Share Joe Pitts
Joe Pitts for Congress Blog
Featured Blogs
Latest News!
Written By
Comment Count
Comment Last Three
August 29, 2011
Joe Pitts
By U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts, guest columnist
What is the difference between a good idea and a bad idea? Sometimes the difference is slim. When it comes to tax policy, something that sounds good can still be a failure.
Last week, President Obama announced he would put forward a new plan to encourage job growth at the beginning of September. Some of the details have already leaked to the press. At the top of the list are tax cuts for companies that hire new workers. Most likely this will be done by giving employers a break on the payroll tax for each new employee hired.
This has been tried before. We only have to look at past examples to see that there are better ways to provide a tax break to employers.
What is the difference between a good idea and a bad idea? Sometimes the difference is slim. When it comes to tax policy, something that sounds good can still be a failure.
Last week, President Obama announced he would put forward a new plan to encourage job growth at the beginning of September. Some of the details have already leaked to the press. At the top of the list are tax cuts for companies that hire new workers. Most likely this will be done by giving employers a break on the payroll tax for each new employee hired.
This has been tried before. We only have to look at past examples to see that there are better ways to provide a tax break to employers.
By U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts, guest columnist
What is the difference between a good idea and a bad idea? Sometimes the difference is slim. When it comes to tax policy, something that sounds good can still be a failure.
Last week, President Obama announced he would put forward a new plan to encourage job growth at the beginning of September. Some of the details have already leaked to the press. At the top of the list are tax cuts for companies that hire new workers. Most likely this will be done by giving employers a break on the payroll tax for each new employee hired.
This has been tried before. We only have to look at past examples to see that there are better ways to provide a tax break to employers.
In 2010, the President signed the HIRE Act. This bill eliminated the employer's contribution to the payroll tax when they hired someone who had been out of work longer than 60 days. If the employee stayed at least one year, the HIRE Act granted the business an additional $1,000 credit. However, this credit was only temporary. After a year, the employer was again required to pay their share of the payroll tax.
New York Times economics writer Catherine Rampell sums up the problem with the credit in this way: "The challenge, of course, is making sure that the tax credit actually induces hiring, rather than just being claimed for people who would have gotten jobs anyway."
Rampell goes on to note that economists have no clear way of figuring out what difference the tax credit made in hiring. When the Treasury Department held a conference call to discuss the program they included the CEO of a North Carolina company. He openly admitted that the tax benefit was not directly responsible for the decision to hire new employees, although he was appreciative of the extra cash.
The HIRE Act wasn't an original creation of the Obama administration. In 1977, President Carter signed similar legislation. The results were similar — little real affect on the unemployment rate.
I believe that the best way to provide a break to employers is through permanent tax reform. There are two major problems with our current tax system: uncertainty and complexity. Neither of these problems is solved with a temporary credit for new hires.
For the past few years small employers have faced the possibility of a significant increase in their tax burden. It was only late last year that Congress was able to reach an agreement to extend current tax rates for another two years. Now employers are less than a year and a half away from facing the same tax hike.
The job growth we really want to see is full-time, long-term positions. The type of job that provides assurance for families so that they can invest in a new home, purchase a new car, and settle into their community. That's the kind of job that is good for people and for the economy. When employers think about creating these type of jobs, they have to look years down the road. Only permanent change to the tax code can provide certainty to spur long-term employment.
We also need to simplify the tax code by eliminating special interest provisions. All of these special interest provisions add complexity that make it harder to comply with the tax law and make it harder for the government to figure out who is following the law. If we eliminate the hundreds of billions of dollars in special tax breaks, we could actually reduce the marginal and corporate tax rates without reducing government revenue.
The best thing about permanent reform is that it would encourage economic growth, decrease unemployment, and increase government revenue. Ronald Reagan signed the Economic Recovery Act in August of 1981, the largest tax cut in American history. In just eight years, government revenue increased from $599 billion to more than $1 trillion.
I'm glad that the President is thinking about how we can change the tax code to encourage private sector employment. He's on the right track. However, it is permanent reform — not a temporary break — that employers truly need. That's the difference between a good idea and a bad idea.
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts is a Republican who represents Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District in parts of Berks, Chester and Lancaster counties.
View Original Story Here.
What is the difference between a good idea and a bad idea? Sometimes the difference is slim. When it comes to tax policy, something that sounds good can still be a failure.
Last week, President Obama announced he would put forward a new plan to encourage job growth at the beginning of September. Some of the details have already leaked to the press. At the top of the list are tax cuts for companies that hire new workers. Most likely this will be done by giving employers a break on the payroll tax for each new employee hired.
This has been tried before. We only have to look at past examples to see that there are better ways to provide a tax break to employers.
In 2010, the President signed the HIRE Act. This bill eliminated the employer's contribution to the payroll tax when they hired someone who had been out of work longer than 60 days. If the employee stayed at least one year, the HIRE Act granted the business an additional $1,000 credit. However, this credit was only temporary. After a year, the employer was again required to pay their share of the payroll tax.
New York Times economics writer Catherine Rampell sums up the problem with the credit in this way: "The challenge, of course, is making sure that the tax credit actually induces hiring, rather than just being claimed for people who would have gotten jobs anyway."
Rampell goes on to note that economists have no clear way of figuring out what difference the tax credit made in hiring. When the Treasury Department held a conference call to discuss the program they included the CEO of a North Carolina company. He openly admitted that the tax benefit was not directly responsible for the decision to hire new employees, although he was appreciative of the extra cash.
The HIRE Act wasn't an original creation of the Obama administration. In 1977, President Carter signed similar legislation. The results were similar — little real affect on the unemployment rate.
I believe that the best way to provide a break to employers is through permanent tax reform. There are two major problems with our current tax system: uncertainty and complexity. Neither of these problems is solved with a temporary credit for new hires.
For the past few years small employers have faced the possibility of a significant increase in their tax burden. It was only late last year that Congress was able to reach an agreement to extend current tax rates for another two years. Now employers are less than a year and a half away from facing the same tax hike.
The job growth we really want to see is full-time, long-term positions. The type of job that provides assurance for families so that they can invest in a new home, purchase a new car, and settle into their community. That's the kind of job that is good for people and for the economy. When employers think about creating these type of jobs, they have to look years down the road. Only permanent change to the tax code can provide certainty to spur long-term employment.
We also need to simplify the tax code by eliminating special interest provisions. All of these special interest provisions add complexity that make it harder to comply with the tax law and make it harder for the government to figure out who is following the law. If we eliminate the hundreds of billions of dollars in special tax breaks, we could actually reduce the marginal and corporate tax rates without reducing government revenue.
The best thing about permanent reform is that it would encourage economic growth, decrease unemployment, and increase government revenue. Ronald Reagan signed the Economic Recovery Act in August of 1981, the largest tax cut in American history. In just eight years, government revenue increased from $599 billion to more than $1 trillion.
I'm glad that the President is thinking about how we can change the tax code to encourage private sector employment. He's on the right track. However, it is permanent reform — not a temporary break — that employers truly need. That's the difference between a good idea and a bad idea.
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts is a Republican who represents Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District in parts of Berks, Chester and Lancaster counties.
View Original Story Here.
-
0
July 18, 2011
Joe Pitts
There's a video making its way around the Internet trying to visualize what $1 trillion looks like. One hundred million dollars in $100 bills would fit neatly on a wooden pallet. Ten of these pallets would be $1 billion. It would take 10,000 of these pallets to make $1 trillion. You would need quite a warehouse to fit all those bills. You would need more than 14 warehouses to visualize our current national debt, $14.3 trillion.
There's a video making its way around the Internet trying to visualize what $1 trillion looks like. One hundred million dollars in $100 bills would fit neatly on a wooden pallet. Ten of these pallets would be $1 billion. It would take 10,000 of these pallets to make $1 trillion. You would need quite a warehouse to fit all those bills. You would need more than 14 warehouses to visualize our current national debt, $14.3 trillion.
[Please see bottom of this post for the video being referenced]
Just like a home mortgage, the government pays regular interest to lenders. Debt is bought and sold on open markets. While U.S. banks and citizens own the majority of this debt, foreign holdings have increased to more than 47 percent. We owe countries like China and Japan significant sums of money.
While we certainly owe a lot, we cannot forget that the United States is still the world's largest economy. Our annual Gross Domestic Product is still larger than our debt, $14.6 trillion in 2010.
The great debate in Washington now is whether our nation should take on any more debt. This year, for every dollar in spending, 42 cents will be borrowed. According to the U.S. Treasury Department, the statutory debt limit set by Congress has already been reached. Right now, Treasury is avoiding potential default by suspending investment in government funds, including employee retirement funds.
There is some debate about whether the debt limit should be raised. Some conservatives say that the Treasury Department could avoid default by prioritizing interest payments. There are some liberals who say that debt limit legislation is unconstitutional and Treasury could act without Congressional approval.
While Treasury may have some flexibility in what government accounts it will pay, we have to consider what may go unpaid without an increase in the debt limit. There may be delays in Social Security or Medicare payments. We may not have the resources to pay our troops in the field, or pay for their equipment.
There are other consequences. Each of the debt rating agencies has indicated that they would downgrade the rating for U.S. debt if the limit is not raised. Our current AAA rating means that we pay low interest rates on debt. Just a small downgrade could mean trillions more dollars in debt service over the coming years.
Some may wonder if there is a way to cut spending enough this year to avoid a debt limit increase? Under President Obama's budget, the debt for this year is projected at $1.3 trillion. The most severe spending cut plan in Congress, proposed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) cuts only $500 billion.
What do we need to do? The debt rating agencies have threatened to downgrade debt if the limit is not raised, but they have also indicated that our deficit is simply too large. We could also be downgraded if we do not take actions to restore fiscal order.
I support the Cut, Cap and Balance Plan to deal with our debt. This means we need to cut spending now. The House is already working through this year's appropriations bills. These bills will reduce non-security annual appropriations to below 2008 levels.
This year's appropriations bills are a good start, but we need to keep finding savings in the coming years. This means putting in place caps on spending that will reduce spending to sensible levels.
