said, the government has grown too large, borrows and spends too much money and hampers business and job growth with onerous and “ridiculous” regulations.
Tom Robinson, an adjunct political science professor at Gonzaga University, told the congresswoman that he and others at the college have analyzed every bill passed by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives for the past 10 months and could not find one that could be considered a credible jobs creator. Many rose to their feet to applaud his charge.
McMorris Rodgers shot back that creating jobs in America “doesn’t mean the federal government needs to spend money.”
She voted against the Troubled Asset Relief Program, even though former President George W. Bush lobbied for her vote as the economy collapsed. She also told of rejecting a personal plea from President Barack Obama for her vote for the first stimulus package. The programs have been both hailed and criticized for rescuing banks, including some in Eastern Washington, and putting people to work in public works projects.
“To create jobs in America,” she said, “we have to get the government out of the way.”
Parishes giving $1.5 million toward settling sex cases 
ChefGus/ John Olsen on September 01 at 2:05 a.m.
Well I am glad that Representative McMorris-Rodgers actually had an open meeting that people did not have to pay to attend, but merely be vigilant to find out where and when the meeting would be held. Bravo for her finally having the courage to face some questions. Sounds like a pretty big crowd for a Spokane gathering. Anyone out there that attended care to comment on the meeting? John
drywitt99 on September 01 at 2:33 a.m.
“She responded by saying that one of the best financial decisions she made was to marry retired Navy Cmdr. Brian Rodgers. When she arrived in Congress she was worth about $100,000, she said.”
Wow….marry a retired naval officer…..not even one of flag rank….and your net worth increases 10 fold in 6 years…..in the midsts of the worst financial crisis since The Great Depression???
So….was she a golddigger who married for money?
Is naval retirement pay THAT good?
When she votes to keep down taxes on millionaires…..isn’t that more than a little self serving? Must be nice to continually vote to lower YOUR OWN taxes???
mmspowaus on September 01 at 4:05 a.m.
I always love it when elected officials meet the great unwashed masses…Let’s be honest however…she is one of 435 votes; that’s all. Our economic conditions here in Spokane are more affected by our LOCAL politicians; (mayor Verner, the seven dwarfs (Shogun is Grouchy) and the three amigos of the county). It is naive to complain to CMcR about job creation (the government can only create government jobs; not private sector jobs…) More government jobs means more overhead and greater taxes…Is this what the Gonzaga Political Science Prof desires? What is he teaching our kids?
How she voted was fair game however…CMcR represents E. Washington’s 1 of 435 votes in the House of Representatives…Any legislation she introduced is also fair game…(has she introduced any?)
Yet the lame, lugubrious lemmings complain complain complain complain…
folks, she is still better than Daryl Romaine and Barb Lampert….
Unless you have someone better democrats; (and you have had three shots at this) stop your purely partisan prattle…
Don’t protest just because some group such as Morons.ORG told you too….how dumb is that????
drywitt99 on September 01 at 4:31 a.m.
Moonchild,
But if her website touts her commitment of “….. fighting for…..free-market solutions to create jobs.”…..and those jobs aren’t coming…..is it fair to hold her feet to the fire on that??
Has she failed because she did not fight hard enough…..or has she failed because her chosen solutions do not work??
And how can you say that she is “still better” than someone who was not given an opportunity to serve??
How can you tell……hearing voices that are speaking in tongues???
You wrote: “Yet the lame, lugubrious lemmings complain complain complain complain…”
Yes….they do.
With tea bags hanging from their hats.
Obama is destroying the economy.
Obama is responsible for unemployment.
Obama is sorry Irene wasn’t a bigger, more destructive storm so he could play hero.
Obama is a Martian. Its the ears!!
Complain…..complain…..complain….
Like mooncalves……mooing in the moonlight.
Scoutster on September 01 at 5:29 a.m.
so, mmspows, I guess since there isn’t a better candidate than Obama, at least not one the GOP can put up, it should be time soon for the anti-Obamas to shut up, huh?
That’s your argument, right?
If we don’t have a credible alternative to Cathy, we should just shut up and get out of the way and let her be Boehner arm candy?
John Adams would be proud.
Scoutster on September 01 at 5:40 a.m.
As inept as this woman is to be a Member of Congress, she is to be congratulated for having a Town Hall. I would have liked to have seen Murray and Cantwell at an open Town Hall during this recess as well. Why couldn’t they visit WA’s second largest city in August?
The irony for Cathy is she makes herself more “valuable” and a higher target for the rancorous left (just as obstructionist, though not as annoying as the TPers) by NOT having access to her. If she had a weekly Skype, actually gave thoughtful responses to constituent concerns, and held 25 Town Hall’s a year, she wouldn’t be held in such contempt by such a large minority.
Hell, she’d have a 80% majority.
drywitt99 on September 01 at 5:54 a.m.
Shhh….Scout…..stop giving them ideas.
D Statler on September 01 at 6:48 a.m.
Glad she took the time to show up in Spokane. Her steadfast position on taxing the rich.Her opinions on social security and medicare. Her refusal to join the healthcare for the masses. I am all for being frugal at this point. Kathy is part of the problem here.Not the solution.She has been in Washington long enough to effect real change and nothing has materialized. It is high time to send another republican candidate who knows how to run our country like a profitable buisness. Preferrably a small buisness.Someone that would opt to stay on their own private insurance. Someone that would decline pay increases when our country is stumbling down the wrong road.Somebody that would take on welfare and other fraud to save Washingtonians dollars. Some one with deep roots in Spokane and strong family values.
I have just described Senator Jeff Baxter everyone.Please keep him in the Senate in November and maybe I can persuade him to tackle the federal government mess next. VOTE JEFF BAXTER (R)!
JBlim on September 01 at 6:49 a.m.
matt says: “More government jobs means more overhead and greater taxes…Is this what the Gonzaga Political Science Prof desires?”
Clearly, you have no understanding of economics or government contracts. A government road construction program hires private contractors, not government employees. When the economy contracts under an austerity program, which you seem to favor, the GDP goes down and tax revenues fall, and we are less well off.
opiemuyo on September 01 at 7:05 a.m.
Watch what they do, not what they say is my motto, they all talk a lot and do NOTHING. We need leadership to get the job done and there is a vacuum in the white house. We live in a republic, not a dictatorship and this means compromise from both sides. I choose to blame the president for lack of leadership in getting both sides to get along and get business taken care of. this is his job in a nutshell and he has FAILED.
JBlim on September 01 at 7:31 a.m.
opie, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell stated from the outset that making Obama look bad was the most important thing, not putting Americans to work. Sorry, blame goes to the Republicans. Besides, Republican dogma precludes the one thing that will stimulate this economy, government stimulus.
As Cathy McMorris says, creating jobs in America “doesn’t mean the federal government needs to spend money.” So you want a republican “Herbert Hoover” president in there who will do nothing. Cutting regulations and taxes didn’t help Bush, all we got was a financial collapse and the Lesser Depression.
usmctpdog on September 01 at 7:48 a.m.
McMorris has never authored anything and is only available for GOP photo ops. Health care is something everyone needs. That should be a gov’t mandate. Stop the War and that cost will more than pay for everyone’s health care.
Lulubelle on September 01 at 7:50 a.m.
It was a well attended town hall….to her credit, the questioners were chosen randomly by a ticket draw. There seemed to be about 60/40 split conservative/progressive. The first minute or so of each answer to a question were no surprise…we’ve heard the same talking points a number of times. However, once the main point was made, she tended to wander off which provided some candid comments. The one I found interesting was that her path to economic security was marrying well…..apparently Brian brought a house and nice GOVERNMENT PENSION to the marriage accounting for her million dollars in assets.
And I thought it took a good education, a little smarts and hard work to advance up the economic ladder……or I guess you can marry someone of means.
As a progressive, I was please with the crowd attendance and response. I had no illusions of changing her point of view, but the “earned media” was beyond valuable.
huskerinwa on September 01 at 7:51 a.m.
I’ll give her credit for having a town hall meeting, thank you Cathy.
However if I wanted to hear the Fox/Koch rhetoric I could have just listened to Rush.
It would be nice to have a representative that stood for her constituents, we are not the rich 2%ers that the current GOP represents. “Richest 1% receiving almost 25% of total income, highest since 1928, with lowest rates in 80 yrs.”
Cathy, how did the US thrive when taxes were 91% in the 50s? Today’s GOP opposes a paltry 3.5% increase on the top 2% to help pay off debt.
With the economy in the gutter she supported big oil subsidies?? Who did that help?
Why isn’t Washington as obsessed about the rate of unemployment as it is about the debt ceiling? More jobs = more taxes paid & lower debt… not rocket science.
gmorton on September 01 at 7:54 a.m.
drywitt99 wrote,
“But if her website touts her commitment of ‘….. fighting for…..free-market solutions to create jobs.’…..and those jobs aren’t coming…..is it fair to hold her feet to the fire on that??”
No. You’re confusing “fighting to create free market jobs” with, “creating jobs.”
She can’t create jobs, and has not promised to do so. Promising to “fight for free market solutions” only obliges her to vote to reduce or remove government obstacles to job creation whenever the opportunity to do so presents itself. That is all that is within her power, or the power of any pol, to do. The way you “hold her feet to the fire” is by insisting that she consistently vote that way.
gmorton on September 01 at 8:04 a.m.
huskerinwa wrote,
“Cathy, how did the US thrive when taxes were 91% in the 50s?”
Very simple. Marginal tax *rates* do not reflect the actual tax *burden*. A 91% top marginal rate means nothing if no one actually pays it. Nor are taxes the only component of the government burden on the economy – regulatory costs have increased far faster over the last 50 years than tax costs.
Finally, in the 1950s the US was the only major industrial power left standing in the wake of WWII. It did not have to compete with the likes of Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, India, China, Eastern Europe, or Latin America. So it could pass on the costs of government-imposed overhead to its customers.
detroitdude on September 01 at 8:17 a.m.
I attended last night and to her credit, the Q&A was supposed to go for 50 minutes from 6:10 - 7:00, she did take questions well after 7:00.
Much of it was regurgitated talking points and jingoistic hollow nonsense, that much was to be expected. Some of the questions were softball, unfortunately my ticket number was not called.
She really ought to have these meetings more often though, agree of disagree with her, she needs to be more transparent to her constituents.
