Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 41)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 41)

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.

Cutting Defense to Pay for Deficit Spending is No Solution

Washington, DC – Congressman Todd Akin (R-MO), Chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, a known fiscal conservative who has been standing for structural reforms in response to the deficit spending crisis, released the following statement on the new debt ceiling proposal:

“Providing for the common defense is one of the most important roles of the federal government, and is clearly required by the Constitution. At a time when we still have thousands of our men and women in the line of fire, dramatic defense cuts are simply unacceptable. In the worst case scenario, this bill could result in roughly $1 trillion in cuts to the military. Almost half of the debt ceiling increase may come at the expense of our national defense. I believe that many of my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee share my deep concerns with the defense cuts proposed in this plan.

“While Speaker Boehner and others have been negotiating in good faith, I am concerned that this new proposal may actually make it less likely that we can address the central problem of radical deficit spending. While this new proposal has a balanced budget amendment as one option for a future debt ceiling increase, I do not believe that the President or Democrats in Congress will be willing to support a balanced budget amendment while there are other paths available to them that allow for continued deficit spending.

“While some argue that a balanced budget amendment is unachievable with the current political landscape in Washington, our nation needs a balanced budget amendment now more than ever. We have had problems with deficit spending for much of our history, but we are approaching the point of no return. A balanced budget amendment would force us back on a responsible path. If not now, when? If not us, who?

“The plan before us today fails to address the problem at hand, and it threatens to severely degrade our national defense with a trillion dollars in cuts to our military. For these reasons, I am opposing this bill.”

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 )

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: