Robert Bennett: The debt ceiling and 2012 campaigns

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Aug. 9, 2011 6:05 p.m.

    No one seems to realize we are in a terrible financial situation. Obama has done nothing to help it except reduce defense spending.

  • Bunnyhop SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Aug. 9, 2011 4:38 p.m.

    "I'm sorry Bob, but Romney has signed a "pledge" by NOM to relegate some of his fellow American Citizens to the back of the bus, to force them to drink from separate fountains."
    That is a completely inaccurate and overwrought statement.

  • Richard Saunders Provo, UT
    Aug. 9, 2011 2:06 p.m.

    I personally think that some tax hikes should be part of our efforts to balance the budget, like letting the Bush tax cuts expire, but there is a way to do it without changing taxes. One way is to take all spending levels back to 2004, when our spending was about $2.2 trillion, which matches our current revenue. We could also freeze all spending levels til 2015, and if the economy grew as expected, the budget would balance itself. Of course if we simply rescind the Bush tax cuts, bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, and make changes to the entitlements to make them solvent, our country could be on financially sound footing for decades! None of these ideas are mine, but come from the man who promises to have the federal budget balanced his first year in office, Ron Paul.

  • JoeBlow Miami Area, Fl
    Aug. 9, 2011 9:12 a.m.

    I have yet to see a plan by anyone that can balance the budget, let alone without tax increases.

    When you refuse to give an inch (tax increases) the other side is less willing to give in (spending and entitlement cuts)

    So, when some of you applaud the Tea Party and Republican stance, you are opting to live with debt.

    I have no doubt that if the proposal of Obama and Boehner would have passed, the downgrade would not have happened.

    So, you may take solace that you won the battle, but you are losing the war.

    And merrily blaming everyone else along the way.

    Big Spending cuts (SS, Med and Military) and a modest tax increase are the answer. Like it or not. Cold hard facts.

    And if you want to blast me, fine, but put forth a plan with details on what you would cut to balance the budget without tax increases. Anyone?

  • Hellooo Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 9, 2011 9:06 a.m.

    Your analysis is interesting, using exceptions to the rule in the case where Tea Party backed Republicans faced strong incumbents mostly in heavy blue states, and with only tepid support from the National Republican Party lost. The Angle example is particularly appalling given the snub the head of the ticket in 2010 gave her during his re-election campaign in Arizona. Of course, in more balanced states or in those with more conservative leanings. Like Utah for example such candidates won. Seems to me the Republicans are in the same dilemna as in 1980, when they selected as their candidate Mr. Reagan even though the national party did not like his political agenda, and has not allowed a similar candidate to be selected since. Maybe Republicans should learn something from his success. It being the only one that has generated much popularity with the people of the country in the last two decades. But, no they will follow your advice, and offer up more of the same from the elites of the party. And, just like with McCain in 2008 lose badly even to the likes of Mr. Obama who even makes Mr. Carter look good in comparison.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2011 1:17 p.m.

    "Ron Paul has talked about the national debt for 30 years"

    Ron Paul is frequently an exception to the rule. Heck, most of the Republicans who voted for the balanced budget amendment secretly would not want the BBA passed because the cuts needed to balance the budget are so drastic (the BBA would have made raising taxes almost impossible) that they'd be booted from office in an instant if the public actually knew to how deep the cuts would go. That's why no republicans show their plan as to how they would balance the budget. (Ryan's leaves 6 trillion in new debt over 10 years).

  • DougB Spanish Fork, UT
    Aug. 8, 2011 1:16 p.m.

    Senator Bennett, with all due respect, it is un-surprising that you would back Romney and then claim that Perry is the next best choice.

    Both Romney and Perry support the same un-realistic and un-examined continued use of our volunteer defense troops in perpetual warfare that you rubber-stamped when in office. Both support other gargantuan and unsustainable Federal projects as well. Making them nearly indistinguishable for a Republican voter like me, in the final analysis, from our current President Obama.

