The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 27)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 27)

This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.

Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the  debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”

“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.

Rokita Votes Against Debt Ceiling Increase

Aug 1, 2011 Issues: Spending Cuts and Debt

Rep. Todd Rokita voted against the Budget Control Act of 2011 because it fails to implement the long-term permanent and structural reforms necessary to put the nation back on a fiscally sustainable trajectory:

“I have heard a couple different definitions of leadership today.  Let me add mine: leadership is effectively persuading others of the proper course of action.  It is also about standing up for those who have no voice. For decades now, we have spent too much money on ourselves and have intentionally allowed our kids and grandkids to pay for it.  It is intergenerational theft—literally stealing from our best asset, our posterity.  The correct course of action, as I have said from the beginning, is to enact permanent and structural reform as the price for raising the debt ceiling.  Today’s bill does not do that.

This legislation is a Washington deal, and it barely begins to address our long-term spending problem. Our debt crisis is driven by mandatory spending on entitlement programs and this plan fails to address such spending.  Also, this plan only reduces the future debt we will pile on the backs of our kids from $10 trillion to around $7 trillion over the next decade.  It does not begin to reduce our $14 trillion in current debt. 

However, this legislation could eventually lead to the best permanent solution, a balanced budget amendment.  This is certainly worth fighting for and I will lead on that front.  But a vote alone is not worth the $2.5 trillion price tag, again to be paid by future generations. For that price, we should have required passage of a balanced budget amendment for state ratification.

I will continue to fight for a balanced budget amendment, lead our nation to live within its means and tackle out-of-control entitlement spending. It will be a long fight, but the enactment of a balanced budget amendment is the only way to fix the broken system that created this mess, both addressing our long-term fiscal health and giving Americans long-term peace of mind.”  

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: