Budget reform
The label “conservative” is often applied to ideas that are anything but. Take for instance the proposition that we can exclusively cut our way out of our federal debt problem, that we can somehow bring our national budget back into balance without raising any more revenue. This is a radical theory, not a conservative one, unsupported by the facts or the math of the matter.
On this issue, people like me who know we need a balanced approach to budget reform are the true conservatives. I also consider myself conservative in my views of how we spend our government dollars. (Although I’ve yet to meet anyone, liberal or conservative, who’s in favor of waste.) There are steps we can take to get the most bang for our public buck, such as by constructing and maintaining our roads in ways that reduce the need for constant repaving.
But in the end, we’ll need more income as well as less outgo to get our fiscal house in order. The most logical place to look for greater financial contributions to our national finances is among those with the most to give: our wealthiest households and most profitable multinational corporations.
Our middle class struggling through the slow recovery certainly has nothing extra to give.
Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins can prove they’re not only moderate, but actually conservative in the best sense, if they embrace a year-end budget deal that includes restoring slightly higher rates on taxpayers making more than $250,000 a year.
Robert Jordan
Bar Harbor
Lame ducks
The two major parties, in convention, displayed dramatic differences in what they claim causes job creation or loss.
Republicans espouse the “trickle down” approach: Cut taxes on the wealthy few and business, and they will use the extra funds to hire people, start businesses, etc. Democrats espouse stimulus: Get money into the hands of the many nonwealthy, who will spend it and thus create the demand for goods and services that causes businesses to invest and hire.
Trickle-down has been tried by Republican administrations since 1980. It has failed every time. A chart of gross domestic product’s behavior at various levels of the top tax rate over the past 60 years shows this. If anything, GDP did best at high tax rates for the wealthy.
On the other hand, the stimulus approach worked — too small though it was. In late 2008, GDP plummeted by 9 percent, the worst in 50 years and 11 percent below what would have stabilized unemployment. It was still falling when President Barack Obama took office. The stimulus act was passed that February. The next quarter’s jobs numbers showed the largest improvement in 30 years.
Real small businesses, drivers of the economy, confirm in surveys that lack of demand for their output, not high taxes, is their problem.
Our two representatives, understanding this, support tax cuts for the nonwealthy, not the wealthy. One would hope our two senators will, too, in the coming lame duck session.
Dick Altee
Southwest Harbor
Angus-assassins
As a longtime admirer and supporter of independent Angus King, and — when he was governor — an occasional collaborator on his successful program to help Maine businesses increase their exports, I was delighted when he announced his candidacy to replace Olympia Snowe in the U.S. Senate.
And now his campaign is giving me the additional pleasure of being able to watch the out-of-state political action committees waste the money of their anonymous wealthy supporters through the comically ill-conceived ad campaigns they’re throwing at him. Imagine spending perfectly good money to claim that King is “anti-business,” when most of the businessmen in Maine will tell you that the claim is nonsense. And then there’s the spectacle of certain Republican PACs running ads supporting the Democratic candidate as a better way to chip away at King’s lead than buying ads for their own guy.
I imagine that a lot of would-be “Angus-assassins” out there will soon realize that their feet are getting full of self-inflicted bullet holes.
Charlie Graham
Camden
Listen to Mainers
The BDN recently ran a 700-word story about two people who came to our state from Massachusetts to try to persuade Mainers to vote against marriage equality in our November referendum. I would have rather seen a story about how Mainers themselves feel about the referendum. For instance, a pro-marriage phenomenon has been happening in Washington County over the summer, symbolized by the 100-plus residents who marched with the float “Vote ‘Aye’ for Love” in Eastport’s Pirate Festival parade recently.
The color, enthusiasm and size of that contingent garnered the festival prize for “Most Thrilling Entry” and was greeted with vigorous cheers, high fives and thumbs up from the huge crowds that packed the sidewalks. That’s a story.
If Mainers need advice about how to vote on Question 1 this November, perhaps they should be talking to other Mainers instead of listening to Mr. and Mrs. Frank of Brighton, Mass. There are plenty of people here in Washington County who have some heartfelt thoughts on the issue of gaining equal marriage rights for ourselves, our friends and our families.
Gretchen Gordon
Pembroke
Advocate for change
We just received our copy of NAMI Advocate and the monthly letter from the executive director, Michael J. Fitzpatrick, who just returned from the National Alliance on Mental Illness National Convention, which was disturbing. Not because of him but by the facts put forth. Let me quote just a few.
The continued loss of community services, because of lack of funding, leaves many people with mental illness at a loss. As an example, most school dropouts do so because of a lack of services. The only available resource is often incarceration in jails and prison. The only treatment for an outburst is often to be put in solitary confinement. Punishment for being mentally ill — it just doesn’t make sense.
The magazine continues with services available to returning veterans and active duty troops and spouses. Just a few quotes: One-third of military spouses suffer from at least one mental illness; one active duty person commits suicide every 36 hours and one veteran every 80 minutes.
Shameful, because with adequate funding a lot of these would be prevented. Please join those of us who advocate for change.