    Many of the current GOP candidates have a better understanding of limited Federal government, wise foreign policy, and fiscal accountability than Romney, Perry, and Obama. Wishing all the supporters of the actual candidates with a different view than the continued Bush-Obama years would just get in line behind a fourth term of such nonsense is bad for the country and especially bad for the GOP.

    I'm praying we nominate a candidate like Ron Paul -- one sufficiently informed, wise, and different from President Obama to have a chance of inspiring the electorate to vote against the incumbent. Romney would put up a tepid fight, not different enough, and lose.

  • Richard Saunders Provo, UT
    Aug. 8, 2011 11:17 a.m.

    "The Republican party, and it's candidates, have never cared about the debt"

    That statement is simply not true. Sure, maybe most Republicans don't care, and maybe most of the candidates don't care, but Ron Paul has talked about the national debt for 30 years. He has never voted for an unbalanced budget. He sharply criticized the Bush administration during the lead up to the Iraq war and the very expensive Medicaid Part D law. You can that some or even most Republicans don't care, but Ron Paul has probably cared longer than both of us have been alive.

    Aug. 8, 2011 10:37 a.m.

    Sorry, Romney's waiting until debt ceiling vote was already taken, then coming out against it, confirmed his lack of courage & leadership. He doesn't have the backbone to stand up to the tea party. Perry's worse. As an independent voter, who would like to see a little cooperation in Congress, I'll be voting Democratic until the GOP can get its act together.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Aug. 8, 2011 9:31 a.m.

    (title) "The debt ceiling and 2012 GOP campaigns". Robert Bennett, For the Deseret News, is there anything more then Ideological primary victories in swing states with your "Kaleidoscope Wishes" at the Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics?. Come 2012, The White House, US House and the Republicans control of the Senate will go down the drain, faster then you can flush. All caused by these Tea Party/GOP obstructionists, that have not created any jobs, for over a decade, and whst to start now, after the GOP Congress gets back to work after Labor Day, it will have the chance to achieve something that has largely eluded it for the entire decade, passing legislation that might actually create jobs?. After decades of giveing to the Koch Brothers and Grover Norquist, in their "Field Of (corn and sugar cane) Dreams" called "Ethanol Subsidies" entitlements the GOP can't seem to get away from. I guess they are happy now?. Sees like this $2.5 trillion wiped off world stocks went poof, then it went in the off shore tax safe havens of none other then Grover Norquist and the Koch Brother's. I don't trust anyone that speaks with a forked tongue.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2011 8:45 a.m.

    'Or will the president be able to use it to discredit the Republicans as obstructionists?' - Article


    The Republican party, and it's canidats, have never cared about the debt.

    *'Romney pledges against gay marriage' - By Jamshid Ghazi Askar, Deseret News - 08/06/11

    Instead trying to focus on ANY and all social issues instead of focusing on the Republican parties dismal history. Doubling the national debt, and national unemployment.

    * 'Bush Administration Adds $4 Trillion To National Debt' - by Mark Knoller - CBS News - 09/29/08

    'It'll be the 7th time the debt limit (ceiling) has been raised during this administration. In fact it was just two months ago, on July 30, that President Bush signed the Housing and Economic Recovery Act, which contained a provision raising the debt ceiling to $10.615 trillion.'

    Which Obama has factually not done.

    If these are my choices...? I'll stick with Obama.

    Thank you.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2011 7:53 a.m.

    I appreciate the voice of reason by the Senator, while I was sharply critical in the past, the radical positions of his predecessor make be wish for a more balanced approach.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Aug. 8, 2011 7:52 a.m.

    I'm sorry Bob, but Romney has signed a "pledge" by NOM to relegate some of his fellow American Citizens to the back of the bus, to force them to drink from separate fountains.

    I could never, in conscience, vote for someone willing to deny equality to his fellow Citizens.