Reed on federal spending

Doesn't know much about Social Security, may not want to learnReed: Mission not accomplished on federal spending

Tom wrote:

“The president is trying to claim victory when it comes to the national debt. “To somehow say that we’ve reduced deficits by $400 billion a year … and somehow be able to go back to the way things were done in Washington D.C., is not acceptable. Now, he’s raising a banner saying, ‘Mission Accomplished.’ The mission is not accomplished, and we have so much more to do.”

deficitThe national debt, the deficit, and interest on the debt are among Tom’s many top priorities. The deficit increased due to the Great Recession; it has declined because the economy is recovering. But Tom has maintained throughout that the deficit could only be reduced by spending cuts. Of course Tom won’t recognize the declining deficit.

The congressman took issue with measures to increase taxes on the nation’s wealthiest.

“We’ve heard that rhetoric and heard those proposals previously, and this is a continuation of it,” Reed said. “The proposals are ways to increase taxes to spend more money out of Washington D.C., and that’s a concept I don’t support. We’re still running $400 billion-plus deficits, and we need to get our fiscal house in order. What we need to focus on is what are our priorities.”

No surprise here–Tom has consistently advocated low taxes for the rich and super-rich. Even Mitt Romney belatedly recognized that middle-class income has declined, but Tom still doesn’t get it. No matter how much of the nation’s wealth the one percent accumulate, Tom says the rest must be forced to work harder.

Looking ahead to upcoming budget negotiations between Congress and the president, Reed outlined several of his priorities…

  • A workfare system that empowers people.
  • Reform SSDI by tightening qualifications for benefits
  • Tax Reform

…as we deal with welfare reform and a workfare mentality. (The Observer)

…break the cycle of dependency that keeps the working poor in poverty. (WRFALP)

Tom believes, as the rich have worked hard to become wealthy, the rest must be lazy. If peoples’ dependence on benefits were cut, they would find work and make themselves better off. If only this were a world where wishing makes it so.

Everyone knows that tax code is broken. We want a fair, simpler, more competitive tax for the 21st century. That will be one of my priorities.”

To Tom, simpler and fairer evidently means lower taxes for the well-to-do.

© William Hungerford – February 2015…/

About whungerford

* Contributor at where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in Congress, Constituents, Economics, Political, Reed's Views and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Reed on federal spending

  1. Anne says:

    I am beginning to question Reed’s commitment to intelligence. As with truth, he seems to have, at best, a very uneasy relationship with it.


  2. Anne says:

    To put it another way: “Raise taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals” is policy, not rhetoric. “Obama’s unconstitutional actions” is rhetoric, not point of law. Or maybe the word “rhetoric” just doesn’t mean what Reed thinks it means.


  3. whungerford says:

    Tom’s writing is hard to understand. In the Olean Times Herald article he wrote: “I’m hopeful that through those conversations, we can advance some real solution that can change the trajectory of our district toward the positive going forward.” What are we to make of that?


  4. Deb Meeker says:

    His statement above suggests, somewhere in the recesses of his mind, even he knows the NY23rd district has been failing under his representation. Reed has chased state issues, the gun lobby, gas and oil priorities, and his own tail. Not much that I can find amongst his votes serves his constituents or the country at large. RAMI may be an exception, but it was co-sponsored by Democrats, though he hoards credit for himself.


  5. Anne says:

    That he’s been studying at the Sarah Palin Word Salad School of Misspeak?


  6. whungerford says:

    Is Tom careless and ignorant or rather Delphic. Is he cleverly, intentionally incomprehensible so that anyone might imagine his views jibe with theirs?


  7. Anne says:

    I’ll go with “careless and Ignorant.” There’s nothing clever or far-seeing about the man.


  8. BOB McGILL says:

    Don’t blame Cuomo or the rest of the Democrats that run the state, blame Tom, but as we all know he has almost nothing to do with it. 🙂


  9. whungerford says:

    Don’t blame Gov. Cuomo for what, Bob?


  10. BOB McGILL says:

    you would save a lot of time and effort if you would just post, ” I HATE TOM “, ” I HATE TOM “, ” I HATE TOM”
    as you can see, not too many people really care what you think 🙂
    Personally I think you’re all nuts.


  11. Anne says:

    You appear to care, Bob, or at least you spend an awful lot of time here on personal attacks for, you know, a guy who doesn’t care.


  12. Anne says:

    Actually, good point…Reed doesn’t have anything to do with the state, so he’d do well to keep his stupid self out of states’ rights issues, like the fracking ban.


  13. BOB McGILL says:

    did you read this ( MEEKER )–” even he knows the NY23rd district has been failing ”


  14. BOB McGILL says:

    PERSONAL ATTACKS ???????? just what the heck do you think you’re doing ?????


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.