Lawrence Grant
Levant



Dick Altee
Come up with something new besides tax the rich and give to the poor. How about figuring out how to get the poor out of the grips of the Democrats who maintain poverty as a constituency? The Dems blame the rich as they through trillions of dollars spent on ineffectual programs keep the poor poverty stricken
Medicare, unemployment insurance and Social Security are three programs that have kept an enormous number of Americans out of poverty. The beneficiaries have paid through their tax dollars and their employer’s tax dollars for these benefits. Unless you are going to burn your Social Security and Medicare cards, I assume you will ultimately join those dependent upon our federal government.
The problem is that Medicare and SS are not sustainable as presently managed.
Actually, a small change in the income cap on which SS taxes are levied will resolve the distant funding shortfall in SS.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) extended the funding shortfall date for Medicare from 2016 to 2024 through a variety of management improvements. Increasing the Medicare tax by a modest amount or applying it to investment income will close that funding gap.
The problem is that one party wants to repeal the ACA and wants never to raise taxes. Why would the Republicans wish to sabotage the two most popular domestic programs in the history of the Republic? It is a sad commentary on the party and reminiscent of the American general, who, during the Vietnam War, said “We had to destroy that village to save it.”
Poster made no statement in opposition to those programs.
A reference to “trillions” spent on anti-poverty programs can only refer, in part, to Social Security and Medicare. There are no other anti-poverty programs on which we have spent trillions.
If you had a question why didn’t you ask poster rather than telling poster what he/she meant?
I have worked very hard all my life to make certain that I would not be reliant on SS
Please burn your card and refuse to accept those benefits, then. If not, we will call you a hypocrite and a slacker, dependent on the government for part of your income.
Shouldn’t you be filling out a liheap app or something
My very conservative Republican sister, retired (and living with Parkinson’s Disease) loves her Social Security and Medicare, both of them programs the Democrats passed and the Republicans opposed. She doesn’t think they are “ineffectual,” and they don’t keep her poverty stricken at all — it’s the opposite: they keep her out of poverty.
What planet do you live on?
Nonsense. Most people on SSI are poor and live in poverty. Government entitlement programs are never a path out of poverty.
Giving the rich more tax cuts sure doesn’t cut it, what smart ideas do you have.
I agree we need to make cuts, but we must also increase revenue, and don’t give me the trickle down is needed so the rich must have cuts, as that has been proven not to work.
The main way to increase tax revenue is to get people working.
Ok but no demand for goods or service who will hire?
Well you can’t create demand until people are hired. You have it upside down.
I was in business and I know many business people and have asked them how many people would you hire if the demand is down for their goods or services, you know the standard answer was ZERO. If you are saying businesses should hire if they don’t have demand then we shouldn’t be in the mess we are, businesses should never have let them go, just hang onto them until demand increases.
Other than some outside source to create demand what do you suggest? Don’t give me lower taxes because again we wouldn’t be in the mess because taxes are the lowest they have ever been and I’ve asked business people if lowering taxes would inspire them to hire and the answer was no. They answered they would either increase their salaries or maybe invest in something that might decrease labor.
Kill tax loopholes and municpal unions. There’s 4 trillion out there in unfunded liabilities.
Kill loopholes great idea, but the R’s won’t do it unless it is revenue neutral, remember the I Pledge Allegiance to Grover Norquest.
Killing unions is typical right wing answers, they want to do it to lower the prices they pay for labor. I think they would like it at minimum wage.
So just what is your plan to help the poor? Gut their education? Give endless tax cuts to your rich masters so they can hide it in the Cayman Islands? Dance for joy every time an American job is sent to China by companies like Bain Capital so that your masters can make more millions? Keep helping insurance company CEO”s buy more mansions as sick Americans go bankrupt? Keep giving endless tax subsidies to your oil company CEO masters so they too can buy more mansions as they already are making record profits? It was Bill Clinton who signed welfare-to-work. It is MILLIONS of retired REPUBLICANS who are deeply in love with THEIR Medicare, THEIR Medicaid, and THEIR Social Security that help keep the elderly out of poverty. And of course MILLIONS of REPUBLICANS deeply love THEIR public services of all kinds, and THEIR public schools with their public sports teams, and THEIR public parks of all sizes, and THEIR public arenas, and THEIR military (the largest social program of all), and on and on and on. TEAPUBLICANS just LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT when it suits them. So enough of your silly lies and hypocrisy. The vast majority are sick of it.
Yes you are correct. Better now?
In reality there is nothing wrong with taxing the rich and giving to the poor.
The rich have plenty and can spare much, the poor have very little and are in need of what the rich can spare.
Why don’t you and all your fellow libs give the poor absolutely everything you own. Why do you people think you are entitled to confiscate someone’s legally earned money and give it to someone else. Why do I need to share the fruits of my labor with a pregnant drug addict?
We could start by enacting a Flat Tax to pay for Bush’s War Trillion Dollar of Lies in Iraq.
Rmoney and minimum wage earners alike would pay the same amount of taxes – until that debt is paid off.
