Durbinomics 101,000,000,000

Today my email inbox contained a letter from the office of Senator Dick Durbin, the senior Senator from Illinois. Were he not such a destructive Liberal, I could almost feel sorry for Durbin. He holds the distinction of having had as “junior” colleagues Barack Hussein Obama and, for now, Roland Burris, both of them creatures spawned in the cesspool that is Chicago politics.

Durbin’s letter is little more than a boilerplate response, written by some team of rabid interns, no doubt, to a Feb. 5, 2009, plea from me, urging him to vote against the bloated, dangerous $800 billion “Stimulus Bill”. I suggested he and Senate Democrats consider actual stimulative measures, such as cutting taxes on the two lowest tax brackets (occupied by people who actually earn income and pay taxes), exempting unemployment benefits from income taxation, reducing obscene business tax rates, keeping capital gains tax rates stable (or eliminating them altogether), and creating a small business tax deduction.

I pointed out that analysts of the bill determined that only about 12 cents of every dollar is legitimate stimulus. Here is Durbin’s reply (and, in bold parentheses, the pesky little details he either neglected to mention or misrepresented):

Dear Mr. Woodward (aka, The Conservative Soldier),

Thank you for contacting me regarding the (so-called) economic recovery package. I appreciate hearing from you (about as much as a root canal without anesthetics).

We are facing tough economic times (especially now that the Obama Administration has burdened taxpayers with debt of historic proportions). Americans across the country are feeling the squeeze of this recession as hardworking men and women lose their jobs (because we fail to offer businesses meaningful tax relief), state and local governments cut services to avoid deep deficits, and credit is cut back (after my Democrat colleagues stood by and cheered as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae created a massive housing bubble).

The (Bogus) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (P.L. 111-5) enacts a broad mix of tax cuts (actually, tax credits for people who do not pay taxes) and incentives (to not look for a job) aimed at individuals and small businesses. The act also makes investments in infrastructure (and $600 million for new cars for the Federal Government, plus $400 million to study sexually transmitted diseases), moves forward on alternative energy development, and provides tax relief to working families across the country (offset, however, when they start paying higher energy taxes under Obama’s cap-and-trade farce). These provisions are designed to help our economy on the road to recovery (that would have started by now if liberal politicians would stop using the n-word, nationalization).

Critics of the recovery bill argued that the measure does nothing to scale back foreclosure - the number one cause of the economic downturn. The Obama Administration has announced an aggressive new policy to stem foreclosures (to be paid for by Americans, like you, who pay mortgages on time every month, even if it means cutting back on plans for a third car or fourth flat-screen TV), and Congress is considering legislation to help homeowners stay in their homes (that they can’t afford now, and never will) and strengthen regulation of the mortgage market.

Some have expressed concern (as if I care) that the bill adds to the federal budget deficit. While we need to address the deficit over time (after I am dead and my grandchildren are addressing it), the first order of business is to put our economy back on track. No (obvious) earmarks were included in this bill (because we put all of them in the recent $410 billion “Appropriations Bill”).

This legislation is a necessary step toward economic recovery. Thank you again for writing to me (so I can keep my interns busy). I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress considers legislation to address the downturn (we are fueling). Please feel free to keep in touch (but, please, I beg you, do not actually touch me, ever).


Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator (Who Was All For Roland Burris’ Appointment Until I Was Against It)

No comments: