These proposals seems reasonable as a serious starting point; however, they do not ask rich AMERICANS to pay their fair share of taxes. We are living in a new Gilded Age (i.e. the late 1800s before Theodore Roosevelt became President). The serious disparity in economic opportunity among Americans is a national disgrace.
The tax rate on the wealthy needs to rise to reduce the deficit further, maintain or even increase key government investments that are "discretionary spending" but are the engines needed for future health and prosperity (e.g., NIH, NSF, USDA, etc research budgets that make new discoveries to cure disease, prevent disease, develop and implement changes to transportation and power networks to reduce the risk of the gravest global warming consequences).
Theodore Roosevelt's biographers have written that he was considered a "Traitor" by his "class" (he was born into a wealthy family), but we sure need more like him now!
Do you know what happens when you over tax corporations? They move to the Philippines, or someplace else, taking the jobs in the economy with them.
This was witnessed in New York State in California as well when big companies like Tesla went to Texas, where it was more economical for them to operate and make a profit. We live in a capitalist country, not a socialist country. Don't allow the media to influence you into not using common sense.
Your numbers are irrelevant. Equitable taxation is what is needed. The Eisenhower administration had equitable tax rates and supported unions bargaining for a living wage. This is what helped build prosperity and create the American middle class. And guess what - some people still got extremely wealthy.
Goldens NET ASSETS prior to office were in the $35K range, a few short yrs later, from numerous sources, his NET ASSETS are $1MILLION to over $5MILLION, on a Representatives salary??? LOL He's NO BETTER or TRIUSTWORTHY than the REST!!!!!!!!! ONLY out for himself! Nothing but a "Parrot" just repeating what he's TOLD TO DO, Thank GOD I'm and INDEPENDENT and can think, reason, research on my own without being told what to do like this guy GOLD en, $$$$$$$$$$ LOL
Thank you for a very thoughtful analysis and proposal for addressing our fiscal difficulties.
I absolutely disagrees with the focus on the dollar amounts without much concern over the subsequent policies from the cuts. Our country has done this for far too long: taking great care to ensure our billionaires have access to our political and economic systems and all the possible benefits they can get. We cannot ignore the fallacies of the right over these years: trickledown doesn't work.
In order to have us in a good stable financial condition as you describe, I argue that you must be taking care of the Demand side of the economy. A strong economy won't happen by fiat, but by people paying money for things. This is the area that needs strengthening.
Let's remember where a lot of the money has been going since the 80s: sending jobs overseas, making the rich richer and cutting down the numbers in the middle class, which is the true driver of the economy in the long run. Isn't the long run what we are looking at? Look at the strength of the economy of post-WW2 through the 70s, and compare it to the curve since then.
Instead of picking these "Usual Suspects" programs for cutting, we should be considering our expenditures as investments. Yes: get our fiscals in order. But social spending more than pays for itself while a lot of our money seems to simply end in billionaires accounts.
I am now retired, having worked (in the tech world as it was back then) since the 1970s. In all of that time (yes, ALL of that time) when reviews for raises came about, the companies expressed how the economy was requiring belt-tightening. These companies, as it turns out, were cutting expenses to make themselves look good in order to sell to other companies: either temporary investors out for the resale-killing after breaking up said company, or to mega corporations that cut 80%-plus of the employees and moving their jobs overseas.
I and the rest of my foolish Boomer generation believed the BS we were fed about companies' profits, that the move away from manufacturing and towards a "Service Economy" was the greatest way to for our economy. We each sacrificed a little for... well, it wasn't for the overall good after all. History shows where our money ended up: with a few billionaires who make choices based on their own needs/wants/frivolities. Enough! TOO MUCH!
I am afraid that we have been in a losing war for the country: people against billionaires. DO NOT continue to make them grow at our expense.
Look for cuts wherever we see corporate welfare. The citizens of the country should not be capitalizing established companies' risks while allowing all the profits go to a few stockholders and ignoring the true stakeholders. A good place to start is the fossil-fuels industry (if they haven't been able to make it on their own by now, they do not deserve to be in "business").
I am a retired public school teacher and heard the belt-tightening theme for years, even in good times. Being public servant teacher and being a professional meant spending extra time out of the classroom, and do what is best for the kids for our modest salary and required continuing education. Do you realize that teachers never have a paid vacation? But they have summers off, you say. Yes, but their contract is for so many days (180 perhaps) but paid over 52 weeks. Their summer money was earned and is held by the school district to pay it over the summer and holiday vacations. My children with their college educations all have jobs with starting salaries more than I made after 28 years of teaching and a Masters degree. And we wonder why there is a teacher shortage? Low pay, no respect, shootings, threat of prosecution if you teach or say the wrong thing, and disorderly students with parents who say "what can I do?" to just name a few issues. My retired teacher friends and I all agree that we are soooo glad we are not teaching now. And we all loved our teaching with the good and despite the problem issues of our times. We also wish our retirement pension, which was a reason to keep teaching, would reflect actual cost-of-living so we weren't going behind every year.
National debt, deficits, etc. are very important. Equally important is gun control. Over 60% of the American public think so. We need to curb the proliferation of guns. The reason that we have so many mass murders, suicides, random and intentional shootings is that we have too many guns in our country and, for the past 20 years, a tortured interpretation of the 2nd amendment. America's high rate of gun deaths is not due to mental illness. We are no crazier than any other country. We simply have too many guns and inadequate laws to protect the public, including our children, from gun violence. When I say that we have too many guns I do not mean guns for hunting or recreation. I mean assault weapons, pistols, automatic weapons and magazines for firearms. Americans have the 9th Amendment. We all have the right to live safely in our homes, go to schools, attend concerts, go to a movie theater, enjoy dinner in a restaurant without the fear of being shot. The American citizenry have a reasonable expectation that their elected representatives pass laws that protect them and not well funded lobbyists.
This topic is not going to solve the deficit of his Country, this is just your political rant. Stay on subject of the real economic problems of this country.
FYI - As Disbld Ret. LEO who also enjoys shooting since age of 16 when I had to take courses, test and get certified, I CAN HONESTLY SAY, IN ALL MY YEARS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ALL THE GUNS I'VE OWNED/OWN AND ALL THE ONES FRIENDS OWN, I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN A GUN, ON IT'S OWN, KILL A HUMAN BEING!!!!!!! ANYTHING can KILL, in Biblical days, Rocks just lying on the ground unable to move by themselves were the cause of countless DEATHS, HOW You Ask? PEOPLE, People "Stoning" others to death with an inanimate object, a stone, just like a gun! Anything can KILL, it just takes a HUMANA INTERVENTION and USING that item to make it KILL!
Thanks for your view, Barbara. I have also taught in a few public schools (and private ones), and I agree so much with what you have said!
In one urban middle school I taught at, it was apparent that the kids' parents instilled in the kids the view that school is a good place to sue someone and get rich quick! I would hear so many kids go to the "I'll sue you" with teachers over the slightest disagreement or opinion.
It occurred to me that the police have a built-in protection from lawsuits with their "qualified immunity", but I never heard of any such protection for teachers! It is it not needed, by teachers, I don't think that the police and anybody in the law enforcement system (judges, prosecutors, etc.) should have it either!
In the US, unlike most other places in the world, imo, teachers are dis-respected as some kind of clueless baby-sitters by many: parents and even the school administrations. Raising teachers' standards, as has been happening this century/millennium, should also result in some respect for the people and the job. I have not seen this as much as I should see it, imo.
I totally can relate, I'm a Disabled Retired Law Enforcement Detective/Master Patrolman, and we've NOT had a COLA in NEARLY 20yrs, while these guys vote themselves pay raises ALL the time! I agree, Teachers SHOULD be payed more, however, when Districts in Maine like SAD60 Which I Battled for years against a new 57 Million Dollar HS with indoor pool, gym, etc., ALL for an outgoing Superintendents EGO to have his name on his last school, who, I might ad, was the one always in the Office at the time which dolls out funds for new schools. An older gentleman ran the office but "Our" Rolex wearing Super, basically wrote or helped write criteria, just so he could get schools! WELL, Angus, found out and put a squash on the $57 Million Dollar school, but it still cost Close to $50 Million with, get this, 11 PLAYING fields for the Athletics dept..!! A Baseball, Softball, Track, Football Stadium with All NEW lights, they didn't want the ones they bought few years earlier meant to go to the new HS, also, the remaining fields were "PRACTICE" fields, one NEVER used but always kept up....! I had plans that the Superintendent "thought" he had eleminated ALL of them for the present HS to be added onto, that HS was ONLY 25yrs old!!!!!! HE and some School Board Members BS'd and LIED their way out of that one, even when I put up the ACTUAL LAST COPY of the Study done few yrs earlier that STATED quite clearly, the Addition to the present HS, which was in good shape! However, a lying Principal, who I proved was "Padding" state scores by FORCING so called "problem" A students out and take GED classes then having higher score averages, she padded even more prior to sending to the State! She was later FORCED to Resign or get fired, She resigned, the Superintendent kept her on as a PAID $75/hr consultant for a couple years...? This is why TEACHERS NEVER got their RAISES many of us Wanted! Oh, I also had another Male HS Principal FIRED for Sexualling harrassing and intimidating Female students AND, sexually harrassing female teachers.....! I could go on, but, Teachers, deserve BETTER treatment, and not hiring these NEW Indoctinating New World Lying teachers who are ruining are students!! Soon, we'll ALL be learning Chinese! To BAD there were NOT MORE HONEST, CARING people in this world in Politics who HAVE NO PERSONAL AGENDA, other than, Truly SERVING their constituents! God Bless what's left of AMERICA!
As a millennial, thank you for this thoughtful post! We need to move past this neoliberal political order and into a neo-New Deal political order in which we harness the power of the service economy instead of the industrial economy. Otherwise, our country will be led down the path of absolute Oligarchy and at worst Theocracy as demonstrated in an unfortunately large number of States. Dirigo.
Neoliberalism, also neo-liberalism, is a term used to signify the late-20th century political reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism after it fell into decline following the Second World War.
Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy.
ThankYou. Thanks to shell corporation entrepreneur and Koch bagman Leonard Leo - who crafted the Federalist Society racist right wing religious extremist Supreme Court majority - we are well on the way to repurposing a democratic republic as a clerical fascist state. All the GOP culture war issues are to win the populist vote in service of the American plutocracy.
LOL, honey, it's CLEAR you've Already been indoctrinated in the the LIES and Falsities of the Liberal era of media and lying politicians! TRY using what the Lord gave you, a BRAIN and research more than one LIBERAL source of info, delve back into the past and READ! YOU need to do research, and from more than just a few sources, God Help our Country!
I like that you are thinking about this huge problem. I like your ideas for savings cuts. I hope that you will speak out (with out fear ) to try to get your house members to consider and approve them. In regards to social security it seems to me that the rate ( currently 12.4% ) paid 1/2 by employer and 1/2 by employee could be raised and the cut off cap ( currently 147K) could be increased drastically. A wealthy friend of mine, when I mentioned this, said " why should wealthy people pay this they will not get any benefit beyond a certain amount." and I said to this wealthy business owner "because all the employees that you have and had made you rich with their hard work on your behalf. Now, social security may be the only thing they have in their old age" She agreed. Good luck to you. I am hoping that you succeed in your pursuit.
Simplest remedy I can think of is to cap the multiple by which the CEO's pay may exceed that of the lowliest employee of the company. If you've brought the company to the pinnacle of success, share the wealth with those on whose backs you accomplished this--because you didn't do it all yourself.
Let's not forget that Representative Golden voted for Build Back Better. That along made the national debt much larger. Not the only reason by far but it sure did not help.
Why can people like Trump and Bezos pay no taxes while using their own private jets? If we could fix the tax laws and hire more IRS agents to catch tax cheats maybe lowering the deficit would not just fall on the the backs of hourly wage earners. And funds for public health could be increased if more taxes were collected. It is time the tax laws were written for workers and not the big funders of Congressional campaigns.
In 2020 42.3% of all the taxes the Government collected came from the top 1% of our population. Their combined income was just 22.2% of the adjusted gross income for the nation.
The notion that the rich do not pay enough is a false narrative. We have a SPENDING problem in this country, not a TAX problem (other then the fact that 40.1% of households paid no tax at all in 2022).
These numbers are not accurate. Post your specific sources, in detail please, or retract your statement.
The problem is not with the 1%, which probably includes my workaday dentist. The problem is with the top 1% of the 1% and higher, the 30,000 people (more like 10,000) who own this country.
Thank you for your reply. I am looking at the link to the Tax Foundation. I have not researched the data they present, but have no reason to doubt it.
You have not read that data correctly. The pie chart states that individual taxes account for 42.1% of government revenue. It does NOT break down the income levels of the people who paid those taxes. In other words, ALL individual taxes, including those paid by you and me, account for 42.1%.
While the Tax Foundation describes itself as an independent nonprofit, it often presents a right-leaning and CEO-friendly framing. In this particular link, there's a few BIG caveats buried in the footnotes:
First, this only includes the Federal Income Tax, *not* the Payroll Tax. Because both income tax and payroll tax both come out of your paycheck, many people don't realize the difference, and may not catch this particular sleight-of-hand if they don't read the footnotes. (It's also the source of Romney's inaccurate quote about the "47 percent" who don't pay income tax.) The payroll tax is much more regressive than the income tax because it is capped and only applies to income less than $160,200. In FY2021, federal payroll taxes generated $1.3 trillion, which amounted to 5.8 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP), or 32.5 percent of all federal revenues.
Second, the comparison of total taxes paid to total income comes with the huge caveat that "total" in this case is ONLY total "Adjusted Gross Income" or AGI. Their footnote acknowledges "AGI is a very narrow definition," but they lament it is incomplete because it does not include Social Security transfers. However, their footnote leaves out several large categories of "other" income that might be relevant to this discussion. In particular, AGI primarily is calculated on your salary, but most of the super wealthy earn most of their money through investments and only pay the capital gains tax. That's how Warren Buffet only pays an effective tax rate lower than his secretary!
Finally, Mr. Wilkins, you posted that as a pithy retort to Mr. LeCount, who correctly noted that many of the super-wealthy pay little or no tax compared to "hourly workers," particularly when considering loopholes for many "business" expenses that aren't taxed (such as "private" jets owned by the corporation, but effectively an untaxed perk for the CEO). The analysis you posted only looks at income tax, but ignores payroll taxes, as well as state/local sales and property taxes which are generally more regressive and often account for a larger share of lower-income households' budgets. The analysis also ignored capital gains, corporate earnings, and estate taxes which are lightly taxed (and loopholes so big you can fly private jets through them).
As we think about what a fair and efficient tax policy would be to meet the needs of our country, I hope you will consider a broader analysis and facts about all of the taxes households pay instead of repeating a right-wing talking point about how many households "pay no tax at all."
Blame that on the people who write the tax code. Oh wait those are the same politicians telling Donald Trump is Bad and Barack Obama is good. The tax code could be very simple and fair but then the Politicians would lose all the leverage they have on business. You need to get it through your skulls that all our problems are created by politics and until people stop voting for the same people who promise you something and then do not produce it, just excuses instead.
I am old enough to remember that Bill Clinton negotiated a bipartisan balanced federal budget in the 1990s and put the country on a path to pay down the debt. What happened when his term in office ended and the Republicans took over? They used the surplus Clinton budget had created to cut taxes rather than reduce the debt. When I heard on the news that tax cuts were one of Kevin McCarthy's negotiating points on the debt ceiling, I knew that Republicans are still not serious about dealing with the debt. Their proposals seem to mostly involve reducing spending on programs that benefit the bottom half of the income structure in order to provide tax cuts that mostly benefit the top 10%. For this reason, I would prioritize your last three proposals. In a country (and state) where the majority no longer earn enough to afford the average-priced home and where inequality continues to grow, I don't think it is appropriate to ask middle and lower income Americans to sacrifice still more in order to provide tax cuts for the wealthy. In the long run, I wonder if it would be possible to create a corporate tax scale in which tax rates are tied to the ratio of top executive compensation to average worker compensation. In such a scheme, owners of small businesses that work with their employees and do not get rich off their backs would pay the lowest rates, while companies which pay their top executives 300-400 times the wages of their average workers (the average ratio for American corporations in 2021!!) would pay the highest tax rates. This would provide corporations with some incentive to share some of their government-subsidized profits with their workers, instead of just with their shareholders.
The cuts are to SPENDING, NOT tax breaks! If you cut spending you have more money to pay down the debt. Simple budgeting that we are all forced to do. Since he mentions how brave he is on this matter, I would like to see Jared Golden vote for Senator McCarthy's budget. Biden wants ONLY to raise the Debt More and not be financial responsible and that is where the devastation for all of us is going to come from. However, Jared Golden just voted to spend a ridiculous amount of Money in December so, I don't see this as anything but smoke and mirrors.