And sorry Gmorton, but she and her party DID run on a mantra of creating jobs, and they haven’t produced. One gentleman (I forget his name), did however make a good point that while the GOP assails President Obama for not getting people back to work, they themselves block everything she tries to do, she blamed the senate.
Another gentleman called her on the reduction of Pell grants for college students, she responded by saying that there needs to be standardization of student loans, apparently not aware that a grant and a loan are different things.
What I learned coming away from this town hall is: she is a career politician, she has a very good spin writer, and she must incessantly practice how to deflect a question and not give a straight answer.
detroitdude on September 01 at 8:19 a.m.
“…they themselves block everything she tries to do, she blamed the senate.”
Should read: ….they themselves block everything HE tries to do, she blamed the senate.
soccermomsusie on September 01 at 8:26 a.m.
Cathy, I thank you for visiting us here. You are one of the best. If I squint my eyes, it’s almost as if I envision your man, my man - George W. Bush talking!!!!
You are right, as usual. Government is the problem! Thanks for proving that every day!
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
liberal_in_right_wing_land on September 01 at 8:36 a.m.
Funny, all the tea baggers on here who claim they hate government and should vote everyone out now defending the biggest do-nothing congresswoman and all will probably be voting for her again.
In other words, they just want to vote out every democrat…..meanwhile, the republicans are just fine because they have never done anything wrong in the history of the country and are the only true patriots, so they should be allowed to be voted back in.
robrien51 on September 01 at 8:36 a.m.
As earlier stated, watch what they do, don’t listen to their pandering. I was there and the doublespeak was amazing. She said “we can’t balance the budget by cuts alone” and yet she stood fast with her party to ignore ANY discussion about increasing revenues. She said she was in favor of local block grants as keeping money locally is where jobs are created and then voted to cut these grants by 62%. She stated that regulation is the problem and wants banks to be “free to do their business” without government interference. Didn’t Bush do this earlier?
She went on to say that “the EPA is the problem” and that she was working with the Republicans to “defund the EPA!” Wow, clean air and water are bad. She regurgitated the conservative mantra that she is working hard against raising “our” taxes and went on to say that the American worker pays the highest taxes in “the world!” When challenged by the upset crowd she said it again with even more emphasis. Any check of any website will tell you this is not true. We are something like 23rd behind countries like Sweden, Norway, France and on down the line.
It was a sad showing in that we got our very own Rush Limbaugh speaking the company line, throwing out general statements to incite the crowd and tossing in some false statements now and then for good measure.
The political science prof from Gonzaga reminded her of her party’s proclamation after winning the majority in the house, that they would concentrate “with a laser focus” on the creation of jobs. They have not put one single bill forward that spoke to jobs creation. She responded that by cutting taxes, everything they tried to do would create jobs. Yep, and trickle down economics has proven to be a great success.
The only thing they have done with a laser focus is to work to discredit the current sitting president. They are obstructionists, pure and simple
gmorton on September 01 at 8:37 a.m.
detroitdude wrote,
“And sorry Gmorton, but she and her party DID run on a mantra of creating jobs, and they haven’t produced.”
Methinks you probably were not listening very closely. No pol can create jobs (other than gummint or make-work jobs). When (most) Repubs promise to “create jobs,” they mean real, free market jobs, which only the market, by definition, can create. They expect you to understand that, and that what they are promising is to try their best to reduce the government burdens which suppress growth in the free market.
They also expect you to understand the political system, and to realize that any efforts on their part to reduce those burdens requires the cooperation of the other House and the President.
Please cite any claim by any GOP pol who promised that if elected he would single-handedly create jobs.
The_Seer on September 01 at 8:44 a.m.
I also attended the meeting last night. When Cathy is forced to wander off script she is barely articulate and borders on coherence.
I guess Matt Monroe can’t remember when Don Barbieri ran against McMorris Rodgers a few election cycles back. He has actually created jobs and wealth, not by marrying a retired Navy officer (and son of former Spokane mayor, David Rodgers) but by innovation and risk to personal finances. In addition, he is not the career politician Cathy McMorris Rodgers embodies. When is the last time she had a “real job?”
The reason Cathy is still paying off student loans is that she received a forbearance the entire time she was in the Washington state legislature. No payments and no interest accrued the entire time.
http://www.pcci.edu/FinancialInfo/Default.html
The current four year financial obligation to her alma mater is less than $25,000.00. How long does that take to retire?
She only wins because she has an R next to her name. The local GOP could put up a not so well trained monkey and the results would be the same.
The_Seer on September 01 at 8:46 a.m.
gmorton: So my government job helping our children learn is a “make work” program?
Bagger, please.
gmorton on September 01 at 8:48 a.m.
robrien51 wrote,
“They have not put one single bill forward that spoke to jobs creation.”
Oh, they’ve put forward several.
The trouble is, you misunderstand what “creating jobs” entails. You are thinking like a statist, and assume that a “jobs bill” is something hoked up by gummint to create phony, make-work jobs such as subsidies to “green” energy scams, infrastructure boondoggles such as high-speed rail, the Jobs Corps, and the like.
When (most) Repubs speak of creating jobs, they mean real jobs – work which produces goods and services actually in demand in the market. Gummint cannot create jobs of that kind. All gummint can do is reduce the burdens it imposes which discourage economic growth (which is where real jobs come from). Any bill which attempts to reduce those burdens is thus a (real) “jobs bill.”
soccermomsusie on September 01 at 8:53 a.m.
