Last night, I discussed with Neil Cavuto the need to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and to heed the will of the American people. I believe that extending these tax cuts and drastically cutting federal spending are essential to reviving our economy and averting the looming fiscal crisis imposed by our country’s exploding deficits and debt.
(will not be published)(required) Or used for any reason, no permission given for any use.
“Last night, I discussed the need to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and to heed the will of the American people. I believe that extending these tax cuts and drastically cutting federal spending are essential to reviving our economy and averting the looming fiscal crisis imposed by our country’s exploding deficits and debt.”
During the decade these tax cuts were implemented and used, our economy slowly, but surely, has brought us to the situation we currently find ourselves in. Since the mid 90s until the election in 2006, one party controlled both houses of Congress, and for 8 of those years controlled the White House. So why exactly should THAT group be allowed to ‘try’ it again?
With regards to the extension of the tax cuts, that were passed using reconcilliation, tieing votes cast by the vice president and a kick back to the senator from Nebraska for his vote, there is talk of extending a tax cut to the top 2% because they represent “small business’”. The most important question here is to define the term ’small business’? It has a new meaning as it is now being presented.
Mail (will not be published)(required) No authorization for the use of my email address. Please don’t send any of your information, ever.
Your or your article states that you want to continue the tax cuts that were passed using reconcilliation and a bribe to the senator from Nebraska to pass, and which were not legally allowed by LAW.
My question to you may seem rather simple, but it is one that needs asking. Define; SMALL BUSINESS? This may seem silly to anyone reading this, but there are those making statements that allowing the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 to expire (as was passed, that legal thing), keep referencing tax cuts to the small businesses. And I would like for them to explain to everyone their definition of ’small business’. In using this definition, please be certain to explain how partnerships and S-corps (those companies like Bectel and the Koch brothers) are a part of this definition. We all need to hear the honest definition. So Scott, or whoever writes these webpage things, please be sure to inclue.
Extending the Bush tax cuts will raise the national debt by trillions of dollars. This isn’t sound conservative fiscal policy. I am against welfare abuse, but we cannot penalise the poorest and neediest Americans by continuing to cut the taxes of those who can well afford to pay more – the millionaires and billionaires. What’s your proposal to pay for the tax cuts you advocate, so the debt doesn’t grow even bigger?
Got the message in time yesterday. Saw the Cavuto piece. Excellent content and delivery! THANKS–VERN
I totally agree with you and glad you are representing us in Congress. We need to have more a Regan philophsy low taxes, smaller government and we really need a corporate income tax since ours is the hightest in the world. We need to keep the Bush Tax Cuts in permanently, to help this economy grow. I hope you are helping Jim Demint in getting more conservative candidates elected, not make believe conservatives ( like Mike Castle in Deleware).Thanks and God Bless America.
Dear Congressman Culberson,
You say all the right things in this clip. I agree 100%. However 3 years ago, I wrote to you when Republicans held the house about federal spending becoming out of hand and the interest payments on the national debt increasing at an alarming rate and I never got a response. Now I know I am but one constituent and that you are but one member of the Republican party, but when Republicans did control the house, they lost sight of what it meant to be a fiscal conservative and focused instead on social conservatism. If and when the Republicans regain control of the house, I implore you to remember and spread these ideals of fiscal conservatism and not just make it a convenient attack of the Dems.
You had mentioned before about a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. If you ask me, I think that is a great idead. After proving Congress can limit spending and act as trustees of our hard earned tax dollars, then you raise taxes for 3-5 years using the extra government income solely to pay down the national debt, followed by a reduction in taxes. As a result, you have smaller interest payments and thus create greater future cash flow for education, defense, etc. But first all of Congress must prove any new tax dollars aren’t going to be squandered on my nonsense.
Just one constituent’s thought.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Cohen