A budget is revenue and spending. The Republican party refuses to consider revenue - instead in 2017 they provided more revenue to corporations and the wealthy. The results was stock buy backs and more deferred income among the rich to pay less taxes.
1) Pass the spending limits.
2) Prepare a budget for FY 2024
3) Negotiate that budget based on policy, spending and revenue.
Instead, the Republicans will send us off a cliff while they formally passed huge increases in the deficit under former Pres. Trump.
While you raise important points, there are much more pressing matters endangering our country right now. I, for one, would prefer that you address the despicable erosion of our civil liberties, the dangerous rise of Christian nationalism, racism and neo-Nazism, and the attacks on women's rights. I would say keep up the good work, but you can do better. Stand up for your constituents; don't cower under the threat of political reprisal.
If you call gender fluidity education, you are a moron. If you think open borders lead to a safer and more prosperous nation, you are a moron. If you think stopping petroleum production in the U. S. while not curtailing rampant pollution in China and India helps the global environment you are a moron. If you think taxing "the rich" more will help any of us, you are a moron. Basically, if anybody still calls themselves a Democrat, you are an easily swayed , unintelligent, lead-by-the-nose-to-slaughter moron.
And, btw, calling Christians Nazis is fulfilling BIBLE PROPHECY.
Umm, no. Jared describes the purpose of this forum as "to keep you up to date on the work I am doing in Congress." There is more important work to be done.
That is a lie, Jeff. In fact, the Treaty of Tripoli specifically states “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion." I'd be happy to discuss this with you, but perhaps this is not the place.
Founding father John Adams disagrees with you, and I'm pretty sure he would know a thing or two on the subject of the founding of this country..... : "“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion....." (Treaty of Tripoli, 1797)
The government was not to be a theocracy, that is true... but it's people were predominantly Christian. and our legal precepts Judeo- Christian. perhaps not so much these days...
Regardless of what we were, or what we are, the establishment clause makes it pretty clear that your religion should begin and end at your door or the door of your preferred religious institution. Religion has zero place in our government, especially with more and more Americans every year identifying as religiously unaffiliated.
said who? Democrats have used what John F Kennedy said years ago to drive a wedge between government and religion because as the demons they are they needed to make that happen.
It has nothing to do with JFK, it’s the first amendment. Literally right before all you guys favorite pew pew amendment that grants well regulated militias the right to keep and bear arms. The founding fathers considered freedom from religion even more important than guns, that’s why it’s not the 2nd amendment.
Congratulations on your new blog! Reading your thinking and learning the details behind it will be far more informative that the short newsletters with their focus on daily activities, meetings, etc. You will no doubt receive negative comments from both political directions, but remember that many of us in Maine have a lot in common with you. I may disagree with your positions on some issues, but I much prefer your work in Congress to what we had before you. Stay the course.
Reverse the 2017 tax scam that gave big corporations and wealthy Americans a huge tax break. Republicans trying to hold Biden hostage right now are the ones responsible for that 2017 tax break. It's pretty rich of them to insist on cutting the budget, when they can't even come up with a list of cuts that would do anything to make meaningful progress. The idea that McCarthy would EVER sit down with Biden for a productive conversation are slim to none. McCarthy sold his soul to the lunatic fringe in order to get his speakership, and he answers only to them. He is not interested in serious governing, only performative politics.
I have a suggestion for you. Free up this Country to produce energy as fast as possible. That includes oil and natural gas. An immediate beginning will make us energy independent again in 18 months. Fast track the building of three more refineries and put modern nuclear energy production back on the table. Ramp up nuclear. New nuclear technology is safe and could eliminate the need for fossil fuels in ten years. All of this will increase our GDP so substantially. Estimates I hav3 seen are as high as 22% in three years as we sell energy to our European friends. Next, tariff the hell out of China. This will cost us a lot in the private sector, but it must be done. Bring the jobs back or at the least to friendly shores. The American people are prepared for the sacrifice if they are advised honestly. Just a start, kid. Stand up and tell it like it is. My old friend democrats, the men I served our State with, cared about people, but they shared a caring with conservatives for personal responsibility and traditional family values and morals. Join with them to move woke out of our system. When republicans say work should be required for welfare they are correct. When democrats say people sometimes need a hand up, they are correct. The middle speaks for itself. There is right on both sides. Much more if you wan5 to hear it.
I agree that we need to invest in our energy supplies to be the most efficient bang-for-the-buck but while addressing the climate changes that are taking place.
I understand that the three best returns on energy projects presently are
Wind,
Solar, and
Nuclear.
Far behind nuclear is natural gas!
New investments in other, older technologies (especially oil and coal) should be eliminated, as should any government financial or tax support for these spent resources.
This gives us a good start to make a plan for investment for our energy needs. And, as our US Senator King and others say, we must rebuild the transmission lines. (But I would prefer the method used in the Back To The Future series: a Mr. Fusion" in every home! No transmission lines needed!)
I'm so sick of people talking climate change! If they were serious they would go after China, India, Brazil because even if the USA stopped polluting completely it would have no effect on the planet, we are not the major pollution source, it is China and India. If you are serious go after the airlines and we have thousands of planes taking off all over the world daily. Why not go after them? It's a fact that solar and wind can't even come close to replacing what coal/gas gives us now. Why is Nuclear power never considered? Environmentalists are so fake, Do they have any idea how environmentally unfriendly the battery in their electric car is? Do they realize there is no safe way to dispose of worn out/broken solar panels? You need to see the whole picture just not want you want to see.
There are some that will if the dems relax and eliminate the road blocks that designed to delay forever and bankrupt. If a green light was forthcoming, this Country could bury China economically. I am hoping Congressman Golden will stand up and do what America needs.
"The big builder is China" -- of COAL plants! They had cut back on building them but with their economy doing so poorly they've gone back to building them at a furious rate.
In 2022 it's reported they built 2 coal-fired plants A WEEK. And they're still at it. (Look it up.)
Yes, we're not building nukes in America (almost zero) but there are very good reasons and the reasons are not "Democrats". We still have no place to store all the spent fuel rods (for centuries) and this represents a huge problem. We have no good solutions except to: keep on keeping on. That's not good. And electrical generation companies don't want to take the chance of a big disaster (like Russia's Chernobyl or Japan's Fukushima). It would instantly bankrupt them and they know it. Nuclear power plants are not a simple solution.
I have been out of that world for 20 years, but in the 90s the US still had a lot of engineering firms active in the nuclear industry. Part of our "service economy" of using our brains instead of our hands and bodies; sounds nice but who gets "serviced" if there are not people making anything? But I digress as I seem helpless not to!
But, yeah: I think France might be ones with experience building commercial nuclear plants. But there are new mini-nuke plants being made in the US now for new applications, too.
I do not agree with reversing the student debt cancellation plan. I think this is a short-sighted view. Please reconsider and review the data regarding the long-term benefits of supporting education for our populace and getting our families out of debt.
The double-negative statement confused me (i.e., reversing the cancellation), but I now understand that I agree with you completely!
Starting out fresh out of school with your own 5-figure debt constrains our young people in many ways that affect their futures negatively in those many ways; when you look at the number of students affected, we have a national long-term economic problem.
The argument against canceling the debts seem to be "I got through it, so kids today can too". The first part is true: I have an advanced degree but I never had more than a 4-figure debt from it which could be paid in short time (my first degree, an Associates' at community college, cost about $200 including books). That is not possible for kids today, and it was not their fault, but the fault of the hungry system we have nourished against our own.
The rising cost of higher education is a direct result of the actions of Congress in the 90s. They removed the cap on PLUS loans (actually changed it to "cost of attendance"- which means, no cap.) At that point, tuition and fees began their sharp upward trajectory as colleges took advantage of the almost limitless supply of credit made available to young people. Colleges increased enrollment, lowered their standards until anyone who could sign a promissory note could get a degree, and college administration grew enormously. They've been laughing all the way to the bank, while our youth are saddled with a shameful debt burden. We should not support any debt cancellation unless it is accompanied by two things: holding the universities accountable for their role (meaning, they should pay a large portion of any debt forgiveness), and turning off the spigot so that we don't find ourselves in this mess again 10 years from now.
Yes, Amos, and you can add the expenses colleges/universities added to their construction boom and moves they made to entice top money-gathering administrators and academics (not necessarily actually working teachers), which added greatly to expenses and, therefore, tuitions and costs to students.
But not supporting debt cancellations for students in order to hold the universities accountable? Turning off the money spigot (for help with the tuitions and costs?).
A high school student has a difficult choice for the future. College is one of them, ad of course it is not for all; many students have different aspirations, which is good. But many have the particular strengths and desires that would make college the best choice for them. If they do not choose college, it is a huge loss to them and to the society.
These students never had a say in those construction projects, and certainly are not happen about the money they have had to pay. Forcing this on them has been the fault of our system, and not the individuals that are forced to bear those costs despite the fact that many were children when the choices were made - made by the monied!
Don't make the students pay for the sins of our society.
I agree that our young people have been screwed. The first step we should take is to make sure it doesn't keep happening to more kids! I see no plan to end this racket. No one wants to talk about it. But if you don't stop the bleeding, there will be no end to this. Use the young people like piggy banks!
But remember, the students aren't completely blameless. They signed for the loans. (Maybe the age of consent to sign for student loans should be raised.) Many chose more expensive options-- like living in the nicest housing, and going to private schools. Many are actually using their education to make a lot of income. The costs of loan cancellation should not be born by everyone, including those who chose less expensive options for education. They should be born by the only party that benefited from this scam- the colleges themselves.
Put yourself in a kids' position: you are a junior in HS. You get good grades and have a yearning for higher education for your future. But pricing is not fair, so you... pause your life for a few years?
I have my ideas about how kids can get a good education for much less, but for the top people in society, it seems that only the rich are eligible. Look at all the politicians with their Yale and Harvard educations. Those educations did not seem to offer much in the way of critical thinking (I am thinking of DeSantis and his Yale degree; also W. Bush's!) But they sure did offer them the connections for their success! (Also, look a the connections Dr. Reich got at Harvard! It even works for the left.)
Of course, a teenage wouldn't know better. A lot of them have been failed by their parents and teachers in this regard. All my kids heard from their high school counselors was, "Don't worry about the price. Just try to get into your dream college. Worry about paying for it later." (FAME actually does an excellent job, in my opinion, in educating teens and their parents about the pitfalls of extreme student debt, but many won't listen.) There are still good ways to get an education without a high price tag, but they're not glamorous. My daughter just graduated with an engineering degree from UMaine, with very little debt. She lived in a cheap apartment by the railroad tracks and so was able to pay her room and board with her summer earnings. She said no to the private school in Boston that wanted her to graduate six figures in debt. We have to get more kids saying no. (One of her friends actually said no to UNE, and they came back later offering to match UMaine's pricing!)
I like your ideas. I am an independent and even though you are a Democrat, you think more like an Independent. The only hope for this country is compromise. My worry is that no one will step up to lead us to that end. If you take up this challenge, you are truly a great man. Wishing you all the best in your endeavors.
This seems a good start. A couple of observations:
(1) Insofar as the US dollar is, effectively, the world's reserve currency, it's not subject to many of the rules governing other currencies. That is, it will continue to have the confidence of international lenders far past the point where other currencies are likely to lose it. (Recall an old saying: If you owe the bank $10,000 and can't pay it back when due, you have a problem. If you owe the bank $10 trillion and can't pay it back when due, the bank has a problem.) The more pressing fiscal problem for the US is the looming debt-ceiling crisis, a manufactured issue that could be eliminated by appropriate legislation. Those holding the country hostage are the diners who've enjoyed the meal and now want to skip out on the bill. The ceiling should be abolished to avert the genuinely catastrophic consequences of a US debt default (and to remove a tool abused by a desperate minority to avoid facing their responsibilities).
(2) Past profligate borrowing notwithstanding, when you're confronting an existential crisis it is time to borrow if you cannot finance the necessary actions with existing money available. This is the only justification for the immense borrowing entailed by last year's legislation, which will spend a huge amount of money to mitigate the damaging effects of climate change. Any cuts sought must come from elsewhere.
John, Please not to forget the HUGE deficit add-on caused by Trump's tax cut for the wealthy. Over time that tax cut is costing multiple trillions of dollars. Warren Buffet of Omaha estimated that tax cut netted him (actually his companies) about 29 BILLION dollars. Yes $29,000,000,000! (Look it up.). And that's just one billionaire -- we have about 1,000 billionaires in the USA now.
"Congress" did not pay ONE PENNY of the interest on America's national debt. To the extent there was an interest payment, that interest was paid by We the People, or more specifically, those 50% of Americans who pay taxes. Congress has THREE, and only three, methods to pay for any new expense"
1. Raise Taxes (and risk not being reelected)
2. Cut funding of an existing program (which NEVER happens)
3. Borrow the money
When you borrow BILLIONS to make ends meet, the end is near.
Randy, I hear you. But I would remind you that "the end is near" has been the cry for decades now. Over and over and over again it's been "proven" that we are going to fail -- and we haven't. That's no reason to give up but it's also not right to think we're about to go over a cliff (unless it's default on our debt -- then there would be an immediate result and it's clear it would be catastrophic.)
We don't need to go over the Cliff, China will push us over by replacing the dollar as the major trading currency around the world. They have already started to do that with help from Russia, Iran, India, and soon probably Brazil.
These ideas are fairly all right-but there is one that you're not addressing that should be-which is to cancel the tax cuts for the multimillionaires that was passed under Donald Trump. This has added to the deficit, and the middle class is suffering from it.
Another idea that you have approached is the coming 'insolvency ' of Medicare and Social Security-I've retired, so I'm rather interested in these topics but you have as a member of Congress have the duty to make sure neither goes insolvent.
I've read where if the limit of Social Security taxes on those making over $150,000 were removed. that itself would more or less guarantee the solvency of the Social Security trust fund, which by the way, is not going broke but will be paying 80% of benefits starting in 2035. That is not insolvency.
Medicare has to be fixed by stopping the insurance companies from fraudulently billing it, and also by removing the Medicare Advantage programs from existence.
Those are frauds, perpetuated to enrich insurance companies and nothing else. This has been reported on by the NY Times among other papers.
I hope these ideas will be reasonable for you to contemplate and perhaps enact.
I voted for you to represent me and the state of Maine, and you've done a good job even if the GOP has gone off the cliff.
what the government needs to do is make the rich pay there share of taxes and then maybe we can get inflation to start dropping so we can afford to eat and pay our bills I am in the lower class I have to work 7 days a week just to survive so please help us midclass
While on the topic of budget and paying to support initiatives our government needs to consider removing the income cap to which results in higher earners not being required to pay into social security once the cap is reached. Seems like a major issue that everyone shares an opinion on but do nothing about saving Social Security. That and removing the penalty imposed on government retiree annuitants and cutting “earned” benefits by over 50% through the Windfall Elimination Provision.
These proposals seems reasonable as a serious starting point; however, they do not ask rich AMERICANS to pay their fair share of taxes. We are living in a new Gilded Age (i.e. the late 1800s before Theodore Roosevelt became President). The serious disparity in economic opportunity among Americans is a national disgrace.
The tax rate on the wealthy needs to rise to reduce the deficit further, maintain or even increase key government investments that are "discretionary spending" but are the engines needed for future health and prosperity (e.g., NIH, NSF, USDA, etc research budgets that make new discoveries to cure disease, prevent disease, develop and implement changes to transportation and power networks to reduce the risk of the gravest global warming consequences).
Theodore Roosevelt's biographers have written that he was considered a "Traitor" by his "class" (he was born into a wealthy family), but we sure need more like him now!
Do you know what happens when you over tax corporations? They move to the Philippines, or someplace else, taking the jobs in the economy with them.
This was witnessed in New York State in California as well when big companies like Tesla went to Texas, where it was more economical for them to operate and make a profit. We live in a capitalist country, not a socialist country. Don't allow the media to influence you into not using common sense.
Don't kill a reasonable approach because it isn't all encompassing or perfect. This represents a sound approach. Step one: get the conversation going.
so what Bullies need standing up to not licking their boots
Let them move but control the US resources we don't need people tearing the US down. We can manage our own resources with honest business models
They moved to cheaper labor before working America was prepared for the information age..
Making everything "We don't want no commie, socialistic government" a license plate slogan does not demand Congress balance the budget.
Demand our public schools have higher standards of financial education.
They can chase cheap labor and high profits because of preferential laws. Those laws can be changed.
Chasing cheap labor is so 20th century.
So how many GOP talking point buzz words can you fit into one comment? Still doesn't make them accurate.
How much is their fair share? 10%? 30%? 60%?
How about the rates under Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower?
90%. And guess what? Many still accumulated great intergenerational wealth. Fancy that! Ike also supported unions.
