Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
NON-SIGNING STATEMENTS.
Evan Bayh on the budget:
“The spending blueprint voted on by the Senate today represents an improvement from years past because it is more transparent and honest than the budgets to which we’ve grown accustomed. The money we will borrow will fund important priorities like affordable health care, energy independence, job creation, and education improvements, rather than tax cuts for the most affluent.
“However, under this budget, our national debt skyrockets from $11.1 trillion today to an estimated $17 trillion in 2014. As a percentage of our gross domestic product, it reaches a precarious 66.5 percent. The deficit remains larger than our projected economic growth, an unsustainable state of affairs. This budget will increase our borrowing from and dependence upon foreign nations.
“I cannot support such results. We can do better, and for the sake of our nation and our children’s future, we must.”
Yesterday, Evan Bayh broke with his party on a vote besides the budget: He was one of nine Democrats to support the Kyl-Lincoln estate tax bill reducing the estate tax on rich families at a cost of $250 billion over 10 years. The tax change is not paid for, and so that $250 billion is borrowed.
In his statement, Bayh says that "the money we will borrow will fund important priorities like affordable health care, energy independence, job creation, and education improvements, rather than tax cuts for the most affluent." On first read, I assumed he was paying a compliment to the priorities of the budget. Now I realize he was explaining the reason for his opposition.
COMMENTS (16)
I don't think the words fiscally responsible mean what you think they mean. The issue isn't the deficit the issue is tax's and people's unwillingness to pay them. When Evan Bayh gets up and talks about the deficit and fiscal responsibility he is talking about taxes. That is all. Words don't have logical meaning in politics.
Posted by: Marshall | April 3, 2009 1:01 PM
Marshall may be correct, but I don't think it's that deep.
I think Bayh is a superficial hypocrite. It's just that simple.
Posted by: kindness | April 3, 2009 1:10 PM
It would be interesting to see which of his contributors (in various guises) fits into the over 7 million in estate tax bracket.
His vote on estate taxs giveaways vs the budget exposes a fissure that begs to be explored. Who's pulling his strings on taxes on huge estate? There can't be that many mammoth estates in Indiana, so perhaps he benefits from out-of-state big boys who see him as easy shill for a payoff. $100K is a big contribution in Indiana.
He's a cheap date and he puts out on demand.
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | April 3, 2009 1:20 PM
What about the fact that Obama (along with Dodd) was the biggest recipient of Fannie Mae contributions? Talk about cheap dates. Not to mention the Clintons' receipts of millions upon millions from the Chinese communists. They have put out for years, bringing China a generation ahead in missile guidance technology. I would call that a cheap date having your baby.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2009 3:06 PM
Part and parcel of the Great Republican Budget of 2001 and 2002 was that tax cuts for the wealthy were set to expire in 2010.
All rosy Republican projections of the national debt/deficit included the expiration of these tax cuts for the wealthy as fundamental to their forecast.
And expenditures for the Iraq & Afghanistan Wars were never included in the budget or budget projections.
Posted by: ROGNM | April 3, 2009 3:15 PM
It's been disappointing to see no progressive action on the estate tax.
The starting point should be to revert to the pre-2001 rate of 55% and $1 million trigger this year, that is, taking effect in 2010. Then, if they want to tweak the rates and income brackets, it should be revenue neutral against the simple reversion number.
The Democrats seems to have been coopted by the "death tax" rhetoric, formulated by a small group of the super wealthy.
Posted by: griffen | April 3, 2009 3:30 PM
What about the fact that Obama (along with Dodd) was the biggest recipient of Fannie Mae contributions? Talk about cheap dates.
Well, if they're the biggest recipients, they can't be very cheap dates, now can they? Honestly, anonymous, you need to proofread your arguments more carefully.
Posted by: Cyrus | April 3, 2009 3:52 PM
As a percentage of our gross domestic product, it reaches a precarious 66.5 percent. The deficit remains larger than our projected economic growth, an unsustainable state of affairs. This budget will increase our borrowing from and dependence upon foreign nations.
Liberals won't acknowledge these reasons given why it's a bad budget. They think that the laws of economics are suspended if the cause is rightous enough.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2009 4:35 PM
Liberals won't acknowledge these reasons given why it's a bad budget. They think that the laws of economics are suspended if the cause is rightous enough.
Hunh. All these years, and I never realized that Bush and Cheney were liberals.
Posted by: SFAW | April 3, 2009 6:10 PM
What about the fact that Obama (along with Dodd) was the biggest recipient of Fannie Mae contributions? Talk about cheap dates. Not to mention the Clintons' receipts of millions upon millions from the Chinese communists. They have put out for years, bringing China a generation ahead in missile guidance technology. I would call that a cheap date having your baby.
You forgot Carter and the CRA, and Roosevelt handing China over to Stalin, and Truman losing Viet Nam.
And Poland! You forgot Poland!
But I need to ask you something: doesn't all that cognitive dissonance make your teeny little head hurt?
Posted by: SFAW | April 3, 2009 6:15 PM
Right. You cannot acknowledge how much Dodd, Frank and Obama received for "services rendered". Have you even taken the next step and asked yourself what those services were? I am certain they were not of a sexual nature.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2009 7:48 PM
Who the f$!* is Anonymous trying to fool with that name? Obviously he's the illegitamate spawn of Glenn Beck with Rush his father.
Posted by: bnau | April 3, 2009 9:30 PM
Anonymous = El Viajero = El Viagra. Can't hide the idiotcy. I suspect he's the father rather than the spawn of Glenn and Rush. It took some 'anal poisoning' to achieve (Rush's words), but butt sex is well known in certain conservative circles behind those closed doors.
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | April 3, 2009 11:01 PM
Nice smackdown!
Posted by: tom veil | April 4, 2009 12:29 AM
administration superlatives
wealthiest: the Clintons. not even close
best looking: Rahm Emanuel,Greg Craig
brainiest: Greg Craig, Geithner, Summers
dumbest: uh oh, lots of contenders but Valerie Jarrett
powers behind the prompter: Greg Craig, Axelrod
having the most secrets: Rahm Emanuel
the real apples of Obama's eye: Greg Craig, Susan Rice, Michelle.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 5, 2009 6:28 PM
having the most secrets: Rahm Emanuel
touche
Posted by: El Viajero | April 6, 2009 2:42 PM