“I care about our nation’s future. Each and every family has to work with a budget; our Congress should be no different. That is why I am calling for “No Budget No Pay” as an accountability reform measure for members of congress to the American people. It is only fair we put the gimmickry of the last congress behind us. We need to work together towards passing a budget that puts us on a path to balancing our budget as a nation, and enables debt reduction so our kids and grand-kids are not left to pay the tab and true job growth where generations will have opportunities to enjoy the American dream.” —Rep. Tom Reed
- Tom might want to pay attention to growing inequality in family income in America, if he cares about our nation’s future.
- American government is like a family? In some ways, but beware of over generalization.
- It is pretty silly when Congress proposes to pass laws to force itself to do what it otherwise wouldn’t do; this reminds one of New Year’s resolutions.
- “It is only fair we put the gimmickry of the last Congress behind us.” There is no evidence of any intention to do that yet. These “No Budget, No Pay” acts are good examples of gimmickry.
- Balanced budget? Trying to balance the budget, which is unnecessary, would likely trigger another recession if attempted now.
- Tom again suggests that future generations will have to pay back current debt. This is nonsense: the national debt and private debt are entirely different things. No individual is responsible for repaying any part of the national debt.
- True job growth? Tom likes phrases such as “true this” and “real that”, but who knows what he means by them?
While Tom’s writing seems a mish-mash of silly ideas, this sort of thing seems to work for him politically. Perhaps correctly, Tom seems to have no fear of underestimating our intelligence.
The two bills Tom refers to are:
Tom isn’t listed as a cosponsor of either bill yet.
“No Budget, No Pay” acts may be unconstitutional because of the 27th Amendment. Tom, who is often quick to call laws he dislikes unconstitutional, is evidently unconcerned about the Constitution in this case.
© William Hungerford – March 2015