That pinko commie red. Supporting a strong American middle class. How dare he!
The top 1% pay 90% of the taxes
this is NOT TRUE lol
Do the math, in 2020 the top 1% paid $723 billion dollars, the bottom 90% paid $450 billion.
Your numbers are irrelevant. Equitable taxation is what is needed. The Eisenhower administration had equitable tax rates and supported unions bargaining for a living wage. This is what helped build prosperity and create the American middle class. And guess what - some people still got extremely wealthy.
Goldens NET ASSETS prior to office were in the $35K range, a few short yrs later, from numerous sources, his NET ASSETS are $1MILLION to over $5MILLION, on a Representatives salary??? LOL He's NO BETTER or TRIUSTWORTHY than the REST!!!!!!!!! ONLY out for himself! Nothing but a "Parrot" just repeating what he's TOLD TO DO, Thank GOD I'm and INDEPENDENT and can think, reason, research on my own without being told what to do like this guy GOLD en, $$$$$$$$$$ LOL
Thank you for a very thoughtful analysis and proposal for addressing our fiscal difficulties.
I absolutely disagrees with the focus on the dollar amounts without much concern over the subsequent policies from the cuts. Our country has done this for far too long: taking great care to ensure our billionaires have access to our political and economic systems and all the possible benefits they can get. We cannot ignore the fallacies of the right over these years: trickledown doesn't work.
In order to have us in a good stable financial condition as you describe, I argue that you must be taking care of the Demand side of the economy. A strong economy won't happen by fiat, but by people paying money for things. This is the area that needs strengthening.
Let's remember where a lot of the money has been going since the 80s: sending jobs overseas, making the rich richer and cutting down the numbers in the middle class, which is the true driver of the economy in the long run. Isn't the long run what we are looking at? Look at the strength of the economy of post-WW2 through the 70s, and compare it to the curve since then.
Instead of picking these "Usual Suspects" programs for cutting, we should be considering our expenditures as investments. Yes: get our fiscals in order. But social spending more than pays for itself while a lot of our money seems to simply end in billionaires accounts.
I am now retired, having worked (in the tech world as it was back then) since the 1970s. In all of that time (yes, ALL of that time) when reviews for raises came about, the companies expressed how the economy was requiring belt-tightening. These companies, as it turns out, were cutting expenses to make themselves look good in order to sell to other companies: either temporary investors out for the resale-killing after breaking up said company, or to mega corporations that cut 80%-plus of the employees and moving their jobs overseas.
I and the rest of my foolish Boomer generation believed the BS we were fed about companies' profits, that the move away from manufacturing and towards a "Service Economy" was the greatest way to for our economy. We each sacrificed a little for... well, it wasn't for the overall good after all. History shows where our money ended up: with a few billionaires who make choices based on their own needs/wants/frivolities. Enough! TOO MUCH!
I am afraid that we have been in a losing war for the country: people against billionaires. DO NOT continue to make them grow at our expense.
Look for cuts wherever we see corporate welfare. The citizens of the country should not be capitalizing established companies' risks while allowing all the profits go to a few stockholders and ignoring the true stakeholders. A good place to start is the fossil-fuels industry (if they haven't been able to make it on their own by now, they do not deserve to be in "business").
Sorry for the long note.
I am a retired public school teacher and heard the belt-tightening theme for years, even in good times. Being public servant teacher and being a professional meant spending extra time out of the classroom, and do what is best for the kids for our modest salary and required continuing education. Do you realize that teachers never have a paid vacation? But they have summers off, you say. Yes, but their contract is for so many days (180 perhaps) but paid over 52 weeks. Their summer money was earned and is held by the school district to pay it over the summer and holiday vacations. My children with their college educations all have jobs with starting salaries more than I made after 28 years of teaching and a Masters degree. And we wonder why there is a teacher shortage? Low pay, no respect, shootings, threat of prosecution if you teach or say the wrong thing, and disorderly students with parents who say "what can I do?" to just name a few issues. My retired teacher friends and I all agree that we are soooo glad we are not teaching now. And we all loved our teaching with the good and despite the problem issues of our times. We also wish our retirement pension, which was a reason to keep teaching, would reflect actual cost-of-living so we weren't going behind every year.
National debt, deficits, etc. are very important. Equally important is gun control. Over 60% of the American public think so. We need to curb the proliferation of guns. The reason that we have so many mass murders, suicides, random and intentional shootings is that we have too many guns in our country and, for the past 20 years, a tortured interpretation of the 2nd amendment. America's high rate of gun deaths is not due to mental illness. We are no crazier than any other country. We simply have too many guns and inadequate laws to protect the public, including our children, from gun violence. When I say that we have too many guns I do not mean guns for hunting or recreation. I mean assault weapons, pistols, automatic weapons and magazines for firearms. Americans have the 9th Amendment. We all have the right to live safely in our homes, go to schools, attend concerts, go to a movie theater, enjoy dinner in a restaurant without the fear of being shot. The American citizenry have a reasonable expectation that their elected representatives pass laws that protect them and not well funded lobbyists.
This topic is not going to solve the deficit of his Country, this is just your political rant. Stay on subject of the real economic problems of this country.
What does this have to do with fiscal responsibility? For once, can we not drag political issues into everything?
Now here is something i can agree with.
The problem you are talking about is not about the tools people use it's why people want to kill other people. It is a mental health issue.
FYI - As Disbld Ret. LEO who also enjoys shooting since age of 16 when I had to take courses, test and get certified, I CAN HONESTLY SAY, IN ALL MY YEARS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ALL THE GUNS I'VE OWNED/OWN AND ALL THE ONES FRIENDS OWN, I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN A GUN, ON IT'S OWN, KILL A HUMAN BEING!!!!!!! ANYTHING can KILL, in Biblical days, Rocks just lying on the ground unable to move by themselves were the cause of countless DEATHS, HOW You Ask? PEOPLE, People "Stoning" others to death with an inanimate object, a stone, just like a gun! Anything can KILL, it just takes a HUMANA INTERVENTION and USING that item to make it KILL!
Guns are not the reason our Gubmint has outspent itself. More taxing and spending will not curb spending.
Thanks for your view, Barbara. I have also taught in a few public schools (and private ones), and I agree so much with what you have said!
In one urban middle school I taught at, it was apparent that the kids' parents instilled in the kids the view that school is a good place to sue someone and get rich quick! I would hear so many kids go to the "I'll sue you" with teachers over the slightest disagreement or opinion.
It occurred to me that the police have a built-in protection from lawsuits with their "qualified immunity", but I never heard of any such protection for teachers! It is it not needed, by teachers, I don't think that the police and anybody in the law enforcement system (judges, prosecutors, etc.) should have it either!
In the US, unlike most other places in the world, imo, teachers are dis-respected as some kind of clueless baby-sitters by many: parents and even the school administrations. Raising teachers' standards, as has been happening this century/millennium, should also result in some respect for the people and the job. I have not seen this as much as I should see it, imo.
I totally can relate, I'm a Disabled Retired Law Enforcement Detective/Master Patrolman, and we've NOT had a COLA in NEARLY 20yrs, while these guys vote themselves pay raises ALL the time! I agree, Teachers SHOULD be payed more, however, when Districts in Maine like SAD60 Which I Battled for years against a new 57 Million Dollar HS with indoor pool, gym, etc., ALL for an outgoing Superintendents EGO to have his name on his last school, who, I might ad, was the one always in the Office at the time which dolls out funds for new schools. An older gentleman ran the office but "Our" Rolex wearing Super, basically wrote or helped write criteria, just so he could get schools! WELL, Angus, found out and put a squash on the $57 Million Dollar school, but it still cost Close to $50 Million with, get this, 11 PLAYING fields for the Athletics dept..!! A Baseball, Softball, Track, Football Stadium with All NEW lights, they didn't want the ones they bought few years earlier meant to go to the new HS, also, the remaining fields were "PRACTICE" fields, one NEVER used but always kept up....! I had plans that the Superintendent "thought" he had eleminated ALL of them for the present HS to be added onto, that HS was ONLY 25yrs old!!!!!! HE and some School Board Members BS'd and LIED their way out of that one, even when I put up the ACTUAL LAST COPY of the Study done few yrs earlier that STATED quite clearly, the Addition to the present HS, which was in good shape! However, a lying Principal, who I proved was "Padding" state scores by FORCING so called "problem" A students out and take GED classes then having higher score averages, she padded even more prior to sending to the State! She was later FORCED to Resign or get fired, She resigned, the Superintendent kept her on as a PAID $75/hr consultant for a couple years...? This is why TEACHERS NEVER got their RAISES many of us Wanted! Oh, I also had another Male HS Principal FIRED for Sexualling harrassing and intimidating Female students AND, sexually harrassing female teachers.....! I could go on, but, Teachers, deserve BETTER treatment, and not hiring these NEW Indoctinating New World Lying teachers who are ruining are students!! Soon, we'll ALL be learning Chinese! To BAD there were NOT MORE HONEST, CARING people in this world in Politics who HAVE NO PERSONAL AGENDA, other than, Truly SERVING their constituents! God Bless what's left of AMERICA!