Finally, we need a solid long-term solution to prevent future Congresses from getting us back into the same mess. A balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution would place the same burden on the federal government as most state governments.
Voting to increase the debt limit without long-term solutions would be irresponsible. I believe that it is possible for us to reach a bipartisan agreement that would set our nation on a better course. I was a member of the House Budget Committee my first four years in office. During that time, we balanced the budget despite having government split between the political parties.
We have different philosophies of government, but we all recognize that our current debt situation is unsustainable. Now is the time to come together and recognize that we are spending too much. If we act responsibly now, we have a chance to make lasting change.
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts is a Republican who has represented Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District in parts of Berks, Chester and Lancaster counties since 1997.
Read the full article here
[Please see bottom of this post for the video being referenced]
Just like a home mortgage, the government pays regular interest to lenders. Debt is bought and sold on open markets. While U.S. banks and citizens own the majority of this debt, foreign holdings have increased to more than 47 percent. We owe countries like China and Japan significant sums of money.
While we certainly owe a lot, we cannot forget that the United States is still the world's largest economy. Our annual Gross Domestic Product is still larger than our debt, $14.6 trillion in 2010.
The great debate in Washington now is whether our nation should take on any more debt. This year, for every dollar in spending, 42 cents will be borrowed. According to the U.S. Treasury Department, the statutory debt limit set by Congress has already been reached. Right now, Treasury is avoiding potential default by suspending investment in government funds, including employee retirement funds.
There is some debate about whether the debt limit should be raised. Some conservatives say that the Treasury Department could avoid default by prioritizing interest payments. There are some liberals who say that debt limit legislation is unconstitutional and Treasury could act without Congressional approval.
While Treasury may have some flexibility in what government accounts it will pay, we have to consider what may go unpaid without an increase in the debt limit. There may be delays in Social Security or Medicare payments. We may not have the resources to pay our troops in the field, or pay for their equipment.
There are other consequences. Each of the debt rating agencies has indicated that they would downgrade the rating for U.S. debt if the limit is not raised. Our current AAA rating means that we pay low interest rates on debt. Just a small downgrade could mean trillions more dollars in debt service over the coming years.
Some may wonder if there is a way to cut spending enough this year to avoid a debt limit increase? Under President Obama's budget, the debt for this year is projected at $1.3 trillion. The most severe spending cut plan in Congress, proposed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) cuts only $500 billion.
What do we need to do? The debt rating agencies have threatened to downgrade debt if the limit is not raised, but they have also indicated that our deficit is simply too large. We could also be downgraded if we do not take actions to restore fiscal order.
I support the Cut, Cap and Balance Plan to deal with our debt. This means we need to cut spending now. The House is already working through this year's appropriations bills. These bills will reduce non-security annual appropriations to below 2008 levels.
This year's appropriations bills are a good start, but we need to keep finding savings in the coming years. This means putting in place caps on spending that will reduce spending to sensible levels.
Finally, we need a solid long-term solution to prevent future Congresses from getting us back into the same mess. A balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution would place the same burden on the federal government as most state governments.
Voting to increase the debt limit without long-term solutions would be irresponsible. I believe that it is possible for us to reach a bipartisan agreement that would set our nation on a better course. I was a member of the House Budget Committee my first four years in office. During that time, we balanced the budget despite having government split between the political parties.
We have different philosophies of government, but we all recognize that our current debt situation is unsustainable. Now is the time to come together and recognize that we are spending too much. If we act responsibly now, we have a chance to make lasting change.
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts is a Republican who has represented Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District in parts of Berks, Chester and Lancaster counties since 1997.
Read the full article here
-
0
July 08, 2011
Joe Pitts
Originally Published: Wednesday, June 29, 2011
I know that President Obama wants to see job growth as much as anyone in Washington, but a recent comment displayed a lack of economic understanding: "There's some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport, and you're using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate."
New technologies can certainly be disruptive, but if the ATM can be blamed for today's recession, then why couldn't the Model T be blamed for the Great Depression?
I know that President Obama wants to see job growth as much as anyone in Washington, but a recent comment displayed a lack of economic understanding: "There's some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport, and you're using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate."
New technologies can certainly be disruptive, but if the ATM can be blamed for today's recession, then why couldn't the Model T be blamed for the Great Depression?
I know that President Obama wants to see job growth as much as anyone in Washington, but a recent comment displayed a lack of economic understanding: "There's some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport, and you're using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate."
New technologies can certainly be disruptive, but if the ATM can be blamed for today's recession, then why couldn't the Model T be blamed for the Great Depression?
Most new technologies increase efficiency in one way or another. The ATM was no exception, but the ATM did not actually replace bank tellers. In fact, the number of bank teller jobs in the U.S. has increased in the last ten years. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 607,960 bank tellers in the U.S. in 2007. In 1985, there were only 485,000 tellers. From 1985 to 2007, the number of ATMs increased from around 60,000 to nearly 400,000.
The ATM is not an illustration of how automation takes away jobs. In fact, it almost perfectly illustrates how technological advancement makes our economy grow. U.S. companies like Diebold and NCR manufacture ATMs in the U.S., employing thousands of workers. The networking and maintenance of ATM machines also create jobs in the banking industry.
At the same time this technology directly creates jobs, it makes every bank-using American more efficient. Wait times at banks are dramatically decreased and consumers have access to their money when they want it, not when the bank is open.
The President's words this week concern me greatly. We are facing 9.1 percent unemployment. The average time the unemployed spend looking for a job has risen above 40 weeks.
Many economists have downgraded their predictions for this year's economic growth. Our number one priority in Washington needs to be job growth.
But if the President does not understand how jobs are created, then Washington is going to continue to make life hard for job creators. This week, the President's chief of staff, Bill Daley, met with hundreds of manufacturing executives. According to the Washington Post, one executive stood up and said that the government, "Throws sand into the gears of progress."
Daley had to admit that the number of rules and regulations "that come out of agencies is overwhelming." He tried to point out that the Administration is working to identify rules for elimination. The problem, however, isn't just decades old rules that don't make much sense. New rules in pipeline will do incredible damage to American industries large and small.
The President's chief of staff is a former executive himself, but there is little that understanding and empathy can do when the bureaucratic machinery of Washington is spreading red tape across the country.
In the House of Representatives this year, we have passed nine major bills to help job growth. Two of these bills try to hold back a specific job-destroying regulation that the Obama administration is working on right now. Another one of these bills directs every Congressional committee to identify ways that Washington is holding back job growth and introduce bills to correct what is wrong with the bureaucracy.
Only one of these bills has been signed by the President: the legislation eliminating the burdensome 1099 tax mandate created in last year's health care law. Frankly, we need to do more than just stop government from taking actions that hurt employment. While the House has passed legislation to reduce energy prices, no similar bill has been considered by the Senate or proposed by the President.
The Small Business Optimism Index monitored by the National Federation of Independent Business has fallen for three straight months. When Americans are confident, they start new and innovative businesses. Washington is making it harder for job creators to come up with the next ATM or to manufacture it here in the U.S. We need leadership that recognizes that innovation is what drives the American economy, not what drives it into a ditch.
New technologies can certainly be disruptive, but if the ATM can be blamed for today's recession, then why couldn't the Model T be blamed for the Great Depression?
Most new technologies increase efficiency in one way or another. The ATM was no exception, but the ATM did not actually replace bank tellers. In fact, the number of bank teller jobs in the U.S. has increased in the last ten years. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 607,960 bank tellers in the U.S. in 2007. In 1985, there were only 485,000 tellers. From 1985 to 2007, the number of ATMs increased from around 60,000 to nearly 400,000.
The ATM is not an illustration of how automation takes away jobs. In fact, it almost perfectly illustrates how technological advancement makes our economy grow. U.S. companies like Diebold and NCR manufacture ATMs in the U.S., employing thousands of workers. The networking and maintenance of ATM machines also create jobs in the banking industry.
At the same time this technology directly creates jobs, it makes every bank-using American more efficient. Wait times at banks are dramatically decreased and consumers have access to their money when they want it, not when the bank is open.
The President's words this week concern me greatly. We are facing 9.1 percent unemployment. The average time the unemployed spend looking for a job has risen above 40 weeks.
Many economists have downgraded their predictions for this year's economic growth. Our number one priority in Washington needs to be job growth.
But if the President does not understand how jobs are created, then Washington is going to continue to make life hard for job creators. This week, the President's chief of staff, Bill Daley, met with hundreds of manufacturing executives. According to the Washington Post, one executive stood up and said that the government, "Throws sand into the gears of progress."
Daley had to admit that the number of rules and regulations "that come out of agencies is overwhelming." He tried to point out that the Administration is working to identify rules for elimination. The problem, however, isn't just decades old rules that don't make much sense. New rules in pipeline will do incredible damage to American industries large and small.
The President's chief of staff is a former executive himself, but there is little that understanding and empathy can do when the bureaucratic machinery of Washington is spreading red tape across the country.
In the House of Representatives this year, we have passed nine major bills to help job growth. Two of these bills try to hold back a specific job-destroying regulation that the Obama administration is working on right now. Another one of these bills directs every Congressional committee to identify ways that Washington is holding back job growth and introduce bills to correct what is wrong with the bureaucracy.
Only one of these bills has been signed by the President: the legislation eliminating the burdensome 1099 tax mandate created in last year's health care law. Frankly, we need to do more than just stop government from taking actions that hurt employment. While the House has passed legislation to reduce energy prices, no similar bill has been considered by the Senate or proposed by the President.
The Small Business Optimism Index monitored by the National Federation of Independent Business has fallen for three straight months. When Americans are confident, they start new and innovative businesses. Washington is making it harder for job creators to come up with the next ATM or to manufacture it here in the U.S. We need leadership that recognizes that innovation is what drives the American economy, not what drives it into a ditch.
-
0
June 09, 2011
Joe Pitts
I’m concerned that our number-one national priority, job creation, is being ignored in Washington. Washington is too distracted by scandals, partisanship, and other things that simply aren’t as important. America is still faced with an unemployment crisis, and Washington needs to stay focused on it.
