Friday, March 09, 2007

Guess Who's Getting Richer?

One of the biggest of many big ironies in American public life is that Republicans have successfully sold themselves as beacons of family values when they’ve taken every opportunity to stab working families in the back while doling out tax breaks to the super-wealthy.

A particularly egregious example of this is Bush’s recent budget proposal that would give $73 billion in tax cuts to millionaires while cutting domestic social programs by more than $34 billion. From TomPaine.com:

The tax breaks enacted since 2001 will be worth $73 billion to millionaires in 2012, providing them with an average of $162,000 each in that year. In that same year, the President would cut domestic programs such as education, housing, nutrition, public health, Head Start, job training, environmental protection and much more by $34 billion. And that’s not all—the budget shrinks the federal role in providing medical care to the poor by $60 billion over 10 years. It would reverse the progress made in insuring children by freezing funds for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), and eliminate food stamps for 300,000 people in low-income working families.


How come giving tax cuts to the richest among us is a higher priority of our government than providing children with health care, and how come more people aren’t outraged by this?

Can’t we pull our collective wiener out of Anna Nicole’s corpse long enough to...ah, forget it, I already know the answer.

2 comments:

Don Birkholz said...

I estimate the food stamp program would save around 100 million dollars per year if we would get those off food stamps who are on food stamps only to retrieve money lost to 500$ delinquent traffic fines (should be given community service), 500$ mandatory auto insurance costs (should either get rid of the law or make low income policies available), or 250$ DUI school costs (many states exempt indigents from the cost-Montana does not exempt the homeless from the 250$ DUI school.

I requested food stamp applicants be asked the reason for applying for food stamps, here in Montana, and 18 of 96 food stamp applicants (in Billings) indicated DUI costs, fines, or auto insurance was a reason for applying for food stamps (that would equal 70,000 over the last 20 years in Montana.)

I do not think food stamps are to be used to replace money lost to DUI, fines, or auto insurance and the laws should be changed so that indigents are not forced to go on food stamps after paying a 500$ late traffic fine. (Don Birkholz, Email donaldchristopherdcb@yahoo.com

Dan said...

Essentially every Republican position on issues can be traced back to two guiding principles:
1) Inject religion into public life.
2) Encourage the flow of money from the poor to the wealthy.