Latest Headlines
- Cat Country 98.7 Is The 2024 CMA Radio Station Of The Year (With Gallery)
- Gonzalez Man Gets Two Life Sentences For Abusing Children
- One Airlifted After Highway 97 Rear End Crash
- Semi, Pickup Crash Closes Highway 29 For Hours In Cantonment
- Now That Matt Gaetz Has Resigned After Being Picked For Trump’s AG, Who Will Seek His Seat?
- Learn How To Break Down A Chicken At The Molino Library
- Escambia Man Dies In Two Vehicle Crash
- Flomaton Man Arrested In Atmore For Possession of Fentanyl, Cocaine
- Escambia Man Sentenced to 25 Years for Fentanyl Trafficking
- Tate High Softball’s Kara Wine Signs With The University of South Alabama
Jeff Miller: Voting Against Fiscal Cliff Deal
January 7, 2013
Late on New Year’s Eve, a deal was struck behind closed doors in the Senate to avert the “fiscal cliff”—the return to Clinton-era tax rates and the implementation of deep cuts to defense and other discretionary spending imposed under Sequestration. The Senate, without having sufficient time to read the full bill, quickly voted to pass this deal and left town. The House met on New Year’s Day to take up the bill as passed by the Senate and 257 members voted in favor of passage. I voted against it.
Our nation currently sits at the bottom of a fiscal well, drowning in more than $16.4 trillion in debt—debt that has grown by more than $1 trillion in each of the four years since President Obama was first elected, and that is projected to continue its runaway growth into perpetuity. Rather than embracing a solution that addresses the roots of our current fiscal crisis—debt and spending—this deal raises taxes on job creators, makes no significant reforms to entitlements or cuts to discretionary spending, and increases our debt by an additional $4 trillion over the next 10 years. Furthermore, it doesn’t reasonably address Sequestration’s cuts to our national defense, but again kicks the can down the road.
Rather than cutting spending, the bill I voted against adds $134 billion in stimulus spending, extends for the 11th time the “temporary” unemployment benefits extension, re-establishes the death tax at a 40 percent rate, and continues the marriage penalty. And despite the President’s claims to the contrary, this bill does in fact raise taxes on middle class Americans. That middle class tax increase comes from the expiration of the two percent payroll tax cut. So, every American worker, regardless of income, will see a two percent increase in their tax bill. If you make $30,000 per year, your tax bill will increase by $600 this year.
The painful, uncomfortable truth we need to confront as a community of Americans is this: we cannot tax our way out of this crisis. Washington has a problem because it spends too much, not because it doesn’t tax enough. Even if we raise taxes on top earners to 100 percent, we still will not generate enough revenue to close our budget deficit and begin paying down our mountain of debt. In fact, according to House Budget Chairman, Paul Ryan, taxing top earners at 100 percent would only run the government for two and a half to three months. The fact of the matter is that government spending on entitlements and unnecessary discretionary programs has grown to unsustainable levels. The longer we take to confront this truth, the closer our nation comes to fiscal and economic ruin.
The President and his administration are correct that we need a balanced approach to deficit reduction, but their definition of “balanced” is unrealistic. In their minds, a deal in which we cut $1 in spending for every $41 in tax increases, while adding $4 trillion to the debt, is “balanced.” That is the kind of math that put us in our current predicament, and it is a dangerous mindset for the people who are supposed to lead us on a path to prosperity.
A responsible, truly balanced approach to deficit reduction will include long-overdue entitlement reforms that restore sustainability to programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and ensure their viability for future generations. A balanced approach will include tax code reforms that simplify our tax code, lower rates, and provide individuals and businesses with the certainty they need to achieve success. Finally, a balanced approach will eliminate wasteful spending on unnecessary government programs to ensure we have the resources to invest in the core functions of government laid out by our Founders in the Constitution.
The elements of a balanced approach I just laid out were conspicuously absent in the deal agreed to on New Year’s Day. I was not elected to this office to enable the irresponsible behavior that got us in our current predicament, and I will not be deceived by attempts to sugarcoat wasteful legislation. This is why I voted against the fiscal cliff deal, and it is why I will continue to fight for legislation that reins in wasteful government spending.
Comments
15 Responses to “Jeff Miller: Voting Against Fiscal Cliff Deal”
I think honestly we need to CLEAN HOUSE!!!
Mike J – I agree totally with a flat tax especially since the very rich are now paying a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than the average middle class person.
All the more reason to have a flat tax so that everybody pays the same percentage on taxes. The rich lobby Congress to exclude dividends in taxable income, but I would not want that allowed. Flat tax, people! That would be fair to everybody, rich or poor or middle-class.