Gmorton! Don’t forget other government boondoggles like Grand Coulee Dam, our freeway system, the Tang/NASA thing, etc.
Government has never created one job!
Even the military is being privatized, Libertards!! Get on board the Tea Party Express!!
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
gmorton on September 01 at 8:56 a.m.
The_Seer wrote,
“So my government job helping our children learn is a “make work” program?”
No. That is a gummint job. If you’d read carefully, you’d have seen that I said, ” No pol can create jobs (other than gummint or make-work jobs).”
While many gummint jobs do have some value, their costs tend to outstrip their value by a substantial margin.
soccermomsusie on September 01 at 8:57 a.m.
Oh and don’t you sneaky Liberals mention the defense industry and Boeing, etc. Those don’t count!
Government has never created one job!
Or Cathy McMorris/GWB/David Condon. Their jobs don’t count either. Even though, they did/continue to prove that government does not work. DOES NOT COUNT!!!
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
johnclarke on September 01 at 9:07 a.m.
Susie, I heart you.
johnclarke on September 01 at 9:10 a.m.
“When (most) Repubs speak of creating jobs, they mean real jobs – work which produces goods and services actually in demand in the market.”
Ok, I’m breaking my rule of not responding to pontificating blowhards.
Er, gmorton I am wondering if you could provide some evidence of republicans creating these types of (or any type for that matter) jobs. Perhaps some statistics that support your comment. Take all the time you need.
Orphan on September 01 at 9:10 a.m.
Jblim @ 6:49 you said “Clearly, you have no understanding of economics or government contracts. A government road construction program hires private contractors, not government employees. When the economy contracts under an austerity program, which you seem to favor, the GDP goes down and tax revenues fall, and we are less well off.
Your statement demonstrates a severe lack of common sense.
Labor on construction projects amounts to about 25% of the cost of a job so for every million dollars spent 250K goes to actual wages. Factor in the labor to produce the materials at say 15% of the cost and you have another 113K in wages for a grand total of 363K of wages paid. The government is spending 1 mil for 363K of wages, wake up man this is exactly why we are in trouble.
To top it off guess who owns the construction companies, yep thats correct the rich people you dislike so much.
How ironic, this is actually funny.
detroitdude on September 01 at 9:13 a.m.
@gmorton: Once again, you eloquently sidestep the real issue. When someone gets on their soapbox and says “I want to put America back to work, I want you to vote for me because creating jobs will be my goal.” Excuse me for expecting them to put forward new initiatives that will spur job creation and not bicker with the opposing party on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE. Also, one shouldn’t have to go to the Gonzaga stacks and consult economic texts to “truly understand what they mean” as you put it. If that is the case, then their running on job creation is disingenuous as well.
sks519 on September 01 at 9:18 a.m.
Nicely done The_Seer and everyone who participated last night. Unfortunately the facts don’t make much difference to Cathy or her supporters these days, but it’s good to try anyway. And it’s important to note also that her wealth was growing plenty before her marriage.
I find it fascinating that someone who rails so strongly against government programs is living so heavily on the government dime - a government salary, government health care, government pension, government funded travel expenses and big staff and handlers. But not all of it is government funded - there’s also plenty of money from special interests, too, for serving on their boards and participating in their events - and of course for voting their way.
If that’s Cathy’s definition of the American Dream then I guess it’s just another in a long line of things about which we disagree.
Orphan on September 01 at 9:25 a.m.
I have to make one more comment. I went to the town hall meeting last night and I was very pleased to see that the questions were not staged, thank you. I also thought all the questions were valid even the ones I did not agree with.
What I found to unacceptable was the heckling and yelling out things like tax the rich, end the war etc. What I saw and heard was enough to make most independants reject the liberal side of things. If these people represent progressives/liberals I want no part of them or their doctrine. I now have to rethink my voting habits of voting for whom I think is the best candidate rather than what party they belong to. I was almost evenly split last election that will not be the case next election, sad but true.
johnclarke on September 01 at 9:27 a.m.
“What I found to unacceptable was the heckling and yelling out things like tax the rich, end the war etc”
Yeah, have to agree with that. This type of behavior is not acceptable.
monarch on September 01 at 9:27 a.m.
She and the Republicans have no plan for creating jobs and getting the economy moving again. And don’t expect them to work with President Obama to come up with a plan as they would rather have a bad economy and people suffering, as that will help defeat the President in 2012. We still have the lowest tax rates in years, that are even lower than under George W. Bush. and that’s not working. We had eight years of “governement getting out of the way” under Bush and that didn’t work and ended in the worst recession since World War II in Bush’s last year.
detroitdude on September 01 at 9:31 a.m.
“What I found to unacceptable was the heckling and yelling out things like tax the rich, end the war etc”
I agree, and so was the yokel who kept yelling “Let her speak!”.
rosehips on September 01 at 9:33 a.m.
When will people be honest enough to admit that the Bush tax cuts did not have their intended result? I lost my job to outsourcing in October 08. I was one of many who lost jobs DESPITE the tax cuts. It sure sounded good when Reagan convinced so many that trickle down economics was just the ticket to grow our economy. Well, that ticket never got us anywhere but where we are today.
zelda on September 01 at 9:45 a.m.
