|
|
Jon Tester on Budget & EconomyDemocratic Jr Senator |
JONES: That's easy for me. Eliminate unconstitutional departments and agencies.
BURNS: There's only one way to control the deficit--grow the economy and control spending. We have brought down spending on the discretionary spending - the part we have some control over. The non-discretionary part is troubling. We're continuing with the tax cuts which have energized the economy--that's the way you take care of the deficit. We didn't ask for 9/11, or Katrina, or the war on terror. We always grew through it. You grow the economy and control spending and that's the way you take care of the deficit.
TESTER: When it comes to funding for Montana, we took the third biggest cut in FY05, in that discretionary funding. Out of 13 subcommittee chairs, Sen. Burns is ranked 10th in getting dollars to this state for critical projects. It's time that we spend the money wiser, that we prioritize better, and start looking out for middle class folks.
BURNS: His record is very clear on that, and my record is very clear also. I don't vote for tax increases.
TESTER: Sen. Burns talks about how he doesn't raise taxes. He's spending more money than the economy is growing--that's putting a tax burden on our children. If you think that's a way to do business, it certainly wouldn't have worked on our farm. You are a borrow-and-spender, that's unequivocal.
BURNS: You said to some students, "I want to lower your tuition." Since you've been in the senate, tuition has gone of 48%. I have no control over that--you do, with the board of regents. You've got your hand on the throttle.
TESTER: You want to talk about a throttle--your hand on the throttle has doubled the national debt in 5 years. On our kids! If my folks had done that on our farm, they'd have lost the farm. You're running this country into bankruptcy. China's buying our debt, because he can't balance our checkbook.
Proponents recommend voting YES because:
My amendment says we are going to take about $18 billion as a strong signal from the Congress that we want to support effective programs and we want the taxpayer dollars spent in a responsible way. My amendment doesn't take all of the $88 billion for the programs found by PART, realizing there may be points in time when another program is not meeting its goals and needs more money. So that flexibility is allowed in this particular amendment. It doesn't target any specific program. Almost worse than being rated ineffective, we have programs out there that have made absolutely no effort at all to measure their results. I believe these are the worst offenders. In the following years, I hope Congress will look at those programs to create accountability.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
The effect of this amendment will simply be to cut domestic discretionary spending $18 billion. Understand the programs that have been identified in the PART program are results not proven. Here are programs affected: Border Patrol, Coast Guard search and rescue, high-intensity drug trafficking areas, LIHEAP, rural education, child abuse prevention, and treatment. If there is a problem in those programs, they ought to be fixed. We ought not to be cutting Border Patrol, Coast Guard search and rescue, high-intensity drug trafficking areas, LIHEAP, rural education, and the rest. I urge a "no" vote.
