Heitkamp’s Phony Balanced Budget Schtick

Heitkamp-Energy

Democrat Senate candidate Heidi Heitkamp is on a “Balance the Budget Tour” of North Dakota right now, doing her absolute best to sound like a Republican on fiscal issues. No joke.

“Her plan includes lower corporate income tax rates and allowing companies to move profits earned overseas into this country tax-free if used for business investment and job creation,” reports the Minot Daily News. “She also wants cuts in what she calls wasteful spending. For example, trimming the federal vehicle fleet by 20 percent would save $5.6 billion. Just cutting the number of limousines would save $115 million.”

Those aren’t necessarily bad ideas, but let’s remember that Heitkamp is just nibbling around the edges of our spending problems. Heitkamp says she’s for a balanced budget, but remember that she wants to exempt 62% of our budget (Social Security, Medicare and other mandatory spending such as interest on the national debt) from any balanced budget amendment.

How can you balance a budget when you’re only willing to address 38% of it?

That’s a question I’d like to hear Heitkamp answer, because the truth is she’s not really for balancing the budget at all.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

    Heitkamp must be trolling for the cornball vote.
    http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/378088/publisher_ID/1/

    • splined

      Garrison Keillor, Al Franken, Keith Ellison.and Heidi Heitkamp. Definitely not the ND way.

      • ctomrun

        Heidi woe be gone.

  • ctomrun

    I saw on a tv ad she would not vote for a pay raise. Of course not, raises are automatic,Congress has to vote to NOT take raise. What a sacrificer she is.

  • DelawareBeachHouse

    Conrad and Dorgan used to do this shtick: We don’t support THAT Balanced Budget Amendment, we support our ALTERNATIVE Balanced Budget Amendment. Whispered: “Which doesn’t do anything and will never pass anyway. Suckers!”

  • Robert Portly

    The most simple minded dolt knows that a budget consist of two parts, expense, and income. Somehow Republican budgets ignore income. The simple explanation is that income means the rich have to pay their share of taxes. The rich are paying the lowest taxes in 80 years, and the country is in the worst shape. Port and his gang of thieves refuses to recognize that you cannot give 700 billion to the rich in the form of Bush tax cuts and have no impact on the budget. Social security is a classic case. The rich do not pay one cent of social security one any dollar they earn over 110k. If they rich did not get away with this robbery social security would be fine. Rob and his greedy rat friends like to pretend like the working class and the poor are the problem when in reality it is the free riding greed dogs at the top.

    • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

      What does Social security have to do with income taxes?

      • mikemc1970

        It’s all connected in a moonbats mind. Locked in place with a thick shellacking of bong grunge.

        • Choomer in Chief

          bong? did some mention choom? After my last nights ass kick’n I could use a toke.

      • Gern Blanston

        Its not general income unless they need it to ‘balance’ the budget.

    • InTheKnow

      Todays socialist minute with Joel H brought to you by his twin brother Hiedy Hightcamp

    • robert108

      Govt does not produce income, so it is completely dependent on confiscating the earnings of the achievers in the private sector to pay for its desires for social spending. As such, the govt needs to stay within the boundaries of what the achievers want to pay. The govt needs to cut back, not demand more.

    • Gern Blanston

      “free riding greed dogs at the top”
      The top 1% pay 39% of all taxes; the top 50% pay 97%. Who’re the free riding greed dogs?
      Still waiting to hear what percent of taxes is ‘fair'; and by how much would we reduce the deficits if we taxed at that percentage.

    • Uh, What?

      Again… Tax Reduction is not “GIVING” anyone ANYTHING!
      Do you have a job? Are you “Free riding” when you spend your own money from your job on stuff for you and your family? Or are you earning a living?

      You might be envious of the “living” earned by others and that is clouding your logic here. I think we should let lots of people (including “the rich”) keep MORE of their money and then reduce the spending across the board (including SS, Medicare, and the streamlining of social support programs). If a family has more money in their pocket (because they have jobs) then they won’t need gov’t (taxpayer) assistance.

    • Joel Highfat

      Republicans do not ignore income in their budgets, it is just that Democrats do not understand the economics of tax rfevenue. Democrats make the simplistic claim that a reduction in tax rates is a static thing; lower rates equals less tax revenue. But in fact tax cuts are in fact a dynamic thing; capital that would otherwise have gone to a bloated and ineffective government is instead inserted into the economy creating growth resulting in increased revenues. In other words, Democrats simply refuse to acknowledge that 35% of $1.000,000 is less than 30% of $1,250,000. JFK understood that back in sixties which just goes to show that Democrats do not get smarter with time.
      The point about the $110.000 limit on social security is interesting as not often do you get a Democrat to openly admit that social securtity is a redistribution of wealth scheme. Additionally, had the Democrats not spent the better part of 40 years draining the so called “trust fund” and stuffing it full of IOUs, there now would be no social security crisis. In short, the Democrats went on a 40 year credit spending spree and like spoiled brats, they now want the wealthy to pay the bill for them.
      But by and large the Democratic “tax the rich” scheme is just a smoke screen to distract from the fact that they are clueless about how to engineer a recovery. Since the begining of the recovery, household incomes have dropped dramatically and the percentage of the population with jobs has fallen nearly 2%. The Democrats moronically claim that raising taxes on the wealthy will fix all that. Next they will claim that a gunshot is how you heal a broken leg on a horse.

  • Robert Portly

    When do we talk about Mitt dodging taxes Rob?

    • mikemc1970

      When you have a shred of proof that Mitt has done anything wrong with regard to his taxes or donkey’s grow wings and fly away.

    • Gern Blanston

      When Obama’s DOJ and IRS decide there’s something wrong with his previous taxes, I suppose. Would make for a great October Suprise. I wonder why they are waitng so long…

  • Robert Portly

    As a child growing up I always remembered the bully on the playground. The amazing thing about the bully were the little whimps that were his buddies. The whimps curried the favor of the bully as the prudent thing to do. The whimps always seconded what the bully did and said in hopes that it would keep them safe. This is Rob Port in a nutshell. Instead of fighting for the working class and doing what is right, Rob sides up to the rich bullies in the Republican party, hoping there will be some trickle down for him. This kind of sad cowardly life where you are the agent of the dictator has to be depressing. When your kids look back on your life and saw that you took the easy cheap way out they will have nothing but shame for you. If the bullies do not rain money on Rob, he will even look like more of a fool when his children see he was a dupe for the rich. Who stands beside those terrible human rights offenders in Syria, and the other dictatorships throughout the world. It is sad little men like Rob trying to live in the glow of tyrants. Men like Rob who don’t have the guts to take a stand. The guys like Rob who say Yea, when the bully speaks, these little puppets of the rich are a sad shameful bunch. Rob is the guy who stayed home when the civil rights fight was raging, Rob was the kind of guy who was for the Klan if he thought the Klan would win. Rob is like Mitt, all for the war in Vietnam, but unwilling to go.

Top