Friends of John Boehner
Fighting for Freedom. Making a Difference.
Boehner's Blog
Boehner Outlines "Pledge" to Create Jobs, Cut Spending, & More
- September 27, 2010
- Blog
- 3 Comments
- Share
Boehner led Republicans in launching a “Pledge to America” last week – a governing agenda built by actually listening to voters – that could be implemented today if Democrats were willing to work together. Boehner led Republicans in launching a “Pledge to America” last week – a governing agenda built by actually listening to voters – that could be implemented today if Democrats were willing to work together. The Pledge includes plans for:
- CREATING NEW JOBS: The Washington Post says “Small businesses would be able to deduct from taxes up to 20 percent of their annual income.” “Republicans would end the new requirement, effective 2012, to file a tax form every time they spend more than $600 per year at any one company, such as an office supply store or a gas station,” writes economist Diana Furchtgott-Roth. The Wall Street Journal says “Republicans understand that above all this year voters want to stop the Obama-Pelosi agenda. Stop it cold. Stop the spending, the tax increases and the huge expansion of the regulatory state.”
- CUTTING GOVERNMENT SPENDING: Michael Barone wrote that the plan would “roll back non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels.” The Union Leader says Republicans want to “cap discretionary spending; roll back spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels; end TARP and federal support of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; place sunsets on federal programs; ‘require a full accounting of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid’.” There’s also “a freeze on hiring federal workers except security personnel” according to the Associated Press.
- REPEALING OBAMACARE & STARTING OVER: The Columbus Dispatch reports that the Pledge calls for “repealing the health-care law championed by President Barack Obama.” National Review says Boehner and Republicans “plan to work toward their own health-care reforms, including medical-malpractice reform, freedom to buy health insurance across state lines, and better-funded high-risk pools for people with pre-existing conditions.” The National Right to Life Committee says the Pledge “also includes pledges to ‘establish a government-wide prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion and subsidies for insurance coverage that includes abortion.’”
- REFORMING CONGRESS: Diana Furchtgott-Roth says “New proposed rules include a mandatory three-day online review period for all bills, and changes to rules to make it easier for members of Congress to get a vote on amendments that would cut spending.” The Union Leader says Republicans would also “require legislation to identify where in the Constitution it is authorized.”
- KEEPING AMERICA SECURE: The Washington Post says “the Pentagon would receive increased funding to more quickly implement a ballistic missile defense system.” The Christian Science Monitor says the Pledge would “boost national and border security, including fully funding missile defense, enforcing sanctions against Iran, and reaffirming the authority of state and local law enforcement to assist in the enforcement of all federal immigration laws…”
Read more about and view the Pledge here courtesy CBS News.
If you want to help John as he works to get our economy moving again, join the Boehner Campaigners today and help us lead the fight for a smaller, more accountable government in Washington.
You and the lame stream
Wed, 03/16/2011 - 18:37 — Brenda Dorris (not verified)You and the lame stream republicans are going to force a third party for 2012. I am not a fan of third parties because I am sure that will cause a loss for us in the election. Why can't you see what the 2010 election means? Someone better wake up......I don't look forward to 4 more years of Obama Care.
