No raises for Congress

Many Missourians have written letters about Social Security beneficiaries not receiving a cost of living adjustment (COLA) raise this year. Unfortunately, our economic downturn has created many hardships but has also resulted in no inflation. Under the law, that results in no COLA for Social Security recipients.

In order to help seniors cope with these hard economic times, we voted for a $250 payment to seniors in 2009, and we’re trying to do that again in 2010. We hope that will help.

I couldn’t agree more that Congress should not receive a raise next year under these circumstances. I voted to make sure there were no congressional raises next year — and now there won’t be one — as we continue to recover from the economic mess President Obama inherited.

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill
 Democrat, Missouri
Washington

Comments

[mike d]

Easy solution for Congress.

Charter flight - check
All members of Congress on board - check
6 hour ocean flight - check
5 hours of fuel - check

[Kee]

What quotes on the market are you watch gayhawk pooch? We are over 13,000? I don't think so. Can you 10% plus unemployment? Have we had three straight quarters of private sector growth?

The recession is marching under the firm guidance of the worst President in US History.

[Greghand]

How did we go from surplus to deficit?
Wildman
We haven't seen a surplus in this nation in your lifetime!!!!!!

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

Surplus says whom? We have never truly had a surplus. Whether you believe it or not, higher taxation does not afford better economic stature. Most people see very little change either way so long as they are in the lower brackets.
NY Times? credible? Be serious.
All I know is threatening earners and enterprise does not stimulate the economy.
We can not afford any more taxation by government. When they come to confiscate our property, we will torch it and shoot the commies.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

The Dow and Nasdaq are not indicators of the economy. It was yet higher during the "last 8 years" but the economy was deemed bad. Funny how inflation is creeping and enterprise continues to bleed jobs.
The fix?
Higher taxes on business
Unions
More foodstamps
More grant writers
More affirmative action
More lawyers
Increased debtors prison population
Dissolving the healthcare and energy industry

[Kansasdog]

News Flash Kee - the recession is over and the Dow is back to where it was before the crash.

[Kee]

Absolutely lets eliminate those tax cuts, ergo, raise taxes. That ought to make the economy soar during a recession.......

[Wild Man]

How did we go from surplus to deficit?

37% of the swing is a result of the business cycle. The 2001 recession and the current recession reduced tax revenue and the government increased spending by both the current and last presidents for social safety nets. The current economic slow down clearly began as early as the second quarter of the last year of the Bush administration, due to the poor oversight of the financial institutions. The increased spending during the 2001 recession ate the surplus, but more importantly changed assumptions of how much tax revenue the government could collect in future years.

About 33% of the swing to the projected deficit comes from new legislation that was signed into law by former President Bush, such as the tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, as well as other programs that were never paid for. These programs not only continue to cost the government, but they also contribute to increases on the interest being financed in the debt.

20% of the swing can be accounted for by President Obama’a support of extending some programs that were enacted by President Bush such as extending tax cuts for households making under $250,000 per year, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as TARP (Which then Senator Obama also supported).

Only about 7% of the deficit comes from the stimulus package that President Obama signed earlier this year, and about 3% comes from his agenda on health, education, energy and other areas.

As much as republicans would like the American people to ignore the facts, it can not be denied that about 70% of the budget crisis that republicans want to blame on the President come from inherited programs and problems that he had no control over.

I will agree that I do not see a plan from the Democrats or the President that will effectively address the problem. In a recent White House summit with Congressional leaders, the President urged them to only enact legislation on a pay as you go basis. If they follow through, they will only be paying for new programs, not paying down the debt. Congressional republicans aren’t proposing anything either. Recently on the Senate floor republicans held up a chart showing that President Obama would increase the deficit. They failed to mention however that most of the increase was because of his support for extending many of the Bush programs. They also failed to mention that they support extending the full Bush tax cuts that will increase the deficit even more. Even the conservative Cato Institute says that the republicans are not serious about cutting the deficit. http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/06/04/the-gop-not-serious-about-spending-cuts/

Popular programs may be slashed and taxes may go up in order to seriously address the problem. It needs to be understood that one man did not create the problem as some would have you believe.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

"Affordable" is a code word for welfare.
On one hand they complained about the decrease in home values, setting the expectation to increase home values, then turn around and claim they (the govt and lawyers) can "make' housing affordable.
Huh? Does not the price and a person's income dictate affordability?

[Kee]

"Affordable health care" translates to a 40% increase in premiums. It means costs will increase 21% under the government system vs. 11% under the private sector.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

$20.83 per month will make a huge difference! Inherited? Sorry Claire, he is as guilty of writing hot checks as Bush.
let me guess, more excuse making by liberals. How a bout reducing taxation dipsticks.

[Ted]

Senator McCaskill, I don't need the 250 as many other seniors don't need it. Please send mine to a senior that is living in poverty. Now, on health care reform,I'm for it, but so far you folks are not doing a very good job of informing the public of what in the house bill. Why hasn't there been some form of readable summary put on the internet so we can read and evaluate the content and intent of the bill. Same for the Senate after they approve one. I'm sure there are Executive Summaries somewhere. Also, please define "affordable healthcare". What prcentage of gross income or monthly amount do you all consider affordable?

[Kee]

Senator Clara your yo-yo got his stimulous for all those "shovel ready" projects, and UE is over 10% and climbing. That ain't Bush's fault baby. It's his and yours.

[jeanette]

Please, Claire, quit blaming the last administration for how much they screwed up and start concentrating on how much this admninistration is screwing things up.

[Greghand]

In order to help seniors cope with these hard economic times, we voted for a $250 payment to seniors in 2009, and we’re trying to do that again in 2010.
Claire McCaskill
TRANSLATION!
So if you don't remember the Dems. gave you the $250 around the 2010 elections, we will refresh your memory with another check before you return to the voting booths! Please vote your conscience!