Two funny things from last night’s meeting: 1) She is financially secure because she married a guy with money (thanks, Cathy, for upholding those old-fashioned values), and 2) she’s still paying off student loans for what evidentally was a dismal education. That’s the beauty of the higher-ed business model — you can’t get your money back for getting only a C- average. Her sole ability is memorizing and reciting conservative bumper -sticker slogans.
(One wonders about her judgement if she actually went into long-term debt to attend an unaccredited bible school in Florida or does the U of Wa. charge that much for an accelerated weekend MBA?)
If she got forebearance for the loan payments while she was in the Wa. legislature, well then, whining about her own student debt is just plain deceptive.
gmorton on September 01 at 10:11 a.m.
johnclarke wrote,
“I am wondering if you could provide some evidence of republicans creating these types of (or any type for that matter) jobs.”
Sure. GDP grew at 3.5% annually during the 7 years following the Reagan tax cuts in 1981-83, compared to 1.6% annually during the previous 7 years. About 19.9 million jobs were added to the economy during that period.
About 7 million jobs were added following the Bush tax cuts in 2003. Those were all wiped out, however, by the crash in 2007.
Nor do tax cuts work only for Repubs. The Kennedy cuts in 1961 produced similar results.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3059
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/03/the-real-reagan-economic-record
gmorton on September 01 at 10:21 a.m.
detroitdude wrote,
“When someone gets on their soapbox and says ‘I want to put America back to work, I want you to vote for me because creating jobs will be my goal.’ Excuse me for expecting them to put forward new initiatives that will spur job creation and not bicker with the opposing party on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE.”
If the “new initiatives” you expect are expect are proposals for gummint make-work projects, you need to vote for Dems. If you’d prefer initiatives to improve the economic climate for the free market, so that it may create real jobs which create real wealth, you’ll look elsewhere.
You need to give some thought to what does, in fact, “spur job creation.” HINT: It is not subsidies, temporary tax cuts or rebates, bailouts, boondoggles, or free lunches.
Also, detroit, you have to keep in mind that it takes two to bicker.
valleyman on September 01 at 10:26 a.m.
points:
1) To the critics who say the Republicans aren’t working to create jobs as they promised - Attempts to limit the size, scope, and spending of the federal government in favor of small and midsize businesses have been repeatedly rebuffed by the Democratic controlled Senate and White House. In fact, the Senate has refused on multiple occasions to even schedule a vote on Republican House bills. Additionally, the Dems controlled the House & Senate & White House for how long and did what??? No budget — check…. No job creating measures — check. Create more government overhead — check. Spend more borrowed money — check. Pass a pathetic attempt at health care reform that raised the cost of healthcare for the average American by hundreds of dollars — check check check…
2) As a graduate of Gonzaga’s Political Science and Economics Departments, I can tell you the majority of the political scientists at GU are neither qualified nor intelligent enough in economic matters to speak about doing research on job creation bills. They too frequently allow their own political leanings to influence and bias their “official positions,” and have such a rudimentary understanding of economic theory that they are wholly incapable of articulating the economic theory behind economic job stimulus.
3) It has yet to be explained to me why Democrats have such a deep-seated hatred for small and medium size business owners. These are the majority of the people who are the “rich” in this country, and they also create the disproportionate number of jobs. When we talk about taxing the “rich” we ought to just admit we are taxing business owners, farmers, and entrepreneurs. The portion of the “wealthy” in this country who fall into the Warren Buffet range of wealth is so infinitesimal as to barely warrant discussion. I will admit this however… Personal tax cuts/breaks by themselves are less effective at stimulating the economy than they would be if they were coupled with an across-the-board cut in the corporate tax rate and the temporary suspension of the capital gains tax for a limited period. This would spur a massive amount of revenue creation and the feds would see this immediately in corporate revenue growth because of international business being done in the U.S. because of favorable tax rates.
4) I’m glad Cathy gave so many who disagree with her a forum to show up and voice their disapproval. That is the best aspect of a representative democracy like we have in this country. That having been said, the strong majority of us who live in this district continue to support her, and the policies she stands for. I personally welcome those who seek to challenge her at the polls and at town halls because it keeps her in touch with what matters to the majority of her constituents. As long as she gets this, she will continue to see her support remain strong.
Orphan on September 01 at 10:27 a.m.
Detriot I agree, the “let her speak” was only slightly better in the fact that it was in responce to the original heckling but still not what I would have liked to see.
SMARTGUY on September 01 at 10:32 a.m.
I know many people are fed up with this congress. You think they are overpaid, and do not really do anything worth while. Alot of you are thinking of voting out all incumbents, and just starting over, or insisting on term limits. That being said, please reelect Cathy McMorris, the rich people who own the Spokesman Review, would really appreciate it, thank you.
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on September 01 at 11:09 a.m.
So apparently what we all need to do is marry really rich people. Those of you [us] who haven’t done so prove that poverty is a choice and should not try to hold the gummint responsible for the consequences.
valleyman on September 01 at 11:28 a.m.
@thatoneguy: How do you hold the government responsible for your financial plot in life?
