Democrats' Plan: More Taxing And SpendingGood morning and...

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

July 04, 1993

Democrats' Plan: More Taxing And Spending

Good morning and congratulations, America! The May 28 headline in The Sun announces: "House Passes Clinton Plan by 219 to 213 . . . Deficit Reduction Package Now Goes to the Senate." Deficit Reduction Plan, indeed!

We have now replaced the incredibly successful "supply-side" economic programs of the Ronald Reagan era, which spurred the longest sustained economic expansion in American history, with the failed liberal Democratic "tax and spend" policies of yesteryear.

Previous incarnations of "tax and spend" brought us misery in the form of 17-plus percent inflation and interest rates as high as 20 percent during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. Now, President Clinton, the unelected "demi-president" Hillary Rodham Clinton and their unrepentant liberal cronies in the Democratic Party in Congress have slid their hands deeper into our wallets to bring you the glories of:

* Billions in increased income taxes. The largest, most economically devastating tax increase in American history. During the campaign, Mr. Clinton promised to raise taxes on only the "rich who got richer under Reaganomics," those earning more than $200,000 per year. Instead, the increased taxes now hit everyone earning more than $20,000 per year. Anyone trying to make it in Baltimore on $20,000 per year will gladly tell you that he or she is not rich!

* Increased taxes on gasoline, Social Security benefits, medical insurance, retirement funds and possibly even a further 22 percent value-added tax on everything. These "revenue enhancements" will be used to increase spending on special interest groups. . . . * Increased Democratic "pork barrel" spending on such desperately needed infrastructure projects that will promote "long-term job growth" as: a bicycle path in Lancaster, Cal., $17.3 million; a gambling casino in West Haven, Conn., $1 million; a movie theater in Columbus, Ohio, $2.7 million; a pool in Vega Baja, Puerto Rico, $1.2 million and much, much more. . . .

Also, a reduction in funds appropriated for drug and tax law enforcement, which will be used to increase salaries in the White House by $7.4 million; an increased deficit of $916 billion over the next four years -- that's an average increase of $62 billion per year over the "dreaded" Reagan-Bush deficits; "spending cuts" (mostly composed of accounting tricks, smoke and mirrors) which won't even take effect until after the next election; $17 in new taxes for every $1 cut from spending, and the money is not even targeted at reducing the deficit, and a new "industrial policy" to help American industry recover from the devastation of the new taxes and reduced consumption caused by Clintonomics, which will wipe out American competitiveness, force businesses to lay off workers, and result in protectionism and trade wars which will obliterate the world economy, turning the U.S. into a socialistic wasteland.

Remarkably, even The Sun, which has never been known to be a conservative newspaper and has endorsed the liberal Democratic party line since before I can remember, called the "Deficit Reduction Plan" ("Democrats Out On A Limb," May 27) worthless without "real curbs on government spending," which the big-spending liberal Democrats in Congress refuse to even consider in good faith. . . . We have to do better, America. If we don't want to end up an unproductive, polluted, bureaucratically controlled wasteland like the former Communist countries, we have to get busy. We need to reduce the size of the government now. We need to reduce federal spending now. We need to return to a time when the federal government only took 9 percent of the Gross National Product (GNP) for all its dealings, leaving us with 91 percent of the GNP to do with as we saw fit, instead of taking 20 percent (and growing), leaving us with only 80 percent for our own needs (1990 figures). . . .

David C. Stark

Bel Air

The Bel Air School Board Caucus Was Not Religiously 'Packed'

This letter is in response to the May 23 article, "Caucus to Review Procedure," regarding the results of the caucus vote for Bel Air representative to the Harford County school board.

The accompanying figures analyze the composition of the caucus by groups. For all the emphasis by candidates that partnerships should be forged with local businesses to help in the education process, no delegates representing businesses were present.

Of those 12 groups present, the civic group was largest, constituting about 41 percent of the caucus body. Next was the religious group at 32 percent, followed by the education group at 26 percent.

Many schools of Harford County did not send delegates. Does this imply a lack of interest in the selection of school board nominees? No one can tell, of course, why groups were not represented. (There are under 50 . . . schools in the county. Not all were represented. There are 150 to 200 local churches and religious groups in the county. Not all were represented.)

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.