Ron Paul Issues Statement on House Cut, Cap, and Balance Act

[Matt Collins]

"This is far from the Pledge’s call for ‘substantial’ cuts”

LAKE JACKSON, Texas – Today, 2012 Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul issued a statement outlining his opposition to the House version of the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act. See statement below.


“While I applaud the spirit of the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act (CCB) and appreciate how it has shaped the debate to include a permanent solution to our deficit crisis, I could not support the legislation as it was presented today.

“Though I broke with many of my friends in Congress by voting against the House CCB plan, I was the first Presidential Candidate to sign the Cut, Cap, and Balance Pledge, as I believed in its call for ‘substantial’ spending cuts, hard caps, and a Balanced Budget Amendment.


“These difficult times require that presidential candidates be willing to lead on this issue by standing against runaway spending and promoting real changes to ensure future prosperity.


“If elected President, I will veto any spending bill that contributes to an unbalanced budget, and I will balance the budget in the first year of my term. I will also fight for and sign an iron clad Balanced Budget Amendment to the United States Constitution.


“I have never voted to raise the federal debt limit, and I have no doubt that we face financial collapse and ruin if we continue to grow our debt. We need to make major spending cuts now, in this budget, and we can no longer afford to allow more deficit spending based on promises of future cuts.

“The CCB act would add $2.4 trillion of new debt to our gargantuan $14.4 trillion debt. CCB would also only cut $111 billion from this year’s budget, allowing a deficit of nearly $1.5 trillion. This is far from the Pledge’s call for ‘substantial’ cuts. And, CCB locks us into current levels of overseas welfare, which will continue to endanger America’s security by forcing us to subsidize other wealthy nations.

“For decades, politicians have promised future restraint in exchange for hikes in the debt limit. Each time, it’s said that if we act immediately to avoid a crisis, we will give the matter proper debate at the next vote. But, time and again, politicians reveal themselves to be untrustworthy. Promises of cuts remain unfulfilled, and we soon find ourselves once more in a crisis that we are told can only be addressed by upholding the status quo yet again.

“Many of my friends have made the case that, despite this bill’s shortcomings, CCB should be supported in order to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. CCB, unfortunately, does not guarantee a Balanced Budget Amendment will ever pass. It would still have to be ratified by the States, a process that could take years and perhaps even fail.

“If we want a Balanced Budget Amendment to be the silver bullet against Big Government that many hope it will be, it must be iron clad. The CCB Balanced Budget Amendment removed the two-thirds threshold requirement to exceed spending caps, which would be too easy for politicians to violate.


“Though I voted against today’s House version of Cut, Cap, and Balance, I continue to support the Pledge’s goals, and I remain committed to working on behalf of the American people to drastically reduce spending and implement fundamental changes that will reform government and restore our nation’s prosperity.”

[harikaried]

“If elected President, I will veto any spending bill that contributes to an unbalanced budget, and I will balance the budget in the first year of my term. I will also fight for and sign an iron clad Balanced Budget Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Go go go!

[freshjiva]

Link please.

[harikaried]

http://www.businesswire.com/news/hom...-House-Cut-Cap
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Ron-Pa...16773.html?x=0

[Esoteric]

will Ron catch heat for voting "no" after he signed the pledge? We know why he did this, but MSM sure as hell won't.

[tsai3904]

will Ron catch heat for voting "no" after he signed the pledge? We know why he did this, but MSM sure as hell won't.

Ron Paul signed onto a pledge that requires "substantial" spending cuts. According to Justin Amash, the bill only cuts $82 billion in spending next year.

[eworthington]

Esoteric,

I don't think he will; most people know that Congress is usually full of it when they vote on bills like this one.

[RonPaul101.com]

Its true this current bill is an empty shell of what it was supposed to be. However its still better than McConnell's bill to hand Obama everything he wants; we know Obama's not exactly the most restrained spender out there...

I just fear in the end Americans will get the shaft, and Obama will spin it as his greatest victory for us all.

[IndianaPolitico]

Bachmann also voted against the "Cut, Cap, Balance Act." Interesting... I wonder if she saw Paul was voting against it, and decided it was the wise thing to do.

[tsai3904]

Bachmann also voted against the "Cut, Cap, Balance Act." Interesting... I wonder if she saw Paul was voting against it, and decided it was the wise thing to do.

She said she would vote for Cut Cap Balance if repealing Obamacare was a part of it.

[Agorism]

According to Justin Amash, the bill only cuts $82 billion in spending next year.

Link?

[nocompromises]

This is why people should donate.

Ron Paul is principled.

[tsai3904]

Link?

http://amash.house.gov/press-release...e-passes-house

The bill limits 2012 spending to $82 billion less than current spending levels

[blakjak]

Interesting, Rand supports it.

http://www.randpaul2010.com/2011/07/...d-balance-act/

“Tonight the U.S. House of Representatives voted with the voice of the American people in supporting the Cap, Cut and Balance Act. The gravity of our debt crisis weighs heavy on our nation’s shoulders, and I commend my colleagues in the House for passing legislation that leads us toward a solution. They have now passed the only current legislation that would both raise the debt ceiling and fix our debt problem.

“I implore my Senate colleagues to follow the same path in voting in favor of this bill, and for the President and his Administration to stop playing games with this matter and support the important goal of defeating our debt and balancing our budget."

[tsai3904]

Interesting, Rand supports it.

He supports it because he is the only person in Congress to have proposed a five year balanced budget that meets all the requirements of the BBA. He knows that if the Cut Cap Balance bill passes, Republicans will have to get behind a five year balanced budget, which will presumably be his.

[nocompromises]

He supports it because he is not principled.

If he was principled, he would not support it.

[GunnyFreedom]

Rand Paul supports it because he thinks it may help. And if passed, it probably would. Ron Paul won't support it because he won't let those buggars trick Reagan into another increase of the debt ceiling. Paul said "NO MORE DEBT" and he dam well meant it.

[tsai3904]

He supports it because he is not principled.

If he was principled, he would not support it.

What principle? To never raise the debt ceiling? Ron Paul would have voted to raise the debt ceiling if the Cut Cap Balance bill addressed his main concerns of dealing with Social Security, Medicare, and military spending. If those were all included and he voted to raise the debt ceiling, would you still consider Ron being principled?

edit: Saw this in Ron's statement today:

Finally, this bill authorizes a $2.4 trillion rise in the debt limit. I have never voted for a debt ceiling increase and I never will. Increasing the debt ceiling is an endorsement of business as usual in Washington.

But Ron also signed the Cut Cap Balance pledge that allows an increase in the debt limit if certain conditions are met.

Which is it? Would he vote to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances or not?

[eworthington]

Its true this current bill is an empty shell of what it was supposed to be. However its still better than McConnell's bill to hand Obama everything he wants; we know Obama's not exactly the most restrained spender out there...

I just fear in the end Americans will get the shaft, and Obama will spin it as his greatest victory for us all.

Agree. We will probably hear about how the revenue increases are either fair or patriotic, and he will be gloating during the campaign about how he save "promises" like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid from the big, bad conservatives. This will keep happening until 1.)Conservatives say "screw the voters; they will appreciate it later," or 2.) Enough voters figure out the effects of monetary policy on the economy and their cherished entitlements.

Good luck with either of them.