| Randy Weber is doing exactly what he said he would do, oppose every action of our President, unfortunately it comes at the expense of seniors, and middle and low income families. Most Americans believe that any person who works full time should be able to support themselves and their family without being on government assistance, which is why 71% said Congress should raise the minimum wage. Last week Randy Weber voted "no" to raising the minimum wage and yes to the Paul Ryan budget that exacerbates our rising income inequality. While income for the top 20% of American households rose by 1.6 percent in 2012, households in the middle saw declines that helped bring Median household income to 8% below what it was before the recession started. It's unfortunate that even with the stock market making a strong rebound and corporations still making record profits that Americans can not rely on their members of Congress to ensure that hard working people can at least keep up with the rising cost of living.
The Paul Ryan budget is a get-out-of-paying-your-fair-share free card for millionaires, paid for by essential programs for seniors and low income families. It seeks to turn Medicare into a voucher program, raise the Social Security eligibility age from 65 to 70 for those 51, while giving an average tax cut of $245,000 to millionaires. The DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) has their hands full with a Republican majority afraid of the extremist in its own ranks, but it is definitely keeping a close eye on Rep. Weber and his Tea Party sympathies. Emily Bittner of the DCCC released this statement, "Congressman Randy Weber must be living in a different reality than most Americans - one where the rich should pay less, hardworking families should pay more and the biggest sacrifice should come from our seniors-but those aren't the values that made America great,".
Below the jump is a round up of the destructive nature of the Paul Ryan budget:
|The Republican Study Committee Budget Would Turn Medicare Into a Voucher Program for Those 59 and Younger. According to The Hill: "The key difference between the two proposals (the RSC and Ryan budgets) is the plan to overhaul Medicare. While Ryan calls for implementing his 'premium support' plan for future beneficiaries age 54 and younger, the RSC budget would start the change for people 59 and below." [The Hill, 3/15/13]
The RSC Budget Would Raise The Social Security Eligibility Age From 65 to 70 for those 51 and Older. According to the RSC's FY 2014 budget blueprint, "This budget would slowly phase in an increase in the Social Security full-retirement age for individuals born in 1962 (currently 51) and after to an eventual full-retirement age of 70." [RSC Budget, March 2013]
The RSC Budget Would Eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Reinstates Too Big to Fail. The RSC's FY2014 calls for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and removes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporations authority to wind-down banks that are too big to fail. [RSC Budget, March 2013]
The RSC Budget Would Allow Pell Grants to Collect Interest During Enrollment and Deny Grants to Adjust to Inflation. Under current law, Pell Grants do not collect interest during the student's enrollment; however, the RSC's FY 2014 budget blueprint calls for the repeal of this provision. In addition, the RSC budget would prevent the Pell Grant from keeping pace with inflation. [RSC Budget, March 2013]
The RSC Budget Would Slash the Corporate Tax Rate from 35 Percent to 25 Percent and Adopt a Territorial Tax System. According to the RSC's FY 2014 budget blueprint, "This budget calls for reducing America's top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. In addition, the "budget directs the House Ways and Means Committee to identify tax deductions and credits that could be eliminated and to report legislation transitioning the U.S. to a territorial tax system." [RSC Budget, March 2013]
The RSC Budget Would Cap the Capital Gains Tax at 15 Percent, Remove the Capital Gains Inflation Index. The RSC's FY 2014 budget blueprint would cap the capital gains tax at 15 percent. In addition, "This budget would eliminate the capital gains tax on inflation." [RSC Budget, March 2013]
The RSC Budget Would Establish A System With Two Income Tax Brackets: 25 Percent and 15 Percent and Eliminate Individual Deductions and Credits. The RSC's FY 2014 budget blueprint would establish: "Just two rates -- 15 percent (first $50,000 taxable income for single filers, $100,000 for joint filers) and 25 percent (taxable income above those amounts); A standard deduction of $12,500 for single filers, and $25,000 for joint filers; An additional deduction of $12,500 for each dependent; and No other individual deductions or credits or exclusions." [RSC Budget, March 2013]
CBPP: Two-Tax Bracket Structure Included in RSC Budget Would Likely Result in Net Tax Increases for Low and Middle Income Families. In 2012, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analyzed the impacts of Rep. Dave Camp's tax reform package, which contained many of the policy proposals that are also included in the FY 2014 RSC budget - such as the repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and two income tax brackets - and concluded that if passed, the proposal would result in a net tax increase for working families. The CBPP wrote: "The proposals thus provide no protection from policy changes that would shift tax burdens down the income scale by giving large net tax cuts to high-income individuals and net tax increases to low- and moderate-income families. That's because the tax rate cuts that the bills call for would be very regressive and give their biggest tax cuts by far to people at the top, while curbs on tax expenditures could cause significant tax increases for low- and middle-income families. That's especially true if, as many Republicans favor, policymakers protect the primary tax expenditure that benefits people at the top - the low top rate on capital gains and dividend income - while substantially cutting tax expenditures on which ordinary families rely." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/31/12]