Is it:
A) The government has created too many obstacles to making your own path in life a reality by either becoming an entrepreneur, a business owner, or an employee hired by an entrepreneur or a business owner?
B) The government isn’t doing enough for you by giving you food stamps, welfare, unemployment, tax refunds when you pay no taxes anyway, money for medical bills, free healthcare in the form of Medicaid, free job training, free energy assistance, free/subsidized housing, free/subsidized transportation?
You are right when you insinuate the government is responsible for poverty. It’s how you answer the question above that shows whether you believe government owes you something or whether you think government needs to get the hell out of your way so you really can succeed for yourself.
Opportunity is a personal choice which can be greatly hampered by a government that either limits your ability or made far too comfortable for you to remain on the teat…
Orphan on September 01 at 12:22 p.m.
Well said Valleyman well said.
soccermomsusie on September 01 at 12:52 p.m.
ValleyMan! Right on!
The government has given me the only things that I have most wanted - THREE WARS, subsidies for our betters (corporations and the wealthy whom God has blessed) and a beautiful, wonderful flag.
I am also thankful for government people like George W. Bush, Cathy Mcmorris-Bush and of course David Condon. These betters do the work to show that, because of them, government does not work. God Bless Them.
I am tired of people telling me all the good government can do. Sure, almost every other country (socialist countries too YUCK) have better cheaper healthcare, better cheaper roads, better cheaper air and water, better cheaper militaries, but that is beside the point. Sure, having our betters run the show costs us more money but WE ARE FREE!! AND FREEDOM ISN’T FREE!!! IN FACT, IT’S NOT EVEN CHEAP!!
And come on, we know the real dregs that are dragging our country down are the bums who get $90 a week from THE GOVERNMENT! LOOK AT THEM!!! Look over there!
KHQ CIA had a great report about the overwhelming one percent of welfare recipients who cheat the system. This may seem like an insect bite compared to our betters’ sabertooth tiger chomp, but remember insects spread diseases and sabertooth tigers are historically significant.
Join me, fellow freedom lovers! This September, I urge you to join me in boycotting everything government supposedly does for us. No streets. No police. Send back your social security and medicare checks. Put just a little bit of poopoo in your drinking water (alcohol is nature’s purifier). I am going to start smoking again to show the clean air Nazis. You get the point!
ANTISOCIALISM SEPTEMBER IS HEREBY KICKED OFF!!!!
Twitter me here to share your antisocialist activities: http://twitter.com/#!/soccermom_susie
HEAR OUR VOICE
valleyman on September 01 at 1:26 p.m.
@Soccermom:
Your attempt at sarcasm is more than a little off the mark, but I’ll bite…
1) Protecting the national interest is a function of government with respect to foreign war.
2) I don’t recall claiming anyone in this country was/is better than someone else because of party affiliation. If anything, I hold great admiration for any individual who takes personal responsibility for their own actions and plot in life and works to better themselves.
3) Other countries have better militaries? Oh really… do tell me who those countries are… Cheaper militaries yes, better… um no. Your comments on the other issues are hyperbole at best and an outright falsehood at worst.
4) Where does your $90 a-week figure come from? I’m sure if you added up the cost of the entitlements I mentioned, someone on full assistance would be bringing in more than $90 a week… I think food assistance is more than $90 a week by itself…
5) I never said anything about cheating the system… I do believe cheating the system is probably quite low. I was making a point regarding the government making it convenient to stay on the teat of federal assistance rather than making it easy for people to get off assistance.
6) It is the job of the federal government to provide for federal transportation projects (freeways between states). It is not the job of the federal government to pay for my local roads. It is the job of my local government to pay for police services to protect me, not the responsibility of the federal government to provide dollars for this service. It is the responsibility of local government to sanitize my water, not the feds. It is the responsibility of the local government to do these things because I have ceded them that authority on my behalf as a citizen of my county/city seeking a common interest. I have not ceded the federal government such authority. This is historically accurate. I don’t get social security or Medicare currently, nor do I plan on ever seeing it - and I’m not sending back any money, because they take it out of my paycheck so benevolently every pay period. This money doesn’t come from the Fed, it comes from me! And really on the smoking thing??? You really need the government to tell you not to smoke because you have no will power or common sense of your own?
7) I don’t recall once mentioning socialism… Your words for government… not mine…
Anytime you want to dance again, I’ll leave room on my dance card for ya… I just hope you can do more than the two-step…
Bucky on September 01 at 1:48 p.m.
Robrien51, pefectly stated. Nice job
soccermomsusie on September 01 at 2:06 p.m.
Valleyman, Watch out, Obamatron 2000 might be taxing words next! LOLOL!
I think, from what I have read, is that you reluctantly agree with me, but are unwilling to Celebrate AntiSocialism September with me? How about just an antiSocialism Saturday?
It looks like you are on board for just getting back what you paid into Socialism Security and Medicant, and are refunding the rest to us taxpayers, so that is a start.
Watch where you cede things. Some young men get into trouble doing that. As such, I think I shouldn’t dance with someone who is so lose with his cede.
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
gmorton on September 01 at 2:07 p.m.
soccermomsusie wrote,
“The government has given me the only things that I have most wanted - THREE WARS, subsidies for our betters (corporations and the wealthy whom God has blessed) and a beautiful, wonderful flag.”
