Toomey, Rothfus show courage
I thank U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey and Rep. Keith Rothfus for making the difficult vote against the recent government funding bill. The easy vote was to continue spending money without any long-term solution. They did not want to vote for a pork-laden bill. These two men had the courage to do what is right.
In 2006, then-Sen. Obama told us raising the debt ceiling was kicking the can down the road. Sen. Obama was right.
But President Obama wants to spend like a drunken sailor. It is time for him to walk the talk.
We must stop raising the debt ceiling and cut spending. Toomey and Rothfus want to do that.
In my lifetime, I have seen numerous budget deals promising to curtail spending — eliminate the deficit and pay down the debt. Congress has never kept such an agreement.
Congress is the recidivist drug addict of spending. The sequester is the first cut and its effects were greatly exaggerated by the media.
There is a simple solution to our budget problems: Stop the annual increase in spending for the next five years, then limit growth to 50 percent of any increase in the gross domestic product. If the GDP declines, cut spending.
This will never happen because there are not enough men and women of courage like Toomey and Rothfus.
Gentlemen, thank you for your courage.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Intelligent discussion overdue
- Ambrosini’s logic lacking
- Better stores needed
- Superstition’s role
- Treat UNC like PSU
- Corbett is the honest choice
- Inconsistent Wolf
- Corbett over Wolf I
- Gross in 45th
- Keith Rothfus is the right choice
- Corbett over Wolf II