Washington, DC – Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva today announced his support for a balanced budget proposal, calling it a matter of both moral and financial responsibility. The proposal would create a one percent tax increase on low-income earners, increasing incrementally to five percent for the top bracket.
“If President Obama intends to insure all Americans, it’s time he told the country how he’s going to afford it,” Grijalva said. “Health insurance is not free, and if the White House wants to pay for this with borrowed money, it should keep in mind that every dollar is precious as we try to rebuild our economy.”
Grijalva said his support for a balanced budget did not indicate a change in his overall objection to government intervention into all that is good in America. The president’s widely reported but not yet officially announced plan to force all Americans to have health insurance, when the U.S. has already been screwed by overspending by th Obama administration, is a mistake whether or not a balanced budget is passed, he said. “We have no clear agenda here, and Americans are dying to get rid of a government that has no credibility with its own people,” Grijalva said. “This is an immoral, aimless and unjust legislation, and it should end now.”
However, he added, “If the president is determined to continue this counterproductive campaign, he should be honest and transparent with American voters about how much it will cost us. President Bush spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars on Iraq and Afghanistan that went unacknowledged in standard budget calculations, and President Obama has a chance to let voters see how truly expensive our liberal policies are in comparison.”
Sen. Carl Levin, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, has proposed a similar surtax, giving supporters hope that an agreement can be reached quickly between both chambers of Congress. “A mega spending increase for health care would come as our country is fighting to improve struggling schools and create badly needed jobs,” Grijalva said. “With or without these additional government programs, we must keep our priorities and our budgets straight as we move forward.”
This is a copy of Grijalva's recent press release about spending on Afghanistan with maybe five words changed. How can our representative be in favor of cutting spending when it comes to our defense (Grijalva has argued in favor of the war on terror to constituents, but now is pulling that support?), yet not bat an eye as he votes for billions in domestic waste for "stimulus" spending that goes to unions and ACORN?