As a millennial, thank you for this thoughtful post! We need to move past this neoliberal political order and into a neo-New Deal political order in which we harness the power of the service economy instead of the industrial economy. Otherwise, our country will be led down the path of absolute Oligarchy and at worst Theocracy as demonstrated in an unfortunately large number of States. Dirigo.
neo? last time I saw that was in reference to neo-nazi!
Per Wikipedia:
Neoliberalism, also neo-liberalism, is a term used to signify the late-20th century political reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism after it fell into decline following the Second World War.
Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy.
That's what they have been brainwashed into thinking from early age, they are "SHEEPLE", they don't research, they believe everything their told! I Question and research countless sources, WHY? I think for myself as an INDEPENDENT and don't believe everything I hear or see! SAD World our children are going to inherit, I had Tshirts made up a long time ago, "What We Teach Our Children Today, WILL Affect Us Tomorrow"!© Also, a business I owned with employees, we used to print up book markers for students of all Genre's, the one I liked the most was an Raptor, going straight up, and the words on the bookmark read: Take your Reading to New Heights", other saying, "Let your Reading Soar your mind to new Levels", there were others, they workded for some. Guess that's all one can ask?
ThankYou. Thanks to shell corporation entrepreneur and Koch bagman Leonard Leo - who crafted the Federalist Society racist right wing religious extremist Supreme Court majority - we are well on the way to repurposing a democratic republic as a clerical fascist state. All the GOP culture war issues are to win the populist vote in service of the American plutocracy.
LOL, honey, it's CLEAR you've Already been indoctrinated in the the LIES and Falsities of the Liberal era of media and lying politicians! TRY using what the Lord gave you, a BRAIN and research more than one LIBERAL source of info, delve back into the past and READ! YOU need to do research, and from more than just a few sources, God Help our Country!
Dear Rep Golden,
I like that you are thinking about this huge problem. I like your ideas for savings cuts. I hope that you will speak out (with out fear ) to try to get your house members to consider and approve them. In regards to social security it seems to me that the rate ( currently 12.4% ) paid 1/2 by employer and 1/2 by employee could be raised and the cut off cap ( currently 147K) could be increased drastically. A wealthy friend of mine, when I mentioned this, said " why should wealthy people pay this they will not get any benefit beyond a certain amount." and I said to this wealthy business owner "because all the employees that you have and had made you rich with their hard work on your behalf. Now, social security may be the only thing they have in their old age" She agreed. Good luck to you. I am hoping that you succeed in your pursuit.
Ralph Smith
Fryeburg, ME
Simplest remedy I can think of is to cap the multiple by which the CEO's pay may exceed that of the lowliest employee of the company. If you've brought the company to the pinnacle of success, share the wealth with those on whose backs you accomplished this--because you didn't do it all yourself.
Let's not forget that Representative Golden voted for Build Back Better. That along made the national debt much larger. Not the only reason by far but it sure did not help.
Why can people like Trump and Bezos pay no taxes while using their own private jets? If we could fix the tax laws and hire more IRS agents to catch tax cheats maybe lowering the deficit would not just fall on the the backs of hourly wage earners. And funds for public health could be increased if more taxes were collected. It is time the tax laws were written for workers and not the big funders of Congressional campaigns.
In 2020 42.3% of all the taxes the Government collected came from the top 1% of our population. Their combined income was just 22.2% of the adjusted gross income for the nation.
The notion that the rich do not pay enough is a false narrative. We have a SPENDING problem in this country, not a TAX problem (other then the fact that 40.1% of households paid no tax at all in 2022).
Mr. Wilkins:
These numbers are not accurate. Post your specific sources, in detail please, or retract your statement.
The problem is not with the 1%, which probably includes my workaday dentist. The problem is with the top 1% of the 1% and higher, the 30,000 people (more like 10,000) who own this country.
Dan Kravitz
Perhaps you ask for the source and read it before you declare that it is inaccurate.
https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/
Mr. Wilkins,
Thank you for your reply. I am looking at the link to the Tax Foundation. I have not researched the data they present, but have no reason to doubt it.
You have not read that data correctly. The pie chart states that individual taxes account for 42.1% of government revenue. It does NOT break down the income levels of the people who paid those taxes. In other words, ALL individual taxes, including those paid by you and me, account for 42.1%.
Dan Kravitz
While the Tax Foundation describes itself as an independent nonprofit, it often presents a right-leaning and CEO-friendly framing. In this particular link, there's a few BIG caveats buried in the footnotes:
First, this only includes the Federal Income Tax, *not* the Payroll Tax. Because both income tax and payroll tax both come out of your paycheck, many people don't realize the difference, and may not catch this particular sleight-of-hand if they don't read the footnotes. (It's also the source of Romney's inaccurate quote about the "47 percent" who don't pay income tax.) The payroll tax is much more regressive than the income tax because it is capped and only applies to income less than $160,200. In FY2021, federal payroll taxes generated $1.3 trillion, which amounted to 5.8 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP), or 32.5 percent of all federal revenues.
Second, the comparison of total taxes paid to total income comes with the huge caveat that "total" in this case is ONLY total "Adjusted Gross Income" or AGI. Their footnote acknowledges "AGI is a very narrow definition," but they lament it is incomplete because it does not include Social Security transfers. However, their footnote leaves out several large categories of "other" income that might be relevant to this discussion. In particular, AGI primarily is calculated on your salary, but most of the super wealthy earn most of their money through investments and only pay the capital gains tax. That's how Warren Buffet only pays an effective tax rate lower than his secretary!
Finally, Mr. Wilkins, you posted that as a pithy retort to Mr. LeCount, who correctly noted that many of the super-wealthy pay little or no tax compared to "hourly workers," particularly when considering loopholes for many "business" expenses that aren't taxed (such as "private" jets owned by the corporation, but effectively an untaxed perk for the CEO). The analysis you posted only looks at income tax, but ignores payroll taxes, as well as state/local sales and property taxes which are generally more regressive and often account for a larger share of lower-income households' budgets. The analysis also ignored capital gains, corporate earnings, and estate taxes which are lightly taxed (and loopholes so big you can fly private jets through them).
As we think about what a fair and efficient tax policy would be to meet the needs of our country, I hope you will consider a broader analysis and facts about all of the taxes households pay instead of repeating a right-wing talking point about how many households "pay no tax at all."
Blame that on the people who write the tax code. Oh wait those are the same politicians telling Donald Trump is Bad and Barack Obama is good. The tax code could be very simple and fair but then the Politicians would lose all the leverage they have on business. You need to get it through your skulls that all our problems are created by politics and until people stop voting for the same people who promise you something and then do not produce it, just excuses instead.
I am old enough to remember that Bill Clinton negotiated a bipartisan balanced federal budget in the 1990s and put the country on a path to pay down the debt. What happened when his term in office ended and the Republicans took over? They used the surplus Clinton budget had created to cut taxes rather than reduce the debt. When I heard on the news that tax cuts were one of Kevin McCarthy's negotiating points on the debt ceiling, I knew that Republicans are still not serious about dealing with the debt. Their proposals seem to mostly involve reducing spending on programs that benefit the bottom half of the income structure in order to provide tax cuts that mostly benefit the top 10%. For this reason, I would prioritize your last three proposals. In a country (and state) where the majority no longer earn enough to afford the average-priced home and where inequality continues to grow, I don't think it is appropriate to ask middle and lower income Americans to sacrifice still more in order to provide tax cuts for the wealthy. In the long run, I wonder if it would be possible to create a corporate tax scale in which tax rates are tied to the ratio of top executive compensation to average worker compensation. In such a scheme, owners of small businesses that work with their employees and do not get rich off their backs would pay the lowest rates, while companies which pay their top executives 300-400 times the wages of their average workers (the average ratio for American corporations in 2021!!) would pay the highest tax rates. This would provide corporations with some incentive to share some of their government-subsidized profits with their workers, instead of just with their shareholders.
If you trust a politician to help you, you are a fool! They are all smoke and mirrors people.
Well said, Jean. You're bang on!
The cuts are to SPENDING, NOT tax breaks! If you cut spending you have more money to pay down the debt. Simple budgeting that we are all forced to do. Since he mentions how brave he is on this matter, I would like to see Jared Golden vote for Senator McCarthy's budget. Biden wants ONLY to raise the Debt More and not be financial responsible and that is where the devastation for all of us is going to come from. However, Jared Golden just voted to spend a ridiculous amount of Money in December so, I don't see this as anything but smoke and mirrors.
A budget is revenue and spending. The Republican party refuses to consider revenue - instead in 2017 they provided more revenue to corporations and the wealthy. The results was stock buy backs and more deferred income among the rich to pay less taxes.
1) Pass the spending limits.
2) Prepare a budget for FY 2024
3) Negotiate that budget based on policy, spending and revenue.
Instead, the Republicans will send us off a cliff while they formally passed huge increases in the deficit under former Pres. Trump.
While you raise important points, there are much more pressing matters endangering our country right now. I, for one, would prefer that you address the despicable erosion of our civil liberties, the dangerous rise of Christian nationalism, racism and neo-Nazism, and the attacks on women's rights. I would say keep up the good work, but you can do better. Stand up for your constituents; don't cower under the threat of political reprisal.
Noe-nazism comes from the left. Open your eyes.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkgbny/republicans-investigate-neo-nazis-military
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/11/donald-trump-nick-fuentes-ye-white-nationalist-nazi-anti-semite-ron-desantis.html
Like most education-eliminating republicans, you can't tell your left from your right. Open a book, probably one you tried to ban.
If you call gender fluidity education, you are a moron. If you think open borders lead to a safer and more prosperous nation, you are a moron. If you think stopping petroleum production in the U. S. while not curtailing rampant pollution in China and India helps the global environment you are a moron. If you think taxing "the rich" more will help any of us, you are a moron. Basically, if anybody still calls themselves a Democrat, you are an easily swayed , unintelligent, lead-by-the-nose-to-slaughter moron.
And, btw, calling Christians Nazis is fulfilling BIBLE PROPHECY.
... let that sink in if you're capable.
Sandy you are sad. Why not listen to others instead of attacking them every time.
Does that mean you think we should not address it? Interesting.
Isn’t this forum supposed to discuss fiscal responsibility? FOCUS, people.
Umm, no. Jared describes the purpose of this forum as "to keep you up to date on the work I am doing in Congress." There is more important work to be done.
That sounds familiar
Chris, the country's founding was derived from Christian nationalism.
That is a lie, Jeff. In fact, the Treaty of Tripoli specifically states “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion." I'd be happy to discuss this with you, but perhaps this is not the place.
Founding father John Adams disagrees with you, and I'm pretty sure he would know a thing or two on the subject of the founding of this country..... : "“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion....." (Treaty of Tripoli, 1797)
The government was not to be a theocracy, that is true... but it's people were predominantly Christian. and our legal precepts Judeo- Christian. perhaps not so much these days...
Regardless of what we were, or what we are, the establishment clause makes it pretty clear that your religion should begin and end at your door or the door of your preferred religious institution. Religion has zero place in our government, especially with more and more Americans every year identifying as religiously unaffiliated.
said who? Democrats have used what John F Kennedy said years ago to drive a wedge between government and religion because as the demons they are they needed to make that happen.
It has nothing to do with JFK, it’s the first amendment. Literally right before all you guys favorite pew pew amendment that grants well regulated militias the right to keep and bear arms. The founding fathers considered freedom from religion even more important than guns, that’s why it’s not the 2nd amendment.
Congratulations on your new blog! Reading your thinking and learning the details behind it will be far more informative that the short newsletters with their focus on daily activities, meetings, etc. You will no doubt receive negative comments from both political directions, but remember that many of us in Maine have a lot in common with you. I may disagree with your positions on some issues, but I much prefer your work in Congress to what we had before you. Stay the course.
Except for representative Golden voting for Build Back Better, he has done an ok job. Sure better than his counterpart from southern Maine.
Reverse the 2017 tax scam that gave big corporations and wealthy Americans a huge tax break. Republicans trying to hold Biden hostage right now are the ones responsible for that 2017 tax break. It's pretty rich of them to insist on cutting the budget, when they can't even come up with a list of cuts that would do anything to make meaningful progress. The idea that McCarthy would EVER sit down with Biden for a productive conversation are slim to none. McCarthy sold his soul to the lunatic fringe in order to get his speakership, and he answers only to them. He is not interested in serious governing, only performative politics.
And Biden sold his to the Chinese Government so your points are mute! They are both bad for the country and it is showing.
Excellent comment and all true facts.
I have a suggestion for you. Free up this Country to produce energy as fast as possible. That includes oil and natural gas. An immediate beginning will make us energy independent again in 18 months. Fast track the building of three more refineries and put modern nuclear energy production back on the table. Ramp up nuclear. New nuclear technology is safe and could eliminate the need for fossil fuels in ten years. All of this will increase our GDP so substantially. Estimates I hav3 seen are as high as 22% in three years as we sell energy to our European friends. Next, tariff the hell out of China. This will cost us a lot in the private sector, but it must be done. Bring the jobs back or at the least to friendly shores. The American people are prepared for the sacrifice if they are advised honestly. Just a start, kid. Stand up and tell it like it is. My old friend democrats, the men I served our State with, cared about people, but they shared a caring with conservatives for personal responsibility and traditional family values and morals. Join with them to move woke out of our system. When republicans say work should be required for welfare they are correct. When democrats say people sometimes need a hand up, they are correct. The middle speaks for itself. There is right on both sides. Much more if you wan5 to hear it.
What a succinctly written breath of fresh air!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you.
Well put.
I agree that we need to invest in our energy supplies to be the most efficient bang-for-the-buck but while addressing the climate changes that are taking place.
I understand that the three best returns on energy projects presently are
Wind,
Solar, and
Nuclear.
Far behind nuclear is natural gas!
New investments in other, older technologies (especially oil and coal) should be eliminated, as should any government financial or tax support for these spent resources.
This gives us a good start to make a plan for investment for our energy needs. And, as our US Senator King and others say, we must rebuild the transmission lines. (But I would prefer the method used in the Back To The Future series: a Mr. Fusion" in every home! No transmission lines needed!)
I'm so sick of people talking climate change! If they were serious they would go after China, India, Brazil because even if the USA stopped polluting completely it would have no effect on the planet, we are not the major pollution source, it is China and India. If you are serious go after the airlines and we have thousands of planes taking off all over the world daily. Why not go after them? It's a fact that solar and wind can't even come close to replacing what coal/gas gives us now. Why is Nuclear power never considered? Environmentalists are so fake, Do they have any idea how environmentally unfriendly the battery in their electric car is? Do they realize there is no safe way to dispose of worn out/broken solar panels? You need to see the whole picture just not want you want to see.
I like your ideas. The only thing I see as an issue is there are no companies in the US that will build a nuclear plant. The big builder is China.
There are some that will if the dems relax and eliminate the road blocks that designed to delay forever and bankrupt. If a green light was forthcoming, this Country could bury China economically. I am hoping Congressman Golden will stand up and do what America needs.
China has invested heavily in this millennium, so I do not think we could buy them anymore if we were ever able to.
"The big builder is China" -- of COAL plants! They had cut back on building them but with their economy doing so poorly they've gone back to building them at a furious rate.
In 2022 it's reported they built 2 coal-fired plants A WEEK. And they're still at it. (Look it up.)
Yes, we're not building nukes in America (almost zero) but there are very good reasons and the reasons are not "Democrats". We still have no place to store all the spent fuel rods (for centuries) and this represents a huge problem. We have no good solutions except to: keep on keeping on. That's not good. And electrical generation companies don't want to take the chance of a big disaster (like Russia's Chernobyl or Japan's Fukushima). It would instantly bankrupt them and they know it. Nuclear power plants are not a simple solution.
I have been out of that world for 20 years, but in the 90s the US still had a lot of engineering firms active in the nuclear industry. Part of our "service economy" of using our brains instead of our hands and bodies; sounds nice but who gets "serviced" if there are not people making anything? But I digress as I seem helpless not to!
But, yeah: I think France might be ones with experience building commercial nuclear plants. But there are new mini-nuke plants being made in the US now for new applications, too.
I do not agree with reversing the student debt cancellation plan. I think this is a short-sighted view. Please reconsider and review the data regarding the long-term benefits of supporting education for our populace and getting our families out of debt.
The double-negative statement confused me (i.e., reversing the cancellation), but I now understand that I agree with you completely!
Starting out fresh out of school with your own 5-figure debt constrains our young people in many ways that affect their futures negatively in those many ways; when you look at the number of students affected, we have a national long-term economic problem.
The argument against canceling the debts seem to be "I got through it, so kids today can too". The first part is true: I have an advanced degree but I never had more than a 4-figure debt from it which could be paid in short time (my first degree, an Associates' at community college, cost about $200 including books). That is not possible for kids today, and it was not their fault, but the fault of the hungry system we have nourished against our own.
The rising cost of higher education is a direct result of the actions of Congress in the 90s. They removed the cap on PLUS loans (actually changed it to "cost of attendance"- which means, no cap.) At that point, tuition and fees began their sharp upward trajectory as colleges took advantage of the almost limitless supply of credit made available to young people. Colleges increased enrollment, lowered their standards until anyone who could sign a promissory note could get a degree, and college administration grew enormously. They've been laughing all the way to the bank, while our youth are saddled with a shameful debt burden. We should not support any debt cancellation unless it is accompanied by two things: holding the universities accountable for their role (meaning, they should pay a large portion of any debt forgiveness), and turning off the spigot so that we don't find ourselves in this mess again 10 years from now.
Yes, Amos, and you can add the expenses colleges/universities added to their construction boom and moves they made to entice top money-gathering administrators and academics (not necessarily actually working teachers), which added greatly to expenses and, therefore, tuitions and costs to students.
But not supporting debt cancellations for students in order to hold the universities accountable? Turning off the money spigot (for help with the tuitions and costs?).
A high school student has a difficult choice for the future. College is one of them, ad of course it is not for all; many students have different aspirations, which is good. But many have the particular strengths and desires that would make college the best choice for them. If they do not choose college, it is a huge loss to them and to the society.
These students never had a say in those construction projects, and certainly are not happen about the money they have had to pay. Forcing this on them has been the fault of our system, and not the individuals that are forced to bear those costs despite the fact that many were children when the choices were made - made by the monied!
Don't make the students pay for the sins of our society.
I agree that our young people have been screwed. The first step we should take is to make sure it doesn't keep happening to more kids! I see no plan to end this racket. No one wants to talk about it. But if you don't stop the bleeding, there will be no end to this. Use the young people like piggy banks!
But remember, the students aren't completely blameless. They signed for the loans. (Maybe the age of consent to sign for student loans should be raised.) Many chose more expensive options-- like living in the nicest housing, and going to private schools. Many are actually using their education to make a lot of income. The costs of loan cancellation should not be born by everyone, including those who chose less expensive options for education. They should be born by the only party that benefited from this scam- the colleges themselves.
Put yourself in a kids' position: you are a junior in HS. You get good grades and have a yearning for higher education for your future. But pricing is not fair, so you... pause your life for a few years?
I have my ideas about how kids can get a good education for much less, but for the top people in society, it seems that only the rich are eligible. Look at all the politicians with their Yale and Harvard educations. Those educations did not seem to offer much in the way of critical thinking (I am thinking of DeSantis and his Yale degree; also W. Bush's!) But they sure did offer them the connections for their success! (Also, look a the connections Dr. Reich got at Harvard! It even works for the left.)
Of course, a teenage wouldn't know better. A lot of them have been failed by their parents and teachers in this regard. All my kids heard from their high school counselors was, "Don't worry about the price. Just try to get into your dream college. Worry about paying for it later." (FAME actually does an excellent job, in my opinion, in educating teens and their parents about the pitfalls of extreme student debt, but many won't listen.) There are still good ways to get an education without a high price tag, but they're not glamorous. My daughter just graduated with an engineering degree from UMaine, with very little debt. She lived in a cheap apartment by the railroad tracks and so was able to pay her room and board with her summer earnings. She said no to the private school in Boston that wanted her to graduate six figures in debt. We have to get more kids saying no. (One of her friends actually said no to UNE, and they came back later offering to match UMaine's pricing!)
Dear Representative Golden,
I like your ideas. I am an independent and even though you are a Democrat, you think more like an Independent. The only hope for this country is compromise. My worry is that no one will step up to lead us to that end. If you take up this challenge, you are truly a great man. Wishing you all the best in your endeavors.
This seems a good start. A couple of observations:
(1) Insofar as the US dollar is, effectively, the world's reserve currency, it's not subject to many of the rules governing other currencies. That is, it will continue to have the confidence of international lenders far past the point where other currencies are likely to lose it. (Recall an old saying: If you owe the bank $10,000 and can't pay it back when due, you have a problem. If you owe the bank $10 trillion and can't pay it back when due, the bank has a problem.) The more pressing fiscal problem for the US is the looming debt-ceiling crisis, a manufactured issue that could be eliminated by appropriate legislation. Those holding the country hostage are the diners who've enjoyed the meal and now want to skip out on the bill. The ceiling should be abolished to avert the genuinely catastrophic consequences of a US debt default (and to remove a tool abused by a desperate minority to avoid facing their responsibilities).
(2) Past profligate borrowing notwithstanding, when you're confronting an existential crisis it is time to borrow if you cannot finance the necessary actions with existing money available. This is the only justification for the immense borrowing entailed by last year's legislation, which will spend a huge amount of money to mitigate the damaging effects of climate change. Any cuts sought must come from elsewhere.
John, Please not to forget the HUGE deficit add-on caused by Trump's tax cut for the wealthy. Over time that tax cut is costing multiple trillions of dollars. Warren Buffet of Omaha estimated that tax cut netted him (actually his companies) about 29 BILLION dollars. Yes $29,000,000,000! (Look it up.). And that's just one billionaire -- we have about 1,000 billionaires in the USA now.
Indeed, that was cronyism at its best.
Dear Rep Golden -
"Congress" did not pay ONE PENNY of the interest on America's national debt. To the extent there was an interest payment, that interest was paid by We the People, or more specifically, those 50% of Americans who pay taxes. Congress has THREE, and only three, methods to pay for any new expense"
1. Raise Taxes (and risk not being reelected)
2. Cut funding of an existing program (which NEVER happens)
3. Borrow the money
When you borrow BILLIONS to make ends meet, the end is near.
Randy Poulton, Winterport
Randy, I hear you. But I would remind you that "the end is near" has been the cry for decades now. Over and over and over again it's been "proven" that we are going to fail -- and we haven't. That's no reason to give up but it's also not right to think we're about to go over a cliff (unless it's default on our debt -- then there would be an immediate result and it's clear it would be catastrophic.)
We don't need to go over the Cliff, China will push us over by replacing the dollar as the major trading currency around the world. They have already started to do that with help from Russia, Iran, India, and soon probably Brazil.
These ideas are fairly all right-but there is one that you're not addressing that should be-which is to cancel the tax cuts for the multimillionaires that was passed under Donald Trump. This has added to the deficit, and the middle class is suffering from it.
Another idea that you have approached is the coming 'insolvency ' of Medicare and Social Security-I've retired, so I'm rather interested in these topics but you have as a member of Congress have the duty to make sure neither goes insolvent.
I've read where if the limit of Social Security taxes on those making over $150,000 were removed. that itself would more or less guarantee the solvency of the Social Security trust fund, which by the way, is not going broke but will be paying 80% of benefits starting in 2035. That is not insolvency.
Medicare has to be fixed by stopping the insurance companies from fraudulently billing it, and also by removing the Medicare Advantage programs from existence.
Those are frauds, perpetuated to enrich insurance companies and nothing else. This has been reported on by the NY Times among other papers.
I hope these ideas will be reasonable for you to contemplate and perhaps enact.
I voted for you to represent me and the state of Maine, and you've done a good job even if the GOP has gone off the cliff.
Thanks for your time in reading this.
what the government needs to do is make the rich pay there share of taxes and then maybe we can get inflation to start dropping so we can afford to eat and pay our bills I am in the lower class I have to work 7 days a week just to survive so please help us midclass
While on the topic of budget and paying to support initiatives our government needs to consider removing the income cap to which results in higher earners not being required to pay into social security once the cap is reached. Seems like a major issue that everyone shares an opinion on but do nothing about saving Social Security. That and removing the penalty imposed on government retiree annuitants and cutting “earned” benefits by over 50% through the Windfall Elimination Provision.