I’m concerned that our number-one national priority, job creation, is being ignored in Washington. Washington is too distracted by scandals, partisanship, and other things that simply aren’t as important. America is still faced with an unemployment crisis, and Washington needs to stay focused on it.
Government statistics tell us Pennsylvania’s unemployment rate is 7.5 percent, more than a point lower than it was a year ago. That’s not the number I’m most interested in. The number that matters to me is 477,113. That’s the number of Pennsylvanians who don’t have jobs. Almost half a million of our neighbors can’t find work.
But even that number is misleading. It doesn’t count people who have settled for low-paying or part-time jobs. It doesn’t count those who have given up looking. Pennsylvania’s “effective unemployment rate,” which counts these people, is far higher than 7.5 percent: it’s 14.4 percent. That means nearly a million Pennsylvanians are out of work or have taken low-paying jobs out of desperation.
A key reason voters gave Republicans a second chance last year was America’s belief that the trillion-dollar “stimulus” and the multi-billion-dollar bailouts were little more than expensive failures. I and many others pushed hard for better approach.
In January of 2009, and again a year ago, I proposed a path to job creation based on six core principles. If we did each of these things, businesses could quickly begin to invest in new jobs:
Congress cannot force employers to hire. But Washington can create an environment that encourages businesses to hire. Amazingly, Washington has not only failed to act in these areas, it has actually done the opposite of what is necessary to spur job creation. Here’s an update on each of the six action items.
Action Item 1: Helping Right Now
While the best solution to unemployment is a good job, I’ve done my part to help those who need assistance in the meantime. I voted repeatedly to extend unemployment benefits throughout the recession, but I also insisted that they not be paid for with more government IOUs.
Status: When Pennsylvania’s unemployment rate dropped below 8.5 percent, we no longer qualified for these extensions. That makes it even more important that we act quickly to create jobs for people whose benefits have run out.
Action Item 2: More and Cheaper Energy
Every part of our economy runs on energy: from driving to work to turning on the lights when you get there. Manufacturing, a key driver of middle-class job creation, is particularly dependent on energy. When energy sources like electricity, diesel, gasoline, and natural gas are expensive, companies have less money to spend on people. It is essential that we make energy as inexpensive as possible, without endangering the environment.
Status: Continued opposition to domestic energy production is hurting our economy. The Administration’s policy of keeping the dollar weak has also led to high gas prices. The House of Representatives has passed several bills to increase domestic energy production from all sources. If passed by the Senate and signed by the President, we would lower energy prices for everyone and lessen our dependence on imported fossil fuels from unstable parts of the world.
Action Item 3: Low and Stable Taxes
Jobs don’t come from the government. Jobs come from successful business that grow, take risks, and hire. For years, our tax code has been a major disincentive to hiring. Our corporate tax rate is one of the highest in the world (though loopholes do allow some businesses to avoid paying their share.) But only half of American businesses pay corporate taxes. The other half pay taxes the way you and I do: using a 1040 form. These are usually the small, entrepreneurial businesses that are the real engines of our economy. Seesawing tax rates and frequent talk of raising taxes on the “rich” (who are often actually just struggling businesses) has made it impossible for employers to plan for the future and hire.
Status: A month after the election last year, a bipartisan agreement was reached to extend the current tax rates for two years. This averted what would have been the largest tax increase in history. While job creators still can’t plan for the long term, they at least know what to expect for the next two years.
Action Item 4: Open New Markets
New markets for American goods would very quickly create tens of thousands of new jobs. Three already-negotiated trade agreements have been left unratified by Congress for almost four years. South Korea, Panama, and Colombia are just three of the countries that are eager to buy more of our goods, but they can’t until Congress acts. That has cost jobs.
Status: While these agreements have been languishing, our competitors have been moving ahead. The European Union ratified its own trade agreement with South Korea on February 17. If we don’t act quickly, Europe, China, and others will beat us to the punch, leaving American employers at a disadvantage. That will cost jobs. Four years of inaction has already cost 250,000 jobs, according to Obama Administration numbers.
Action Item 5: Balance the Budget
Our government is more than $14 trillion in debt. About 40 cents of every dollar our government spends is borrowed. We have over $100 trillion in binding commitments we have no plan to pay for. This is extremely dangerous to our current and future prosperity. It has to stop. In a sign of how serious this is, S&P downgraded its outlook on America’s credit rating to “negative” in April, expressing pessimism that we will get our fiscal house in order. Moody’s Investor Services warned on June 2 that its rating will “depend on the outcome of the negotiations on deficit reduction.”
Status: Politics and demagoguery are the primary reasons for inaction. The truth is, if we raised the top tax bracket to 100 percent and completely shut down the Department of Defense, the budget still would not be balanced. We must save, strengthen, and fix Medicare and other entitlement programs to solve this problem. Until both parties can work together on this, progress won’t happen.
Action Item 6: Wise and Consistent Regulation
“Cap and trade,” increased government control of healthcare, and many of the other initiatives from the last Congress promised major disruptions to America’s regulatory structure. Businesses weren’t only waiting to find out what would happen to their taxes—they were also waiting to find out what new regulations were going to cost them. In the meantime, they didn’t hire. Regardless of the merits of these proposals, the timing of them was terrible.
Status: The President’s healthcare plan is now law, but that has not ended the uncertainty. The Department of Health and Human Services is working overtime to write sweeping regulations that will affect nearly every employer in America. At the same time, the law’s continued unpopularity and a strong challenge to its constitutionality make it uncertain whether the law will survive at all.
Looking Ahead
Despite Washington’s errors, the economy seems to be improving slowly. I believe there is good reason for optimism as we look ahead. Long-term, the American people won’t stand for a government that ignores our nation’s biggest challenges. But we must deal with the situation we are faced with now, and that means doing everything we can to make sure every American—and every Pennsylvanian—who wants a job can find one. This is my top priority.
Government statistics tell us Pennsylvania’s unemployment rate is 7.5 percent, more than a point lower than it was a year ago. That’s not the number I’m most interested in. The number that matters to me is 477,113. That’s the number of Pennsylvanians who don’t have jobs. Almost half a million of our neighbors can’t find work.
But even that number is misleading. It doesn’t count people who have settled for low-paying or part-time jobs. It doesn’t count those who have given up looking. Pennsylvania’s “effective unemployment rate,” which counts these people, is far higher than 7.5 percent: it’s 14.4 percent. That means nearly a million Pennsylvanians are out of work or have taken low-paying jobs out of desperation.
A key reason voters gave Republicans a second chance last year was America’s belief that the trillion-dollar “stimulus” and the multi-billion-dollar bailouts were little more than expensive failures. I and many others pushed hard for better approach.
In January of 2009, and again a year ago, I proposed a path to job creation based on six core principles. If we did each of these things, businesses could quickly begin to invest in new jobs:
1. Help People Right Away
2. Lower Energy Prices
3. Low and Stable Taxes
4. New Markets for American Goods
5. Balance the Budget
6. Wise and Consistent Regulation
2. Lower Energy Prices
3. Low and Stable Taxes
4. New Markets for American Goods
5. Balance the Budget
6. Wise and Consistent Regulation
Congress cannot force employers to hire. But Washington can create an environment that encourages businesses to hire. Amazingly, Washington has not only failed to act in these areas, it has actually done the opposite of what is necessary to spur job creation. Here’s an update on each of the six action items.
Action Item 1: Helping Right Now
While the best solution to unemployment is a good job, I’ve done my part to help those who need assistance in the meantime. I voted repeatedly to extend unemployment benefits throughout the recession, but I also insisted that they not be paid for with more government IOUs.
Status: When Pennsylvania’s unemployment rate dropped below 8.5 percent, we no longer qualified for these extensions. That makes it even more important that we act quickly to create jobs for people whose benefits have run out.
Action Item 2: More and Cheaper Energy
Every part of our economy runs on energy: from driving to work to turning on the lights when you get there. Manufacturing, a key driver of middle-class job creation, is particularly dependent on energy. When energy sources like electricity, diesel, gasoline, and natural gas are expensive, companies have less money to spend on people. It is essential that we make energy as inexpensive as possible, without endangering the environment.
Status: Continued opposition to domestic energy production is hurting our economy. The Administration’s policy of keeping the dollar weak has also led to high gas prices. The House of Representatives has passed several bills to increase domestic energy production from all sources. If passed by the Senate and signed by the President, we would lower energy prices for everyone and lessen our dependence on imported fossil fuels from unstable parts of the world.
Action Item 3: Low and Stable Taxes
Jobs don’t come from the government. Jobs come from successful business that grow, take risks, and hire. For years, our tax code has been a major disincentive to hiring. Our corporate tax rate is one of the highest in the world (though loopholes do allow some businesses to avoid paying their share.) But only half of American businesses pay corporate taxes. The other half pay taxes the way you and I do: using a 1040 form. These are usually the small, entrepreneurial businesses that are the real engines of our economy. Seesawing tax rates and frequent talk of raising taxes on the “rich” (who are often actually just struggling businesses) has made it impossible for employers to plan for the future and hire.
Status: A month after the election last year, a bipartisan agreement was reached to extend the current tax rates for two years. This averted what would have been the largest tax increase in history. While job creators still can’t plan for the long term, they at least know what to expect for the next two years.
Action Item 4: Open New Markets
New markets for American goods would very quickly create tens of thousands of new jobs. Three already-negotiated trade agreements have been left unratified by Congress for almost four years. South Korea, Panama, and Colombia are just three of the countries that are eager to buy more of our goods, but they can’t until Congress acts. That has cost jobs.
Status: While these agreements have been languishing, our competitors have been moving ahead. The European Union ratified its own trade agreement with South Korea on February 17. If we don’t act quickly, Europe, China, and others will beat us to the punch, leaving American employers at a disadvantage. That will cost jobs. Four years of inaction has already cost 250,000 jobs, according to Obama Administration numbers.
Action Item 5: Balance the Budget
Our government is more than $14 trillion in debt. About 40 cents of every dollar our government spends is borrowed. We have over $100 trillion in binding commitments we have no plan to pay for. This is extremely dangerous to our current and future prosperity. It has to stop. In a sign of how serious this is, S&P downgraded its outlook on America’s credit rating to “negative” in April, expressing pessimism that we will get our fiscal house in order. Moody’s Investor Services warned on June 2 that its rating will “depend on the outcome of the negotiations on deficit reduction.”
Status: Politics and demagoguery are the primary reasons for inaction. The truth is, if we raised the top tax bracket to 100 percent and completely shut down the Department of Defense, the budget still would not be balanced. We must save, strengthen, and fix Medicare and other entitlement programs to solve this problem. Until both parties can work together on this, progress won’t happen.
Action Item 6: Wise and Consistent Regulation
“Cap and trade,” increased government control of healthcare, and many of the other initiatives from the last Congress promised major disruptions to America’s regulatory structure. Businesses weren’t only waiting to find out what would happen to their taxes—they were also waiting to find out what new regulations were going to cost them. In the meantime, they didn’t hire. Regardless of the merits of these proposals, the timing of them was terrible.
Status: The President’s healthcare plan is now law, but that has not ended the uncertainty. The Department of Health and Human Services is working overtime to write sweeping regulations that will affect nearly every employer in America. At the same time, the law’s continued unpopularity and a strong challenge to its constitutionality make it uncertain whether the law will survive at all.
Looking Ahead
Despite Washington’s errors, the economy seems to be improving slowly. I believe there is good reason for optimism as we look ahead. Long-term, the American people won’t stand for a government that ignores our nation’s biggest challenges. But we must deal with the situation we are faced with now, and that means doing everything we can to make sure every American—and every Pennsylvanian—who wants a job can find one. This is my top priority.
-
0
February 25, 2011
Joe Pitts
The Land Trust Alliance honored Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16) for his work on behalf of farmland and open space conservation. Rep. Pitts co-chairs the Land Conservation Caucus and pushed for the Conservation Easement Incentive Act in the 112th Congress.
Washington (2/16/11)--Last night at a reception on Capitol Hill, the Land Trust Alliance honored Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16) for his work on behalf of farmland and open space conservation. Rep. Pitts co-chairs the Land Conservation Caucus and supported the Conservation Easement Incentive Act in the 112th Congress.
The Act was included in the tax relief package signed by President Obama in December. The Land Trust Alliance estimates that the credit has increased conservation easement donations by a third—to over one million acres a year.
The Land Conservation Caucus seeks to educate Members of Congress and their staffs about issues of importance to the conservation and preservation of open space and farmland. Along with Rep. Pitts, the Land Conservation Caucus is co-chaired by Republican Rep. Jim Gerlach (PA-06), and Democrats Rep. Martin Heinrich (NM-01) and Rep. Christopher Murphy (CT-05).
Rep. Pitts’ statement follows:
“Our home in southeastern Pennsylvania has some of the richest and most beautiful farmland and open space in the nation. Protecting these lands from development is about protecting the quality of life in our community.
“For years, I’ve worked with local conservation groups to find innovative ways to encourage easement donation. It’s an honor to be recognized for this ongoing work. I’m going to continue to work in a bipartisan way to make credits for conservation easement donation a permanent part of the tax code. In my district, this credit has helped preserve 11,000 acres.”
The Act was included in the tax relief package signed by President Obama in December. The Land Trust Alliance estimates that the credit has increased conservation easement donations by a third—to over one million acres a year.
The Land Conservation Caucus seeks to educate Members of Congress and their staffs about issues of importance to the conservation and preservation of open space and farmland. Along with Rep. Pitts, the Land Conservation Caucus is co-chaired by Republican Rep. Jim Gerlach (PA-06), and Democrats Rep. Martin Heinrich (NM-01) and Rep. Christopher Murphy (CT-05).
Rep. Pitts’ statement follows:
“Our home in southeastern Pennsylvania has some of the richest and most beautiful farmland and open space in the nation. Protecting these lands from development is about protecting the quality of life in our community.
“For years, I’ve worked with local conservation groups to find innovative ways to encourage easement donation. It’s an honor to be recognized for this ongoing work. I’m going to continue to work in a bipartisan way to make credits for conservation easement donation a permanent part of the tax code. In my district, this credit has helped preserve 11,000 acres.”
-
0
February 18, 2011
Joe Pitts
For decades, the United States has been the world leader in medical innovation. Individuals come from around the world to receive the best and latest care. What was experimental just a few years ago becomes common medical practice saving and improving American lives. Unfortunately, we are quickly losing this lead.
For decades, the United States has been the world leader in medical innovation. Individuals come from around the world to receive the best and latest care. What was experimental just a few years ago becomes common medical practice saving and improving American lives.
Unfortunately, we are quickly losing this lead. There may soon come a day when wealthy Americans jet off to Europe or the Caribbean to get the latest surgeries while poor and middle class Americans suffer as bureaucracy delays life-saving medical devices.
In the United States today we have a vibrant medical device industry. More than 420,000 Americans work in this industry. In my home state of Pennsylvania, there are 22,000 workers.
These are good, high-paying jobs with average compensation in the industry 40 percent above the national earnings average. The field employs doctors and engineers, but also Americans with undergraduate and high school degrees. These companies compete on a global level and their products are shipped around the world.
When most Americans think of foreign competition, Chinese factories and Indian call centers are what come to mind. But in the medical device field, most of the foreign competitors are based in the European Union.
U.S. companies must have their devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has two responsibilities: protecting public health by ensuring safety and helping to speed innovations that make medicines more effective, safer, and more affordable.
Unfortunately, the FDA has become risk-averse in recent years. Approval times have crept up, nearly doubling the time required in some cases. This means that European patients are receiving access to devices two years before American patients. In some cases, devices approved in Europe have never been legal in the U.S.
Certainly, there may be disagreement between governments about the safety of devices. We don’t want our regulatory process to be a race to the bottom where we must beat the Europeans to the market regardless of safety. But according to recent studies, medical devices marketed through the shorter and more transparent European regulatory processes are statistically as safe as FDA- approved devices and have comparable patient outcomes.
The experience of NuVasive, a San Diego-based company, demonstrates how American companies are being hurt by FDA inefficiency. In the last two years, NuVasive estimates that FDA approval times have led to revenue losses of $70 million, increased operating expenses, and the loss of hundreds of new jobs.
In a letter to the Energy and Commerce Committee NuVasive describes their difficulties: “It is becoming far more efficient and faster to innovate outside the USA in such places as Europe. Non-USA systems have more timely, predictable and transparent processes. We have seen USA delays of three to 70 months which has forced NuVasive to rethink longer term strategies around where to place research & development jobs and even whether or not to invest in innovation of new products.”
Recently, venture capitalists have stated that they are far more likely to put money into European medical device companies. With capital flowing out of the U.S., it’s only a matter of time before we see a corresponding “brain drain.”
This week, the House of Representatives issued direction to the various committees to investigate federal government rules affect on jobs and the economy. The Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee has oversight over the FDA and, as Chairman, I want us to explore why Europe has gained such a significant advantage over American companies.
Medical device industry jobs are great jobs. With unemployment already high, we need this industry to grow and flourish, not be shipped overseas. We cannot let our lead in medical innovation be destroyed by poorly constructed bureaucracy. It’s not just jobs that are at stake. There are suffering Americans waiting for cures.
Bill Walton, the great college and professional basketball player, suffered such incredible back pain that at one point he even contemplated ending his life. This pain—so great that it prevented him from doing everyday tasks like tying his own shoes—was radically reduced by a NuVasive device. Life-saving cures are possible, the question is whether these discoveries will be made here in the U.S. or on foreign shores.
Unfortunately, we are quickly losing this lead. There may soon come a day when wealthy Americans jet off to Europe or the Caribbean to get the latest surgeries while poor and middle class Americans suffer as bureaucracy delays life-saving medical devices.
In the United States today we have a vibrant medical device industry. More than 420,000 Americans work in this industry. In my home state of Pennsylvania, there are 22,000 workers.
These are good, high-paying jobs with average compensation in the industry 40 percent above the national earnings average. The field employs doctors and engineers, but also Americans with undergraduate and high school degrees. These companies compete on a global level and their products are shipped around the world.
When most Americans think of foreign competition, Chinese factories and Indian call centers are what come to mind. But in the medical device field, most of the foreign competitors are based in the European Union.
U.S. companies must have their devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has two responsibilities: protecting public health by ensuring safety and helping to speed innovations that make medicines more effective, safer, and more affordable.
Unfortunately, the FDA has become risk-averse in recent years. Approval times have crept up, nearly doubling the time required in some cases. This means that European patients are receiving access to devices two years before American patients. In some cases, devices approved in Europe have never been legal in the U.S.
Certainly, there may be disagreement between governments about the safety of devices. We don’t want our regulatory process to be a race to the bottom where we must beat the Europeans to the market regardless of safety. But according to recent studies, medical devices marketed through the shorter and more transparent European regulatory processes are statistically as safe as FDA- approved devices and have comparable patient outcomes.
The experience of NuVasive, a San Diego-based company, demonstrates how American companies are being hurt by FDA inefficiency. In the last two years, NuVasive estimates that FDA approval times have led to revenue losses of $70 million, increased operating expenses, and the loss of hundreds of new jobs.
In a letter to the Energy and Commerce Committee NuVasive describes their difficulties: “It is becoming far more efficient and faster to innovate outside the USA in such places as Europe. Non-USA systems have more timely, predictable and transparent processes. We have seen USA delays of three to 70 months which has forced NuVasive to rethink longer term strategies around where to place research & development jobs and even whether or not to invest in innovation of new products.”
Recently, venture capitalists have stated that they are far more likely to put money into European medical device companies. With capital flowing out of the U.S., it’s only a matter of time before we see a corresponding “brain drain.”
This week, the House of Representatives issued direction to the various committees to investigate federal government rules affect on jobs and the economy. The Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee has oversight over the FDA and, as Chairman, I want us to explore why Europe has gained such a significant advantage over American companies.