In 2001, George Bush, Jr. inherited a 200 billion dollar surplus and acted like it was a hot potato that he had to get rid of. He signed the Medicare prescription bill that added about a trillion to our debt. The no child left behind act that was unfunded and broke the back of the state’s budgets. Started two wars that cost trillions of dollars, then the bankers and stock market crooks stole the money and ran, destroying the world’s economy. Now the Neo-cons are complaining about budget deficits. Why didn’t they continue with the bi-partisan policies of the 90’s that gave us a balanced budget?
Congressman Miller,
Everyone understands and know the facts that face all Americans…even the far-far right! the questions here are: Solving the problems facing this country..Just simply voting for or against something isn’t the answer! I clear see that all voted to give Congress a raise? now that really reduced Goverment spending?
Last, to you Congressman Miller you can continue to be part of the problem or part of the Solution!!!!!!!! but simply voting against something doesn’t impress me at all………………………………………………..
I think the worst thing about this, and the part that galls me the most, is the way the Republicans lump Social Security and Medicare into the same sentence as “wasteful spending” and the euphemism “entitlements” which in context are characterized as something for nothing. The fact is that those of us who have worked our entire lives and paid taxes have been required by statute to pay into Social Security and Medicare, and these programs are figured into everyone’s compensation and retirement package. Now, the Repubs (of which I am one, a lifetime party member) appear ready to gut these programs, which we have paid into, in order to reduce the debt. There’s not that much money there to be reclaimed, first, and by taking away our retirement and old age healthcare insurance, you basically steal our retirement and health insurance which we are paying for. How is that different from an insurance company refusing to pay a claim, or dropping coverage after receiving premiums for years? You want to ensure viability to these programs? Put back the money raided from Social Security over the years. Don’t balance the debt problem on our backs, we pay our taxes.
It was always my understanding that the House appropriates (spends ) the funds on all bills that are passed. I don’t think the Executive branch can spend money other than what they get from Congress. Now all the sudden one party says wasn’t me, we’re not to blame. It was those other guys.
Every vote cast since you’ve been there has contributed to this mess one way or another. As for that no tax pledge, you painted yourself in a corner and you can only vote one way. If your oath to the constitution were as strong as the oath to not raise taxes at any cost you could vote freely on what’s best for our Country.
Just as Congress, by voting together on all these issues, got us here they should be able to work together to get us out. If it means changing the tax code as well as cutting spending, so be it. Maybe if calm heads would work together and not wait till we’re on the cliff compromises could be worked out to fix this for the long term.
This problem didn’t sneak up on us, Congressman. If you didn’t see this coming a long time ago maybe you aren’t the best person to represent our district. Nothing against you personally but we need leaders, men of strong character, not sheep to represent us
Miller votes against everything and offers up nothing by way of Bills with solutions.
Besides the fact that the USA has to pay our bills, Congress has to be able fund Bills that it previously passed that became Law.
We are also still recovering for the economic fall out in 2008 and recovery doesn’t happen if people aren’t spending. Cutting funding now would be regressive toward making our economy stronger.
The Uber Rich top few % need to pay the same tax rate percentage as those who make 30K a year. That would help with lowering the Deficit and should have happened if Congress really cares about the Deficit..
None of Republican doomsday rhetoric has been accurate and they need to have political debate, not knee jerking panic attacks with no context.
If or where there is waste in government, put controls in place to stop it, but you can’t just be irresponsible and not fund it.
We need elected officials that will work together to solve our problems not just spout out rhetoric and play the blame game.
Well stated, Harvey!!!
“…debt that has grown by more than $1 trillion in each of the four years since President Obama was first elected, …”
“…and increases our debt by an additional $4 trillion over the next 10 years.”
Just a question but if we were spending 1 trillion a year in each of the four years that is 4 trillion dollars in 4 years. If we are increasing $4 trillion over 10 years, isn’t that a reduction already?
I didn’t see anything in this statement regarding the silly things that even the Republicans in congress put through on these things – why don’t we stop all that as well?
Not satisfied with your answer – sure, taxes went up for everyone but not nearly as much as they would had this not passed. Is it great? NO. Is is something we can work with, YES.
Good job, Congressman Miller! Hang in there! Mr. Duke, I don’t know where you came from – but it is surely not from around here. Me thinks me would like to see you pack up your liberal, obama supporting self and return from whence you came…
Thanks Congressman Miller for stating the obvious. Even though it’s SO obvious, a majority of Americans put their head in the sand. Thanks for voting against this farce of legislation. Duke, who’s going to protect you and yours during this upcoming crisis, FEinstein, brady alliance, NO. Don’t blame the gun, start blaming and executing the criminals, then REAL reform begins.
This is all smoke and mirrors as the nations ship has sailed beyond the point of fiscal return. Mr Miller I encourage you to support the gun control measures that have been drawn up by Senator Diane Feinstein. America is edging closer each day to financial disaster.The last thing we need in a fiscal crisis is all these nuts running around here armed to the teeth.
Congressman Miller, you are being dishonest about the increase in Social Security taxes. The fact is, neither party pushed for an extension of this reduction.