But Grover Norquist wouldn’t like this.
Nossuh
Good letters, Mr. Jordan and Mr. Altee.
I doubt thinking Americans would call the top tax rate under President Clinton (39%) or President Reagan (50%) confiscatory. Remember that these rates are marginal rates: they only apply to taxable income above a certain level. President Obama wishes to return the top rate to what it was under President Clinton; it was a rate at which the economy created millions of jobs. A couple with gross income of $400,000 likely has taxable income of $300,000 (after deductions). The extra 4% in income taxes on taxable income above $250,000 ($50,000) would be $2,000. Yet we hear some Republicans reacting as if such a return to normalcy was socialism! Sadly, most people who will vote for Romney this year hail from states that receive far more in public benefits than they pay in taxes. They should thank us Blue state Democrats for our unstinting support.
Another thing to keep in mind is that for those with *earned* income, the social security tax maxes out at $110,000 so that’s 4.2% that they don’t pay on their income that lower income folks do pay, a tax break in and of itself.
Point well taken. As of next year the 2% FICA holiday will end and the SS tax paid by employees will revert to 6.2%.
If I was to expand my business and I would be considering it if I was younger, I would evaluate the investment. I would take the risk and do the work, if I was successful I would be turning over 48.1% to the federal & state government in income tax. If I wasn’t successful I lose what I worked 60 hours a week for over the last 37 years. No it is not worth the risk. The so called wealthy are not always the same people from year to year. Some are successful and enter their ranks and others fail and fall from those ranks. With the current atmosphere about business and my age I will take the safe road. If you are a younger person good luck.
Our 2 senators joined the Republicans to block the latest jobs bill for veterans today. I have given up on them both, unless of course you want to start a war or overburden the U. S. Post Office, then you can count on Collins.
“But the Senate fell 2 votes short of the usual Senate supermajority they need to pass anything these days, despite Senators Snowe, Brown, Collins, Heller, and Murkowski voting with the Democrats. “
thanx…
Good letters all (thanks).
Robert Jordan, well said.
Incomes are not static. Any guarantee that any additional revenue would be taken in if the rates were raised? The federal revenue increased subtantially from 2003 through 2008 after tax cuts. I’m not saying it was a direct result of the cuts but pointing out that rates alone do not control revenue. Tax cuts for all from the Bush cuts, by the way, not trickle down cuts. A family of four making $40,000 paid federal tax of $1,924 in 2001. In 2010 they paid no federal income tax and received a check for $2,523 for a cut of $4,447. We have had economic stimulus plans for the middle class in 2008 & 2009. We have had the making work pay credit turned into the cut in the FICA tax cuts along with many other credits for the middle class such as education credits, energy credits, first time homeower credits etc. The federal goverment has little more revenue and is much deeper in debt to show for it.
Robert and Dick – What a bunch of hooey.
And of course you don’t say why…
He has no answer unless it is the teapublicans talking point, cut taxes on the rich.
Robert Jordan and Dick Altee great letters. We do need cuts in expenses as well as increase in income plus as Mr. Altee states demand is what creates jobs. This has been my argument for years, that the middle class is the one who most can increase demands therefore they are the ones who create jobs, not this bull of trickle down economics.
Mr. Jordan and Mr. Altee…I have a somewhat different view of how the government and budget should be structured and what would lead to a prosperous economy. Taxing the wealthy may work & trickle down economics is a farse. When Reagan was President he provided an investment tax credit…meaning if the wealthy invested in American companies and American jobs they would get a tax credit for that investment, otherwise they pay the tax. I also view the “TARP” program where billions were given to banks should have a stipulation that
if they received taxpayer money then they need to provide start-up capital to small businesses to create good paying jobs for Americans. Instead Washington is letting these banks sit on trillions of dollars. Good paying American jobs expands the tax base and increases revenue to government. So 4 things need to be done: provide an investment tax credit to wealthy investors who provide American jobs. Force banks to provide start-up capital to Americans who want to start a business. Expand the tax base with good paying jobs. Cut the size of government and end waste fraud and abuse.
Lawrence Grant go online and Google “treatment advocacy center” …many of the mentally ill either walk the streets or are incarcerated. Many times severely mentally ill patients go off their meds and either commit suicide or commit assault or even murder. They need to be in an institutional setting and receive the proper long term treatment. If you look at “treatment advocacy” preventable tragedies in the state of Maine you will see the number of murders, assaults and suicides that have been committed all because these individuals did not receive the treatment and care they need and deserve. The red flags are there as was the case in the Colorado shooting and the Virginia tech shooting. Both showed the signs…both were ignored.
You just proved you don’t have an answer.
“The answer is obvious”
Tax cuts to the wealthy didn’t work so we have to cut taxes to the wealthy.
Yeah, sorry, that doesn’t cut it.
Is that why you can’t come up with it?
My brain has been cleared so I will be able to comprehend any great words of wisdom, spit out your wonderful words of wisdom so that we unfortunate people may be enlighten.
We await to be enlighten.