Sounds like you are a closet Ron Paul supporter. He would quickly end the wars and subsidies. You can keep your flag, though.
“And come on, we know the real dregs that are dragging our country down are the bums who get $90 a week from THE GOVERNMENT!”
Yes, they are. Collectively they are costing the government about $1 trillion per year. That is about twice the burden imposed by the wars you mentioned. Get rid of the free lunches and the wars, and voila! – you’ve balanced the budget.
soccermomsusie on September 01 at 2:24 p.m.
GMorton - OK we agree on the poor people. But, I would rather pay a little more and keep my wars, please.
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
CougarGold on September 01 at 2:31 p.m.
“GMorton - OK we agree on the poor people. But, I would rather pay a little more and keep my wars, please.”
Feel free to send your spare cash to the Treasury Department with a note that you want to spend it on the wars. I’m fairly certain they’d be happy to take more of your money.
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on September 01 at 2:59 p.m.
valleyman – I don’t hold the government responsible for my financial lot in life. I went into a profession that I knew was never going to pay very well, because it was what I love. I’ve succeeded, by my lights, because I make a living in an extremely competitive field. I hope to have enough money saved up to keep me alive when I retire, and I hope that Social Security and Medicare (which I’ve been paying tax into for the last 25+ years) are around to help me out when I am old. They’ve been around since before I was born, and I feel entitled to expect benefits from them (because of the taxes I’ve paid) when my time comes. If the government gets rid of those programs, I will regard that as a promise that was broken. If that means I believe that government owes me something (in return for my tax money), then I’m guilty.
If we disagree about the role of government (and I suspect we do), then I can live with that.
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on September 01 at 3:07 p.m.
CougarGold – my partner earned less than $5k last year, and when he tried to send the gummint some money because they decided he owed no tax, they sent it back. Just sayin’.
valleyman on September 01 at 4:00 p.m.
@thatoneguy: I regard the government’s promise to you and the others that are near retirement (Social Security/Medicare) as something that must be honored.
However, I also believe that those of us who are nowhere close to retirement should not be forced to pay into a system we will not get anything out of. My latest statement from SS Administration says I will get roughly $0.20 on the $1.00 for everything I have paid in when I retire. Is that fair or right?
In my view, Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme. It’s what Bernie Madoff went to prison for. The only difference is, this is legal. The government is using current payers to pay for those who are currently retiring and counting on others down the road to pay for those people and so on. This is because Democrats and Republicans alike have raided Social Security and left IOUs in the place of the money they took out for this and that.
I believe the government needs to establish some government approved and backed/guaranteed (think of the FDIC) mutual funds that are privately managed that people can invest their money in. Those that are within 5 years of retirement age should be grandfathered in to Social Security and Medicare and as they and those who are on the system die off, the system should go away. The government would take a large charge initially to make this happen, but what’s a few trillion more among friends…. Then after the last of the recipients die, there would be no more Social Security of Medicare. For the rest of us, we would get back dollar for dollar what we’ve paid in and have the chance to put that money into one of the government secured mutual funds.
Thoughts on that?
johnclarke on September 01 at 4:03 p.m.
oh hell gmorton, if you are going to use heritage.org as a source, you might as well say Christine O’Donnell used witch power to create jobs. How does someone that fancies himself an intellectual post such …ummm CRAP?
1) Reagan raised taxes after his drastic cuts. 7 times
2) More jobs have been historically created when taxes were higher. Supporting statistics;
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/
There is no evidence NONE supporting the myth that tax cuts create more jobs. Yes, yes yes, certainly jobs were “created when Republicans were in office, so you proved that. I could be in office and “jobs would be created”. Besides all of the statistics, hard evidence and plain common sense - where are the jobs? The tax code has not changed in a decade. Normally this is where you say bbbbbut regulations ! Poppycock. Bbbbbbut anti-business !! Poppycock.
johnclarke on September 01 at 4:39 p.m.
“I hope that Social Security and Medicare (which I’ve been paying tax into for the last 25+ years) are around to help me out when I am old. ”
What makes you think these programs will not “be around”?
Social Security has been very successful, and certainly it requires adjustment from time to time to meet the needs of the retiring population, that is clearly living longer. 40% of the entire nation’s retirees count on SS as their primary source of income. That’s not how I roll, but it does not change the reality.
Every person on I know that is on Medicare simply loves it. Yeah, I hope it is around as well, that is why I keep voting for Democrats. Republicans want to hands both programs over to the private sector, and wow that always works out so well.
detroitdude on September 01 at 5:38 p.m.
There was a gentleman last night who also posed concerns regarding the Patriot Act and it’s erosion of our civil liberties. The stunning thing to me was, after making his point and asking his question it looked like only 50% or so supported his opinion. To me, that was one of the more stunning moments of the night, seeing people boo and hiss because a man brought about the subject of our liberty. When you see people who support this horrible legislation, it really makes you wonder where America is headed 5, 10, 20 years down the road. How in the hell can you sit there and applaud an ideology that preaches “less government intrusion” and then also clap loudly for the very F’ing thing that is doing the most damage to our freedom?
It’s almost the 10 year anniversary, we will never forget, but if you are still scared of the boogeyman, you are being had my friends.
reservedparking on September 01 at 5:51 p.m.