Medical device industry jobs are great jobs. With unemployment already high, we need this industry to grow and flourish, not be shipped overseas. We cannot let our lead in medical innovation be destroyed by poorly constructed bureaucracy. It’s not just jobs that are at stake. There are suffering Americans waiting for cures.
Bill Walton, the great college and professional basketball player, suffered such incredible back pain that at one point he even contemplated ending his life. This pain—so great that it prevented him from doing everyday tasks like tying his own shoes—was radically reduced by a NuVasive device. Life-saving cures are possible, the question is whether these discoveries will be made here in the U.S. or on foreign shores.
-
0
February 04, 2011
Joe Pitts
In the aftermath of Tucson, my congressional colleagues and I have been reflecting on the potential dangers of public life and the importance of accessibility to a functioning democracy. The fact is, persons with mental disabilities are occasionally motivated by their illness to contact and even confront members of Congress. From time to time, my own offices have dealt with such individuals.
In the aftermath of Tucson, my congressional colleagues and I have been reflecting on the potential dangers of public life and the importance of accessibility to a functioning democracy. The fact is, persons with mental disabilities are occasionally motivated by their illness to contact and even confront members of Congress. From time to time, my own offices have dealt with such individuals.
These incidents were always sad, difficult to deal with and potentially dangerous. None of them, however, appeared to be motivated by talk radio or the political debate of the day. I do not know what motivated Jared Loughner to do what he did when he shot my colleague from Arizona. However, I strongly suspect it has far more to do with untreated mental illness than anything he may have heard on the radio.
I disagree with those (left and right) who have suggested that Rachel Maddow or Rush Limbaugh may somehow be to blame for what happened. But I agree quite strongly with President Obama that this is a good time for us to “make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.”
Coarse political rhetoric is nothing new. In the 1884 presidential election, Democrat Grover Cleveland accused Republican James Blaine of corruption with the slogan “Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, The Continental Liar from the State of Maine.” In turn, Blaine spread rumors that Cleveland had fathered an illegitimate child with the slogan “Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa, Gone to the White House, Ha! Ha! Ha!”
While it is easy to brush the coarsest of political rhetoric off as “par for the course,” the truth is that our democracy is better than that. In fact, the essential element of our democracy is our ability to work together regardless of party affiliation.
Historians often point to our fourth presidential election as the most important early test of our Constitution. Why? Because in 1801 power was peacefully transferred from one party to another willingly and without violence. John Adams (a Federalist) relinquished power to Thomas Jefferson (a Democratic-Republican), setting a foundation upon which our democracy still rests.
Adams and Jefferson, who had once co-authored the Declaration of Independence, had since become bitter political opponents. Yet his country and the principles of civility mattered more to John Adams than power or victory. Later, in retirement, Adams and Jefferson carried on a robust correspondence that lasted until they both died on the same day: July 4, 1826.
The Founders set many fine examples for those of us who have followed. This one is among the very best.
We Americans have always disagreed over important issues and we always will. The issues we face are too important for us not to feel strongly about them. We must remember, though, that the way we conduct ourselves in debate will either strengthen or weaken our democracy.
The world is full of unavoidable dangers, from hurricanes to terrorism to the violence of the crazed gunman. As long as we cling to the fundamental decency upon which democracy depends, every one of these dangers can be overcome.
In Tucson, President Obama said, “We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another, that’s entirely up to us.”
I couldn’t agree more.
These incidents were always sad, difficult to deal with and potentially dangerous. None of them, however, appeared to be motivated by talk radio or the political debate of the day. I do not know what motivated Jared Loughner to do what he did when he shot my colleague from Arizona. However, I strongly suspect it has far more to do with untreated mental illness than anything he may have heard on the radio.
I disagree with those (left and right) who have suggested that Rachel Maddow or Rush Limbaugh may somehow be to blame for what happened. But I agree quite strongly with President Obama that this is a good time for us to “make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.”
Coarse political rhetoric is nothing new. In the 1884 presidential election, Democrat Grover Cleveland accused Republican James Blaine of corruption with the slogan “Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, The Continental Liar from the State of Maine.” In turn, Blaine spread rumors that Cleveland had fathered an illegitimate child with the slogan “Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa, Gone to the White House, Ha! Ha! Ha!”
While it is easy to brush the coarsest of political rhetoric off as “par for the course,” the truth is that our democracy is better than that. In fact, the essential element of our democracy is our ability to work together regardless of party affiliation.
Historians often point to our fourth presidential election as the most important early test of our Constitution. Why? Because in 1801 power was peacefully transferred from one party to another willingly and without violence. John Adams (a Federalist) relinquished power to Thomas Jefferson (a Democratic-Republican), setting a foundation upon which our democracy still rests.
Adams and Jefferson, who had once co-authored the Declaration of Independence, had since become bitter political opponents. Yet his country and the principles of civility mattered more to John Adams than power or victory. Later, in retirement, Adams and Jefferson carried on a robust correspondence that lasted until they both died on the same day: July 4, 1826.
The Founders set many fine examples for those of us who have followed. This one is among the very best.
We Americans have always disagreed over important issues and we always will. The issues we face are too important for us not to feel strongly about them. We must remember, though, that the way we conduct ourselves in debate will either strengthen or weaken our democracy.
The world is full of unavoidable dangers, from hurricanes to terrorism to the violence of the crazed gunman. As long as we cling to the fundamental decency upon which democracy depends, every one of these dangers can be overcome.
In Tucson, President Obama said, “We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another, that’s entirely up to us.”
I couldn’t agree more.
-
0
November 12, 2010
Joe Pitts
"Many thanks for all of your hard work and votes in the recent campaign. your efforts were very much appreciated!"
-Joe
-Joe
-
0
November 03, 2010
Joe Pitts
Congressman Pitts won again in a landslide, winning 65.4 percent of the vote. He told one newspaper, "I think the message from the voters is, No. 1, they're giving Republicans a second chance and we'd better get it right this time. And they're reacting against the over-reaching of the Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Washington with these massive new programs and spending. They sent a clear message."
Congressman Pitts won again in a landslide, winning 65.4 percent of the vote. He told one newspaper, "I think the message from the voters is, No. 1, they're giving Republicans a second chance and we'd better get it right this time. And they're reacting against the over-reaching of the Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Washington with these massive new programs and spending. They sent a clear message."
-
0
October 30, 2010
Joe Pitts
Still not sure who to vote for? Take a look at this comparison of Joe Pitts and Lois Herr on the issues. It is fully documented so you can check the facts for yourself.
Still not sure who to vote for? Take a look at this comparison of Joe Pitts and Lois Herr on the issues. It is fully documented so you can check the facts for yourself.
-
0
October 19, 2010
Joe Pitts
Please take a moment to read a copy of a letter by Ginny Pitts
To download and read a printable copy of this letter, please Click Here
(Full Text provided in the full blog post)
To download and read a printable copy of this letter, please Click Here
(Full Text provided in the full blog post)
Please take a moment to read a copy of a letter by Ginny Pitts
Dear Friend,
My husband, Joe Pitts, is running for Congress again this year.
I’m writing to you today to ask you to support him.
When we were first married, Joe and I were both school teachers.
In those days, teachers didn’t make much money. When we had our first child I wanted to stay home with her, but we simply couldn’t make ends meet without my salary. So Joe joined the Air Force. It was a way for him to serve his country and provide for his
family at the same time. It was a hard decision, but it led to a
career in public service we’re both very proud of.
After flying 116 combat missions in Vietnam, Joe returned home
and returned to teaching—this time at Great Valley High School.
Just a few years later he ran for the state legislature, beating the
Republican Party “machine” in a close election. Now he is in
Congress, where he continues to work in an independent and
bipartisan way. Not only does he work with Democrats on many
issues, but he also stands up to his own party leaders and tells
them when they’re wrong.
In his career, Joe has been away a lot—in Southeast Asia,
Harrisburg, and Washington. But he has always found a way to
be there for me and our kids. He’s a good listener. When they
were little, Joe would call the kids every night he was away and
talk to them individually about their day. Every month, he took
one of them out for breakfast, giving them the individual attention
every child craves from their father.
But Joe hasn’t kept that kind of care and attention just for our
family. As a Congressman, he takes on causes other politicians
don’t have time for. Right now he’s working to get airlines to
train their flight attendants to identify and rescue victims of sex
trafficking.
He’s also one of the few members of Congress to actually write
a plan for getting us out of this recession by helping people and
creating jobs. Joe and I remember what it was like when we
couldn’t make ends meet, and that’s what motivates him to help
people now.
I think people are looking for leaders who care, listen, and can
work together for the good of our country. That’s who Joe is.
I hope you’ll vote for him on Tuesday.
Sincerely,
To download and read a printable copy of this letter, please Click Here
-
0
October 03, 2010
Joe Pitts
Joe Pitts is one of the few members of Congress to produce a detailed, commonsense plan for job creation.
There is no doubt what America’s top priority is right now. It’s jobs. Congressman Pitts is one of the few people in Washington who has produced a detailed, commonsense plan for job creation. At its core are seven simple goals: 1) Help those who need it now. 2) Stable and low taxation. 3) Balance the budget. 4) More and cheaper energy. 5) Wise, consistent regulation. 6) Open new markets for American goods. 7) Build infrastructure.
Each of these is a proven way of creating jobs and restoring prosperity. But Congress has failed to even try to act on most of them.
Helping people. Joe Pitts has voted five times to extend unemployment benefits and voted twice to offer first-ever emergency COBRA subsidies for Americans who have lost their employer-subsidized health insurance. Congress recently let those COBRA subsidies expire. For people in need, COBRA is a Catch-22: when you need it, you can’t afford it. Congressman Pitts wrote legislation to fix this problem in the future without increasing spending. The 19 month-old “stimulus” was supposed to limit unemployment and create jobs. Instead it has only put us further in debt, and most of the jobs it “saved” are those of government workers.
Stable and Low Taxes. Every American taxpayer, rich and poor, will face the largest tax increase in American history on January first. Despite a bipartisan majority in Congress who want to stop it, Democratic leaders have done nothing but use the issue for political fodder, accusing Republicans of wanting to cut taxes for the rich. The result? Employers, most of whom are in higher tax brackets, are refusing to expand and hire until they know what is going to happen to their taxes. This has hurt everyone.
Balance the Budget. Our government is $13 trillion in debt. Forty-two percent of this year’s federal spending is borrowed money. We have $107 trillion in binding commitments we have no plan to pay for. This is extremely dangerous to our current and future prosperity. It has to stop.
More and Cheaper Energy. Everything that happens in our economy requires energy. From manufacturing to simply driving to work, our economy runs on electricity, gasoline, and diesel. The law of supply and demand is simple: the more we have, the cheaper it is. Lower energy costs will mean more money for investing in new jobs. Instead, this Congress dedicated the better part of a year on a plan to make energy MORE expensive.
Wise and Consistent Regulation. Cap and Trade, Obamacare, “Card Check” and many of the other initiatives this Congress has focused on constitute major disruptions to America’s regulatory structure. Businesses aren’t only waiting to find out what will happen to their taxes—they’re also waiting to find out what new regulations are going to cost them. In the meantime, they aren’t hiring.
Open New Markets. New markets for American goods would very quickly create tens of thousands of new jobs. At least three already-negotiated trade agreements have been left unratified by this Congress. South Korea, Panama, and Colombia are just three of the countries who are eager to buy more of our goods but can’t until Congress acts. That has cost jobs.
Build Infrastructure. Building roads and highways is the government’s responsibility, and now is a perfect time to invest in this. This would do more than create construction jobs. Traffic jams and poor infrastructure make our economy less efficient, and that limits job creation. Despite strong bipartisan support for “shovel read” infrastructure investment, less than seven percent of the “stimulus” bill was dedicated to this.
The “stimulus” failed. It is no wonder why. The day the bill was passed, the Wall Street Journal called it “a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.” The Pitts Plan for job creation is what America needs.
Each of these is a proven way of creating jobs and restoring prosperity. But Congress has failed to even try to act on most of them.
Helping people. Joe Pitts has voted five times to extend unemployment benefits and voted twice to offer first-ever emergency COBRA subsidies for Americans who have lost their employer-subsidized health insurance. Congress recently let those COBRA subsidies expire. For people in need, COBRA is a Catch-22: when you need it, you can’t afford it. Congressman Pitts wrote legislation to fix this problem in the future without increasing spending. The 19 month-old “stimulus” was supposed to limit unemployment and create jobs. Instead it has only put us further in debt, and most of the jobs it “saved” are those of government workers.
Stable and Low Taxes. Every American taxpayer, rich and poor, will face the largest tax increase in American history on January first. Despite a bipartisan majority in Congress who want to stop it, Democratic leaders have done nothing but use the issue for political fodder, accusing Republicans of wanting to cut taxes for the rich. The result? Employers, most of whom are in higher tax brackets, are refusing to expand and hire until they know what is going to happen to their taxes. This has hurt everyone.
Balance the Budget. Our government is $13 trillion in debt. Forty-two percent of this year’s federal spending is borrowed money. We have $107 trillion in binding commitments we have no plan to pay for. This is extremely dangerous to our current and future prosperity. It has to stop.
More and Cheaper Energy. Everything that happens in our economy requires energy. From manufacturing to simply driving to work, our economy runs on electricity, gasoline, and diesel. The law of supply and demand is simple: the more we have, the cheaper it is. Lower energy costs will mean more money for investing in new jobs. Instead, this Congress dedicated the better part of a year on a plan to make energy MORE expensive.
Wise and Consistent Regulation. Cap and Trade, Obamacare, “Card Check” and many of the other initiatives this Congress has focused on constitute major disruptions to America’s regulatory structure. Businesses aren’t only waiting to find out what will happen to their taxes—they’re also waiting to find out what new regulations are going to cost them. In the meantime, they aren’t hiring.
Open New Markets. New markets for American goods would very quickly create tens of thousands of new jobs. At least three already-negotiated trade agreements have been left unratified by this Congress. South Korea, Panama, and Colombia are just three of the countries who are eager to buy more of our goods but can’t until Congress acts. That has cost jobs.
Build Infrastructure. Building roads and highways is the government’s responsibility, and now is a perfect time to invest in this. This would do more than create construction jobs. Traffic jams and poor infrastructure make our economy less efficient, and that limits job creation. Despite strong bipartisan support for “shovel read” infrastructure investment, less than seven percent of the “stimulus” bill was dedicated to this.
The “stimulus” failed. It is no wonder why. The day the bill was passed, the Wall Street Journal called it “a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.” The Pitts Plan for job creation is what America needs.
-
0
September 28, 2010
Joe Pitts
Washington–Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16) expressed his support for the newly announced House Republican governing agenda, A Pledge to America. The agenda is the product of months of engagement through town hall meetings and the America Speaking Out website. Rep. Pitts participated in the agenda’s creation by holding town hall meetings and advocating for his constituents’ priorities.
Washington–Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16) expressed his support for the newly announced House Republican governing agenda, A Pledge to America. The agenda is the product of months of engagement through town hall meetings and the America Speaking Out website. Rep. Pitts participated in the agenda’s creation by holding town hall meetings and advocating for his constituents’ priorities.
A Pledge to America reflects House Republicans’ commitment to tackling the issues most important to the American people including job creation, controlling the federal budget and repealing the unpopular healthcare reform bill.
Rep. Pitts’ statement follows:
“The House Republicans’ Pledge to America represents our effort to listen to the American people and focus our legislative agenda on their priorities. The first priority must be growing our economy and creating jobs. We cannot accomplish this through debt-fueled stimulus bills or government takeovers of the healthcare, banking, automotive and energy industries.
“Congress must create tax and regulatory certainty so that Americans can confidently move our economy forward. While the first priority is creating jobs, the Pledge also lays out how we intend to lead the nation by stopping out-of-control spending, repealing the government takeover of healthcare, reforming Congress, and keeping our nation secure. Our nation faces great challenges, but principled solutions, grounded in the Constitution, can restore faith in government and move our country forward into a free and prosperous future.”
CLICK HERE to view original post.
A Pledge to America reflects House Republicans’ commitment to tackling the issues most important to the American people including job creation, controlling the federal budget and repealing the unpopular healthcare reform bill.
Rep. Pitts’ statement follows:
“The House Republicans’ Pledge to America represents our effort to listen to the American people and focus our legislative agenda on their priorities. The first priority must be growing our economy and creating jobs. We cannot accomplish this through debt-fueled stimulus bills or government takeovers of the healthcare, banking, automotive and energy industries.
“Congress must create tax and regulatory certainty so that Americans can confidently move our economy forward. While the first priority is creating jobs, the Pledge also lays out how we intend to lead the nation by stopping out-of-control spending, repealing the government takeover of healthcare, reforming Congress, and keeping our nation secure. Our nation faces great challenges, but principled solutions, grounded in the Constitution, can restore faith in government and move our country forward into a free and prosperous future.”
CLICK HERE to view original post.
-
0
September 27, 2010
Joe Pitts
This week, House Republicans released a governing agenda that clearly shows the American people what we are working to accomplish in this Congress and in the future. The Pledge to America is grounded in timeless values and the needs of America today. We looked to the Constitution for guidance on the role of the federal government, and we listened to the American people through town hall meetings, phone calls, letters, and new technologies.
This week, House Republicans released a governing agenda that clearly shows the American people what we are working to accomplish in this Congress and in the future. The Pledge to America is grounded in timeless values and the needs of America today. We looked to the Constitution for guidance on the role of the federal government, and we listened to the American people through town hall meetings, phone calls, letters, and new technologies.
We know that the priority of every American is resurrecting this flagging economy. Despite a stimulus bill that will cost taxpayers over $1 trillion, unemployment has soared to nearly 10 percent. Each report of new unemployment claims confirms that American workers and families are hurting.
There is a fundamental disagreement between Republicans and Democrats about the best way to move our economy forward. In the past two years, the solutions offered by the administration and Congress have been government takeovers of the banking, healthcare, student loan, energy, and automotive industries.
I opposed bailouts and government takeovers when they were pushed by President Bush, and I’ve continued to oppose President Obama’s efforts. The American economy doesn’t succeed because of crafty government policies. It succeeds because Americans are free to innovate and invest.
The first objective of the Pledge to America is to create jobs, end economic uncertainty, and make America more competitive. This means standing against job-killing tax hikes that are due to take effect on January 1, 2011. Our plan calls for growing new and existing small businesses through a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their business income. We also need to repeal the burdensome new tax-reporting requirement created by the health care reform bill. Finally, we need to make sure that bureaucracy is not strangling businesses that are seeking to create new jobs.
One of the greatest causes of uncertainty in the business community is the threat of massive tax increases to pay for a government that is growing fast. The Pledge calls for an immediate stop to stimulus spending. Over $200 billion remains unspent and we must act quickly to prevent more waste. This also means permanently cancelling the TARP bailout program and returning the money to the Treasury.
The federal government has grown at an extraordinary rate in the last two years. We must put the breaks on and revert to fiscal year 2008 spending levels. Once we’ve pared back spending, we need hard caps of the same type that allowed us to balance the budget in the 1990s. When I came to Congress, I co-wrote four consecutive balanced budgets that each paid down the debt. This wouldn’t have been possible without hard restraints on the growth of government.
One way to get back to balanced budgets is to repeal the healthcare law. Contrary to White House claims, the Congressional Budget Office and Medicare’s own actuaries have shown that Obamacare will not pay for itself. This new law will be an extraordinary weight on government, businesses, and, most importantly, doctors and patients. We are committed to repealing the law and replacing it with free-market solutions.
Every poll shows that trust of Congress is at a record low. The Pledge commits our party to giving Members and the American people time to thoroughly read legislation before it is considered. Congress needs to stop ignoring the Constitution and the limits it places on legislative power. We would require a statement explicitly citing the constitutional authority that justifies a piece of legislation.
Finally, Congress has a responsibility to keep our nation safe. The Pledge commits House Republicans to strengthening our border, keeping detained terrorists out of the U.S., funding missile defense, and requiring tough sanctions on Iran.
I wholeheartedly endorse these policies, but my work also goes beyond what is in the Pledge. I’m listening to my constituents in the 16th District and introducing bills based on what I’m hearing from them. The recently introduced COBRA Affordability Act came about because of the struggles many have had paying for health insurance after losing a job.
Republicans are going to press for these policies to be enacted immediately. We’re going to keep listening to the American people and keep offering clear solutions that put them, not government bureaucrats, in charge.
CLICK HERE to view original post
We know that the priority of every American is resurrecting this flagging economy. Despite a stimulus bill that will cost taxpayers over $1 trillion, unemployment has soared to nearly 10 percent. Each report of new unemployment claims confirms that American workers and families are hurting.
There is a fundamental disagreement between Republicans and Democrats about the best way to move our economy forward. In the past two years, the solutions offered by the administration and Congress have been government takeovers of the banking, healthcare, student loan, energy, and automotive industries.
I opposed bailouts and government takeovers when they were pushed by President Bush, and I’ve continued to oppose President Obama’s efforts. The American economy doesn’t succeed because of crafty government policies. It succeeds because Americans are free to innovate and invest.
The first objective of the Pledge to America is to create jobs, end economic uncertainty, and make America more competitive. This means standing against job-killing tax hikes that are due to take effect on January 1, 2011. Our plan calls for growing new and existing small businesses through a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their business income. We also need to repeal the burdensome new tax-reporting requirement created by the health care reform bill. Finally, we need to make sure that bureaucracy is not strangling businesses that are seeking to create new jobs.
One of the greatest causes of uncertainty in the business community is the threat of massive tax increases to pay for a government that is growing fast. The Pledge calls for an immediate stop to stimulus spending. Over $200 billion remains unspent and we must act quickly to prevent more waste. This also means permanently cancelling the TARP bailout program and returning the money to the Treasury.
The federal government has grown at an extraordinary rate in the last two years. We must put the breaks on and revert to fiscal year 2008 spending levels. Once we’ve pared back spending, we need hard caps of the same type that allowed us to balance the budget in the 1990s. When I came to Congress, I co-wrote four consecutive balanced budgets that each paid down the debt. This wouldn’t have been possible without hard restraints on the growth of government.
One way to get back to balanced budgets is to repeal the healthcare law. Contrary to White House claims, the Congressional Budget Office and Medicare’s own actuaries have shown that Obamacare will not pay for itself. This new law will be an extraordinary weight on government, businesses, and, most importantly, doctors and patients. We are committed to repealing the law and replacing it with free-market solutions.
Every poll shows that trust of Congress is at a record low. The Pledge commits our party to giving Members and the American people time to thoroughly read legislation before it is considered. Congress needs to stop ignoring the Constitution and the limits it places on legislative power. We would require a statement explicitly citing the constitutional authority that justifies a piece of legislation.
Finally, Congress has a responsibility to keep our nation safe. The Pledge commits House Republicans to strengthening our border, keeping detained terrorists out of the U.S., funding missile defense, and requiring tough sanctions on Iran.
I wholeheartedly endorse these policies, but my work also goes beyond what is in the Pledge. I’m listening to my constituents in the 16th District and introducing bills based on what I’m hearing from them. The recently introduced COBRA Affordability Act came about because of the struggles many have had paying for health insurance after losing a job.
Republicans are going to press for these policies to be enacted immediately. We’re going to keep listening to the American people and keep offering clear solutions that put them, not government bureaucrats, in charge.
CLICK HERE to view original post
-
0
September 24, 2010
Joe Pitts
America has two priorities: 1) creating jobs and fixing the economy, and 2) getting Washington under control. But Congress isn’t helping.
America has two priorities: 1) creating jobs and fixing the economy, and 2) getting Washington under control. But Congress isn’t helping.
Today, Washington in more out of control than ever. The insatiable liberal appetite for more taxing, more spending, and more regulation have done so much to disrupt the economy that even responsible employers are simply unwilling to invest and hire until the smoke settles.
Meanwhile, I have written a detailed plan for creating jobs and prosperity. I have refused to request earmarks. I have voted “no” on spending bills, just as I did when Tom DeLay and George Bush were spending too much. This Congress’s agenda is the number-one impediment to American prosperity. On November 2, we will have a chance to change that.
Today, Washington in more out of control than ever. The insatiable liberal appetite for more taxing, more spending, and more regulation have done so much to disrupt the economy that even responsible employers are simply unwilling to invest and hire until the smoke settles.
Meanwhile, I have written a detailed plan for creating jobs and prosperity. I have refused to request earmarks. I have voted “no” on spending bills, just as I did when Tom DeLay and George Bush were spending too much. This Congress’s agenda is the number-one impediment to American prosperity. On November 2, we will have a chance to change that.
-
0
June 29, 2010
Joe Pitts
The most fundamental responsibility of anyone entrusted with spending others’ money is to set a budget. Any corporate CFO or charity treasurer who failed in this basic responsibility would be in serious trouble. But that is precisely what Congress is doing right now, for the first time in the history of modern budgeting.
The most fundamental responsibility of anyone entrusted with spending others’ money is to set a budget. Any corporate CFO or charity treasurer who failed in this basic responsibility would be in serious trouble. But that is precisely what Congress is doing right now, for the first time in the history of modern budgeting.
It is true that the House and Senate have failed to agree on budgets before, but never before has the House chosen to skip the process altogether.
Congress is required by law to write a budget every spring: setting spending limits for each area of government, establishing a five-year spending plan, and giving instructions to the powerful Appropriations committees. I served on the House Budget Committee my first two terms in Congress, and we successfully balanced the budget four years in a row. Writing a budget was critical to making that happen.
So why has Congress decided not to write a budget this year? The truth? The numbers would be so shocking to people the Democratic leadership has decided it is better for them politically to just take the hit for not doing their job.
Numbers don’t lie. Trillions of dollars in new spending, combined with a struggling economy, has taken its toll. The price tag is so high Congressional leaders don’t want you to see the numbers. Hence, no budget.
It is true that the House and Senate have failed to agree on budgets before, but never before has the House chosen to skip the process altogether.
Congress is required by law to write a budget every spring: setting spending limits for each area of government, establishing a five-year spending plan, and giving instructions to the powerful Appropriations committees. I served on the House Budget Committee my first two terms in Congress, and we successfully balanced the budget four years in a row. Writing a budget was critical to making that happen.
So why has Congress decided not to write a budget this year? The truth? The numbers would be so shocking to people the Democratic leadership has decided it is better for them politically to just take the hit for not doing their job.
Numbers don’t lie. Trillions of dollars in new spending, combined with a struggling economy, has taken its toll. The price tag is so high Congressional leaders don’t want you to see the numbers. Hence, no budget.
-
0
May 20, 2010
Joe Pitts
After two straight elections with huge gains for Democrats, Democrats control the entire federal government. You’d think they would be happy--but Democratic voters and officeholders alike are increasingly grumpy.
After two straight elections with huge gains for Democrats, Democrats control the entire federal government. You’d think they would be happy--but Democratic voters and officeholders alike are increasingly grumpy.
Democrats in Congress are increasingly nervous that their leaders’ policies are heading them for big trouble with the voters. At the top of their list of complaints is the lack of even a plan to reverse growing unemployment. Read this very interesting article for more on this.
As for Democratic voters, even Tuesday’s primary—which included a big win for Democrats in western Pennsylvania—contained an ominous sign for Democrats going into the fall: Democrats stayed home in unexpectedly high numbers. Read this from a pollster on what this means.
I’ve had several Democrats call and write to me asking how they can switch parties. I received this email from a woman on Sunday: “Hello, please help me change parties…. I am currently a Democrat. … I was raised a Democrat, my father a carpenter in the union. I can no longer belong to a party I do not believe in,,.please tell me how I change parties.”
If you would like to change your registration or register to vote for the first time, registration forms are available at most public libraries and many other government offices. If you can’t find one, please call my office and I’ll send you one!
Democrats in Congress are increasingly nervous that their leaders’ policies are heading them for big trouble with the voters. At the top of their list of complaints is the lack of even a plan to reverse growing unemployment. Read this very interesting article for more on this.
As for Democratic voters, even Tuesday’s primary—which included a big win for Democrats in western Pennsylvania—contained an ominous sign for Democrats going into the fall: Democrats stayed home in unexpectedly high numbers. Read this from a pollster on what this means.
I’ve had several Democrats call and write to me asking how they can switch parties. I received this email from a woman on Sunday: “Hello, please help me change parties…. I am currently a Democrat. … I was raised a Democrat, my father a carpenter in the union. I can no longer belong to a party I do not believe in,,.please tell me how I change parties.”
If you would like to change your registration or register to vote for the first time, registration forms are available at most public libraries and many other government offices. If you can’t find one, please call my office and I’ll send you one!
-
0
May 20, 2010
Joe Pitts
I sent a letter to the co-chairs of Barack Obama’s debt commission today, co-signed by 154 Republicans, urging them to focus on reduced spending instead of new taxes like the Value Added Tax common in European countries. White House Economic Advisor Paul Volcker has called for a VAT and President Obama has refused to rule it out. New taxes would be a huge mistake. Just like overfishing can put fishermen out of business, high taxes ultimately lead to weaker economies and less government revenue. Our only viable option is to reduce spending. Here’s what the Intelligencer-Journal/Lancaster New Era is reporting about the letter.
I sent a letter to the co-chairs of Barack Obama’s debt commission today, co-signed by 154 Republicans, urging them to focus on reduced spending instead of new taxes like the Value Added Tax common in European countries. White House Economic Advisor Paul Volcker has called for a VAT and President Obama has refused to rule it out. New taxes would be a huge mistake. Just like overfishing can put fishermen out of business, high taxes ultimately lead to weaker economies and less government revenue. Our only viable option is to reduce spending. Here’s what the Intelligencer-Journal/Lancaster New Era is reporting about the letter.
Pitts, GOP lawmakers: spike idea of consumption tax
By TOM MURSE, Staff Writer
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts is leading a GOP effort to pressure President Barack Obama's debt commission into spiking the idea of a nationwide consumption tax as a way to close the budget deficit.
"With unemployment at nearly 10 percent, Americans cannot afford the burden of a new job-killing tax," Pitts wrote in a letter to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform on Thursday.
The letter was signed by 153 other congressional Republicans, including House GOP Conference leaders including Leader John Boehner, Whip Eric Cantor and Chairman Mike Pence.
White House spokesmen have said repeatedly that the president has not proposed and is not considering such a tax, commonly referred to as a value-added tax. But Obama hasn't completely rejected the idea, either, saying in interviews that the tax is "something that has worked for some countries."
Many European countries impose a VAT, which taxes the value that is added at each stage of production of certain commodities. It could apply, for instance, to raw products delivered to a mill, the mill's production work and so on up the line to the retailer.
Suggestions of imposing a VAT in the United States have grown in the face of a looming $1.6 trillion budget deficit in the current fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Obama's debt commission began meeting in April and is expected to producing a plan to reduce the deficit.
Republicans lawmakers, however, are suggesting the commission focus on spending cuts, not new taxes.
"A new value-added tax is no way to revitalize an American economy that needs to create millions of new jobs," Pitts said in a statement. "European VAT taxes have not prevented these countries from going into deep debt, they have only slowed job growth."
The lawmakers, who did not identify potential budget cuts in their letter, said a value-added tax of 19 percent did not save Greece from its debt crisis.
"The result of increased government spending and taxation in Greece has been a consistently high unemployment rate of nearly 10 percent and a bankrupt government," the lawmakers wrote in their letter.
Asked where he would cut spending, Pitts said he would freeze discretionary spending and propose a one or two percent across the board cut in spending.
Pitts called, additionally, for a repeal of the new healthcare law and replacing it with cheaper alternatives, as well as saving and strengthening entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.
"Long term, entitlements are the biggest problem," said Pitts. "We have $107 trillion in binding entitlement promises Congress has no plan to pay for. Whatever we do, we should not be creating new entitlements we can't afford."
(This report contains information from our wire services.)
http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/256394
Pitts, GOP lawmakers: spike idea of consumption tax
By TOM MURSE, Staff Writer
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts is leading a GOP effort to pressure President Barack Obama's debt commission into spiking the idea of a nationwide consumption tax as a way to close the budget deficit.
"With unemployment at nearly 10 percent, Americans cannot afford the burden of a new job-killing tax," Pitts wrote in a letter to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform on Thursday.
The letter was signed by 153 other congressional Republicans, including House GOP Conference leaders including Leader John Boehner, Whip Eric Cantor and Chairman Mike Pence.
White House spokesmen have said repeatedly that the president has not proposed and is not considering such a tax, commonly referred to as a value-added tax. But Obama hasn't completely rejected the idea, either, saying in interviews that the tax is "something that has worked for some countries."
Many European countries impose a VAT, which taxes the value that is added at each stage of production of certain commodities. It could apply, for instance, to raw products delivered to a mill, the mill's production work and so on up the line to the retailer.
Suggestions of imposing a VAT in the United States have grown in the face of a looming $1.6 trillion budget deficit in the current fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Obama's debt commission began meeting in April and is expected to producing a plan to reduce the deficit.
Republicans lawmakers, however, are suggesting the commission focus on spending cuts, not new taxes.
"A new value-added tax is no way to revitalize an American economy that needs to create millions of new jobs," Pitts said in a statement. "European VAT taxes have not prevented these countries from going into deep debt, they have only slowed job growth."
The lawmakers, who did not identify potential budget cuts in their letter, said a value-added tax of 19 percent did not save Greece from its debt crisis.
"The result of increased government spending and taxation in Greece has been a consistently high unemployment rate of nearly 10 percent and a bankrupt government," the lawmakers wrote in their letter.
Asked where he would cut spending, Pitts said he would freeze discretionary spending and propose a one or two percent across the board cut in spending.
Pitts called, additionally, for a repeal of the new healthcare law and replacing it with cheaper alternatives, as well as saving and strengthening entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.
"Long term, entitlements are the biggest problem," said Pitts. "We have $107 trillion in binding entitlement promises Congress has no plan to pay for. Whatever we do, we should not be creating new entitlements we can't afford."
(This report contains information from our wire services.)
http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/256394
-
0
May 10, 2010
Joe Pitts
Just before the House passed the healthcare reform bill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi infamously remarked that “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.” It’s been nearly six weeks now and we’re finding out that what’s in it isn’t necessarily good for health care.
Just before the House passed the healthcare reform bill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi infamously remarked that “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.” It’s been nearly six weeks now and we’re finding out that what’s in it isn’t necessarily good for health care.
First of all, we’re finding that medical costs will rise nationwide. According to a report from the federal agency that administers Medicare and Medicaid, national health expenditures will increase by $311 billion over ten years because of the new law. There was lots of talk during the debate over health care reform about “bending the cost curve.” Unfortunately, the bill appears to have bent the cost curve up instead of down.
This same report indicated that individuals who purchase health insurance on their own can expect to pay an additional $2,100 a year. The individual market was already pricing out many consumers, but now costs will rise even faster. For now, individuals can choose to drop coverage and pay for medical costs out of pocket. In the future, all Americans will have to purchase insurance or face IRS penalties.
Premiums are not the only area where expenses are projected to rise. Because of new taxes and fees on prescription drugs and medical devices, the agency report states that costs would be “passed through to health consumers.”
Throughout the debate, President Obama insisted that Americans who like their coverage would get to keep it. Just weeks after the law went into effect, it’s already apparent that this was empty rhetoric.
Medicare Advantage programs were established to introduce market reforms to the Medicare program. The flexibility of the Medicare Advantage programs have made them popular with seniors, especially lower income beneficiaries. Nearly 30,000 seniors in the 16th Congressional District elect one of these plans.
Because of deep cuts in the program, Republicans estimated that one in four seniors could see their Medicare Advantage plan cancelled. These estimates were wrong. Now the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimate that half of seniors will lose the coverage that they currently have.
Seniors on Medicare Advantage aren’t the only ones who could see changes to Medicare. The law cuts $575 billion out of Medicare over the next ten years. It’s difficult to clearly identify how this will change the program, but many doctors warn that they may not be able to continue seeing Medicare patients if the cuts are too severe. Already, Medicare reimbursement rates are far below those paid by private insurers.
Shortly after passage of the health care bill, companies such as AT&T, Caterpillar, Verizon and John Deere released statements noting that the new law would affect their bottom line. These companies were immediately attacked by leading Democrats as trying to undermine the health care law.
I serve on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) immediately scheduled a hearing so that he could interrogate the CEOs of these companies. Only after scheduling the hearing did he come to understand that federal regulations require companies to publicly report such information. They were just acting in accordance with the law.
Documents demanded by the Energy and Commerce Committee show that these four companies are evaluating whether to drop their current healthcare coverage and instead pay government penalties established in the new law. Just these four companies cover over 2.3 million workers. There’s no easy way to tell how many other companies are trying to figure out whether dismantling their employee health benefits will benefit their bottom line.
It hasn’t been 100 days since enactment of the new health care law, and there are bound to be other surprises down the road. I opposed the bill because I don’t believe that centralizing decisions about health care in Washington will reduce costs or improve care.
There were good things done in the healthcare law like allowing young people to stay on their parents’ plan longer and ensuring that Americans are not denied coverage for pre-existing conditions. I think we can take action to preserve the parts of the plan that every American agrees on and introduce real market-based reforms. There’s time to make major changes, but we shouldn’t wait long to make improvements.
-
0
May 10, 2010
Joe Pitts
With unemployment now at 9.9 percent, we have to ask, “Where are the jobs?” President Obama promised that if we passed his trillion-dollar stimulus bill, unemployment would never exceed 8 percent. Clearly the stimulus didn’t work. I knew it wouldn’t and I voted against it. But that’s just one reason unemployment continues to go up under the Democrats’ policies. Here are three more.
With unemployment now at 9.9 percent, we have to ask, “Where are the jobs?” President Obama promised that if we passed his trillion-dollar stimulus bill, unemployment would never exceed 8 percent. Clearly the stimulus didn’t work. I knew it wouldn’t and I voted against it. But that’s just one reason unemployment continues to go up under the Democrats’ policies. Here are three more.
Taxes – The Democrats have advocated for dozens of new and increased taxes. Many more taxes, including your income taxes, are scheduled to automatically shoot up in January. If you were an employer and you knew your tax burden was about to go up—but had no idea by how much—would you risk expanding and hiring right now?
Regulation—From Obamacare to Cap and Trade, the Democrats’ have been pushing for huge new burdens on businesses large and small. If you were an employer and you knew the cost of doing business was about to skyrocket, would you risk expanding and hiring right now?
Government debt—The federal government has $107 trillion in spending promises it has no plan to pay for, prompting Moody’s to warn of a downgrade of federal debt securities within the next decade. That’s exactly what started the debt spiral that is embroiling Greece and other European countries right now. Even Britain is realizing how much trouble they are in because of years of liberal spending. Knowing that our massive government debt could lead to an even worse economic crisis within ten years, would you expand your business and hire right now?
The keys to job creation are low and stable taxes, less government, and less spending and debt.
Taxes – The Democrats have advocated for dozens of new and increased taxes. Many more taxes, including your income taxes, are scheduled to automatically shoot up in January. If you were an employer and you knew your tax burden was about to go up—but had no idea by how much—would you risk expanding and hiring right now?
Regulation—From Obamacare to Cap and Trade, the Democrats’ have been pushing for huge new burdens on businesses large and small. If you were an employer and you knew the cost of doing business was about to skyrocket, would you risk expanding and hiring right now?
Government debt—The federal government has $107 trillion in spending promises it has no plan to pay for, prompting Moody’s to warn of a downgrade of federal debt securities within the next decade. That’s exactly what started the debt spiral that is embroiling Greece and other European countries right now. Even Britain is realizing how much trouble they are in because of years of liberal spending. Knowing that our massive government debt could lead to an even worse economic crisis within ten years, would you expand your business and hire right now?
The keys to job creation are low and stable taxes, less government, and less spending and debt.
-
0
