We are less than two days away from the second of three Presidential debates and Romney is trying to push his budget proposals as his “trust me” claims have begun to unravel.
Chris Wallace calls Romney senior advisor Ed Gillespie* on the carpet for failing to discuss questions about where this “deficit neutral” tax cut will derive (Fox News Turns on Romney and Criticizes His Impossible Tax Cut Math).
The video speaks volumes about what the Romney/Ryan camp want you to believe is the truth of their plans for controlling a deficit that is only just starting to come under control, using Reagan’s voodoo economics as a structural basis for fixing a problem grown almost unmanageable under the Bush administration.
Don’t believe it. The telling point here is Gillespie’s* assertion that Romney is bipartisan. If it were true, I wouldn’t have a problem, but it’s not. In fact, it couldn’t be farther from the truth, as the people of Massachusetts know all too well.
See another article from the same source (PoliticsUSA.com): Romney’s 800 Vetoes Shatter His Bipartisan Myth. Notice that in almost every instance where the Massachusetts legislature overrode a veto, the overriding votes were from both sides and in some cases were unanimous.
This is not an indicator of support for Romney’s views. Rather, it is the opposite, a glaring sign that his policies were against the best interests of the people in his state.
Now consider this: At the moment, there is a super majority of GOP House and Senate members. The whole House goes up for re-election every two years, giving us the chance to correct this imbalance. There are enough Senators up for re-election that the same could be said of the Senate as well. But what happens if this imbalance is NOT corrected?
Romney has a track record of failing to work with both sides. Receiving total control of the House and Senate, and giving him the opportunity to overbalance the Supreme Court could see this country fall faster than the Roman empire.
More food for thought: Romney has said “We don’t have people that[sic] become ill, who die in their apartment because they don’t have insurance.” This is a convenient lie if the goal is to save the cost of healthcare for the highest paid corporations seeking to protect their bottom lines. Paul Krugman understands this and so does Nicholas D. Kristof, both Op-Ed columnists for the New York Times.
They’re not alone. I’ve seen the devastating results myself, with two friends who both died within months of their 50th birthdays from diseases that were preventable if only they had access to reasonable healthcare.
How much do we lose daily to help cover the costs of hospitals for those whose only recourse is the emergency room? Each person we lose to the inability to afford decent care costs us in tax income, in ever-increasing hospital and doctor bills. We all pay for these things and Mitt Romney thinks that’s just fine.
Listen very carefully to the next debate. You’ll hear the same rhetoric from Romney because he can’t say what he should: Corporation CEOs are frightened they’ll have to spend their money to help the people who work for them, in the form of healthcare, pensions or in any other way.
Think I’ve got it wrong? Sally Kohn of Fox News doesn’t. (5 reasons ObamaCare is already good for you). To understand the Affordable Care Act, visit the site: (https://web.archive.org/web/20180222201023/https://www.healthcare.gov/where-can-i-read-the-affordable-care-act/).
Is the ACA imperfect? Yes, because the GOP struck out some of the better goals of the plan, but if we choose people for the House who have the people’s best interests in mind, they can restore those goals.
The race isn’t over yet and in many places is too close to call, but the presidential part of this election is only part of the picture. Who you put in Congress will decide the next budget and will make or break our deficit, if not our entire society.
Election Day is in just a little over three weeks. Take the time now to learn what your House Representatives and Senators stand for and choose wisely.
*Edited to fix the incorrectly identified guest interviewed by Chris Wallace.