I got an email today from Senator Patty Murray asking that I join with her to oppose the efforts by the Republican majority in the House of Representatives to reduce the deficit.
Her message came in the form of an appeal for veterans and how the slashing by those mean Republicans would hurt people if we let them get away with it.
I am only sorry that Senator Murray is not in the same situation as Governor Gregoire here in the other Washington. Being forced to balance her budget, Governor Gregoire has come to the realization that the only way forward is to cut services that do affect people. I doubt that anyone likes the part about affecting people, but forced fiscal discipline makes it necessary to make hard choices.
I suspect that if given the opportunity to go into debt to deliver the services as Senator Murray is more than willing to do, Governor Gregoire would also choose to borrow rather than cut programs. That kind of thinking has to stop!
In the face of a $1.6 TRILLION SHORTFALL for 2011, Senator Murray needs to start identifying meaningful programs she is willing to cut. There will always be seniors, children, veterans or some other group that needs help, but in the face of that staggering debt, can we really afford it?
Senator Murray and her Senate colleagues need to offer a spending plan that meets the goal of cutting $61 billion for the existing budget year the House has on the table but preserving the funding for the veterans she is worried about in her email. If the priorities of the Senate Democrats are different than the Republicans, they should offer different programs to cut; understanding that if she saves one here, it will cost somewhere else. That is what balancing a budget does. It forces us to prioritize.
Governor Gregoire has finally learned that the pot of state money is only so large. She and her colleagues in the legislature are involved in that painful process right now. They are weighing the pros and cons and trying to choose their expenditures wisely. We haven’t seen the results of their efforts yet, but they will adopt a balanced budget on April 24th.
This is the same lesson we are trying to convey to the free spenders in our national government. Work within your budget. Prioritize your spending.
If they are having such a hard time dealing with a minuscule $61 billion cut, imagine how much hurt they would be feeling if they actually had to balance their budget and cut the whole $1.6 TRILLION?
Senator Murray is howling about $61 billion in cuts when the deficit for this year is estimated to be over $1 Trillion. That is just 6% of the trillion. There is a serious gap with these folks not just in their budgets, but in their thinking about what the federal government should be providing.
I would support the House of Representatives sticking to their proposed budget for the Continuing Resolution and if the Senate Democrats refuse to play ball, let the chips fall where they may.
When you only control half of the legislative process like the House Republicans do, you have to use whatever tools you have available to advocate for your agenda. Neither the President nor the Senate is likely to give ground unless they are forced to. I would stand by my campaign promises to the voters and let the other side take their chances.
Senator Murray doesn’t have to worry about re-election for a while, so she can be a free spender. Let’s see if the twenty or so Democrats who are up for re-election in 2012 can afford to do the same.
No Loss for Words 
NPR Off the Dole!
by Steve DanaWhat are we to think about this current flap at National Public Radio? The guy who is at the center of the controversy was not a low level employee in a remote location that strayed from the company line; he was a highly placed executive responsible for fund-raising at NPR. It is not unreasonable to conclude that others that worked for and with Ron Schiller may have shared his views in their efforts to raise money for the organization.
That concerns me.
When NPR terminated Juan Williams a couple months ago for making comments about his personal feelings, NPR said that company policy limited the types of comments their commentators could make and Mr. Williams violated that policy.
Executives at NPR lost their jobs following the Juan Williams controversy and now top executives are again losing their jobs suggest that the organization has serious problems at the very top of the heap.
You would think an organization called National Public Radio would offer diverse opinions about issues of interest to all Americans; a mix of liberal, moderate and conservative staff that provided something for everyone.
Apparently the National and Public parts in the name just have to do with who pays for it. The federal government gives NPR $400 million per year to an organization that has demonstrated a couple times now that they have more than a liberal bias, they have serious animosity about anyone who doesn’t share their views.
It’s too bad that our public money is given to organizations clearly not supporting mainstream public benefit causes.
I hope the government suspends future federal contributions to NPR. I don’t object to a private organization having their opinions, but I don’t want public money paying for it. I suspect liberals don’t want to pay for conservative media either.
Posted in Political commentary | Leave a Comment »