Uh, if you are going to screw
Tue, 01/04/2011 - 04:44 — Jane Pourazari (not verified)Uh, if you are going to screw with social security...umm, which I have been paying into since I was 17 years old (am now 51)...why should I keep paying into it? Why can't this be "optional" just like you and all the other conservatives' ideas about health care, medicare, etc? You guys have the best medical insurance on earth (government employee), and bennies. I just don't know how you guys can understand what the everyday person is going through? If you guys are going to dismantle programs that I have been paying into, okay I guess, but I am done paying into it. Why should I? Why should anyone? If you guys are so dang against "Obama care" why are you against me having to pay into social security and FICA? I promise I won't ever show up on a government doorstep asking for anything, and you guys can quit taking my hard earned money via these taxes! Why not? It is the same thing. You say that "forcing" americans to have health insurance isn't right, but it is okay to force us to pay into programs that we may never, ever benefit from? Seriously? I am shocked that most americans are not making this mental connection. Good for you, I guess...as long as americans are stupid, and don't "connect the dots", you will do fine. Just remember, though, that when you shut down the government, your own paychecks, including health insurance premiums better lapse too...just like would happen for any company that is "competing" in business. You can then feel like a person who has had their health insurance premium suffer a "gap" in coverage which then leads to having to wait whatever period the health insurance company deems necessary due to that "gap". Oh, but I guess, when you shut the government down to teach everyone a lesson, you guys will, no doubt, protect your own benefits. Nice job. You guys have no idea what the ordinary person has to deal with in even a normal economy. In this ecomony, how much bargaining power do you think an employee has? Employers are now taking advantage of these "troubled times" to pass more of their bennies (which were meant to entice employees to that company) on to the employee, which means, it is no longer a "bennie". At least you have your goverment subsidized medical benefits. Good for you, John. Thank you, John. Enjoy shutting down the government. Enjoy giving unpaid tax cuts to the very wealthy, and cutting social security to "balance" that deal. Good job, John. Good, stinking job. When my mom, who also worked from age 17, and paid into this system...sees her social security cut, she ain't gonna be happy. When she figures out that you gave tax cuts to the wealthiest in this nation, and paid for them by cutting her monthly income to poverty level, well, I bet I will have no problem getting her to stop "siding" with republicans. You guys are evil in your snobbery. Good job, John. When you shut everything down to teach us all a lesson, you are gonna have something really solid to cry about. You will be having to do more than just say NO...you will have to answer to an entire country that although not your wealthiest, we do have numbers. You know, the other 99% of the population of the united states of america.
BTW, the answer to health care, isn't to shift it to another entity, like the church, it should be to make it more efficient, more competitive, and reduce what is costs to get care. If people didn't fear losing their life savings, home, etc, due to an illness, then we wouldn't feel compelled to pay $1200 monthly for health insurance! There is a huge problem with how doctors, hospitals, etc bill for their services. Once you add health insurance into the picture, the doctors double or triple their bill! It shouldn't be like this. What something costs, is what it should cost. If health care itself didn't cost a fortune, then...we wouldn't have to pay that much for health insurance. Health insurance would be for catastrophic circumstances, not for the common cold. As long as everyone is seeking to profit off of everything, and doctors pad their bills because someone uses their health insurance, nothing will change. As long as some are insured, and other don't participate, then, the balance is against those that pay their share...I don't think that people should have to become christians to have health care (which is what "justin" above posited). that is just crazy. Our country is too diverse to answer the health care question with getting government out, so that the church, subsidized by the government can step into the void? Scary beyond imagination...and I am a christian.!!!!!
One issue that should be
Fri, 11/05/2010 - 00:10 — Justin (not verified)One issue that should be discussed is filling the void left by a reduction in entitlements. The church definitely seems to be the best option but such a transition won't be easy. Many times churches members are much alike in terms of economic resources leaving churches with primarily poor congregations without the ability to cover the medical expenses of their aged and sick that are now carried by the government.
At the same time even churches that aren't particularly poor will have to make significant cuts in their living expenses and similar increases in their giving to support their members now reliant on government assistance.
Research will need to be completed to determine if there are any savings resulting from government not administering this approach. Would one dollar not spent on entitlements require an increase of one dollar spent by the church. Would a mature Christ-like populace have lower medical bills because of more discipline to follow appropriate healthy lifestyles? Would the increased involvement of the community in caring and paying for their aged and sick mean lower expenses?
In the end, the withdraw of government creates the opportunity and necessity for the advance of the church into the void. The massive amounts of resources, services, and people in play demand careful consideration for the transition. Starting this conversation outside congress must accompany the start of entitlements reform in congress.