“McMorris Rodgers defends GOP line on economy, Medicare”
Any of you who expected anything different are delusionary.
jimvw2 on September 01 at 6:53 p.m.
I was there too. The most encouraging thing about the whole event was watching her reaction when most of the crowd verbally rejected her nonsense narrative on just about every issue fom health care to job creation to energy. Cathy’s parroting of the talking points she memorized from ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and Crossroads, another Koch-sponsored myth machine, was roundly rejected.
I don’t think she used to speaking to an informed audience. This crowd wasn’t the Colvillev Chamber of Commerce or the Colfax Tea Party.
She didn’t seem to have a Plan B when we challenged her narrative so directly and immediately, so she would veer back to her Tea Party flash cards, garnering even more rebukes.
I was proud of all the everyday citizens who showed up on their own, with enough information to know when she was flinging BS at them, insulting their intelligence.
I think most of the anger floating in the aair in that room was really frustration with being lied to and condescende by someone who clearly hadn’t done her homework.
The well informed, educated crowd was encouraging to me, a real contrast to the Tea Party townhall that Michael Baumgarten and Kevin Parker orchestrated last Spring in Mead.
I hope the real working middle class and working poor get more opportunities like this to provide a counter to the Dittohead festivals we saw leading up to the 2010 elections.
Thanks for mobilizing Spokane’s shrinking working class. As one speker put it. “We’ve figured it out Cathy. There IS a class war being waged and we’re losing.” So which side are you on Cathy?
misjustice on September 01 at 7:05 p.m.
I’m tryin’ to do it the McMorris-Rodgers way; on-line lookin’ for a sugar daddy…I always wanted to live the ‘Merican Dream. I mistakenly thought that meant stuff like serve you country by enlisting in the Armed Forces, or go to college and get good grades, and then land a great job, or save your money, or even own your own business, how bout don’t accure too much debt, etc…
Instead, Cathy has convinced me that there is a BETTER way! The OLD FASHIONED WAY!
Heck, I’m sittin’ on a gold mine! And I didn’t even know it!
; )
Just sayin’…
gmorton on September 01 at 7:27 p.m.
johnclarke wrote,
” … if you are going to use heritage.org as a source, you might as well say Christine O’Donnell used witch power to create jobs. How does someone that fancies himself an intellectual post such …ummm CRAP?”
Sorry, John. That is an *ad hominem*. You don’t refute the figures by disparaging the source. If you believe the figures are in error, you need to point out the error and produce the “correct” figures.
The source of those figures, BTW, is not Heritage. It is the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.
“1) Reagan raised taxes after his drastic cuts. 7 times.”
Yes, he did. The increases offset only 50% of the cuts, however. So the net effect was a substantial cut.
“2) More jobs have been historically created when taxes were higher. Supporting statistics . . .”
Sorry, John. Your statistics do not support your claim. The largest gains in jobs were as follows:
1. Kennedy-Johnson, 27.5%. Followed major tax cut.
2. Clinton, 21.1%. Small tax increase, introduction of two transformative technologies (World Wide Web and cell phones).
3. Truman, 20.1%. No tax change, but end of WWII and transition from wartime to peacetime economy.
4. Reagan, 17.6%. Major tax cut.
Taxes are not the only determinants of the rate of economic growth. They are merely costs, and like all other costs, the lower they are, the more growth you will see, *other factors being equal*.
gmorton on September 01 at 7:31 p.m.
detroitdude wrote,
“To me, that was one of the more stunning moments of the night, seeing people boo and hiss because a man brought about the subject of our liberty. When you see people who support this horrible legislation, it really makes you wonder where America is headed 5, 10, 20 years down the road. How in the hell can you sit there and applaud an ideology that preaches “less government intrusion” and then also clap loudly for the very F’ing thing that is doing the most damage to our freedom?”
Sounds like you may be another closet Ron Paul supporter.
JBlim on September 01 at 8:02 p.m.
Orphan says: “The government is spending 1 mil for 363K of wages, wake up man this is exactly why we are in trouble.”
You are referring to a road construction project. You are forgetting that a road was built or repaired. A construction project that will have to be done sooner or later anyway. So the 1 mil is for the construction project, not just labor! DUH! Is that why we’re in trouble, Orphan? Really?
CANTFINDMYBIRTHCERTIFICATE on September 02 at 1:01 a.m.
I laugh when people speak about Reagan lowering taxes to spur the economy. Reagan RAISED taxes. He signed into law the largest tax increase this country has ever seen. And BTW, he also embraced deficits and deplored use of the debt ceiling for brinksmanship. (He created the largest deficits this country had known, to that point). It’s ironic that the next Republican debate is being held at his legacy library. If Ronald Reagan professed these same views today, he’d be laughed off the Republican stage.
davidthewhat on September 02 at 1:56 a.m.
Boy, this is incredible. Thank goodness I got out of the vacuum of Spokane. If anyone makes their opinions and mind up by a newspaper like the Spokesman-Review is a very unwise person. This article gives nothing of the broad truth of this countries troubles or how to solve them. Nor did it, or apparently did she, go into anything but broad generalities of her view of why government is anti-growth, or why limiting government is how to grow the economy. Washington State is a vacuum, and most certainly, this is shown by this article, both of McMorris Rodgers and of the Spokesman-Review.