This editorial first appeared in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner:
House Republicans and President Obama made progress on striking a budget deal Monday, but, by Tuesday, pessimism had returned. The time for such see-sawing has passed. The well-being of the United States is at stake, and the state of Alaska’s more so than most.
Alaskans share the concern of the rest of the country’s citizens about the higher tax rates that will come unless current rates are extended. However, what makes Alaska’s situation distinct is our large number of federal government employees and military troops. Unless a deal is brokered, automatic cuts will hit the agencies and military branches hard.
Who knows where these cuts might fall? Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, suggested Fort Wainwright might close if the military cuts that Obama was advocating in budget negotiations were made. Young wasn’t talking about the even larger automatic cuts that would be mandated if there is no deal. Such talk illustrates how serious the situation has become.
The military isn’t the only federal operation under threat, though. We have many federal agencies and federally supported organizations in Alaska, all of which are at high risk from automatic cuts.
In the long term, the military and federal agencies need to shrink. If that decline is inevitable, though, it needs to be a steady, controlled decline, not sudden death from a leap off the fiscal cliff.
To avoid decimating our federal agencies and military, we’ll need to contain our entitlement spending. We’ll also need to raise revenue if we are to entertain any hope of balancing the budget. Those are big, ugly pills. There’s nothing to do but swallow them.
Last week, 168 CEOs wrote to Obama on behalf of the Business Roundtable, advocating a deal. “The deal should be a balanced solution to the fiscal cliff and long-term deficit and debt issues,” they said. “To address these challenges with the scale of response required, no options should be precluded from a potential solution.”
Their preference is to cut more than tax, but both will be required, they said. “Compromise will require Congress to agree on more revenue — whether by increasing rates, eliminating deductions or some combination thereof — and the administration to agree to larger, meaningful structural and benefit entitlement reforms and spending reductions that are a fiscally responsible multiple of increased revenues,” they said.
It’s long past time to get this done. Alaska’s congressional delegation must do all it can to make it happen. Nothing else is so important at this moment.
Comments (34)
Add commentOff the cliff ! The best
Off the cliff !
The best thing about the cliff dive is it treats all Americans equally. Everybody's taxes go up. I think from a karma stand point it is just beautiful.
All the moochers voted for the Lord of the Moochers in the belief that he was going to raise taxes on the "evil rich", but instead their greed is rewarded with a tax increase on them !!!
yes, we will very likely head back into recession (did we ever really come out of the last one?), but when we do come out, we will be in a much stronger economic position.
Much like we would have been if the government had not bailed out the banks, or the auto industry.
remember"....Government IS the problem".
@mad89
I dont share your optimism about this Phoenix rising from ashes of recession. Taxes will not go up on "moochers" -- you cant increase taxes on non-tax payers.
This could have been averted. SOMEone did not want it, or did not care if no deal was struck. Mele kalikimaka, Mr President. Enjoy your vacation; you worked hard at dodging this one.
So who call things off and went home
Seems like it was the Republican House majority under their leader, Bonehead, that simply closed down the House for a holiday vacation when they realized they could not pass their own legislation among themselves. Yet before most of them left the secession a few were on the FAUX news claiming it is Obama's fault they could not come to an agreement among their party's plan put out by Bonehead.
Meanwhile Dung Yung starts a rage about Ft. Wainright facing possible closures after support the legislation to keep Eielson open. Obviously Dung cares more about keeping those military dollars circulating in Alaska than the National Debt or anything else.
Nothing can be done when you
Nothing can be done when you have a president that hates our country and wants it to go down in flames!Why did he get rid of Bin Laden?So he could be in charge!
It's not a cliff
It's an opportunity.
Boehner cannot possibly get any type of tax increase past his caucus. But if he waits until after the 1st, the tax increase (actually the sunsetting of the Bush tax cuts) will be a fait accompli. Then the republicans can vote for a 'tax cut' for the middle class, bringing their rates back down to the Bush levels while leaving the top tier at the new higher rates.
It's a win-win. Obama gets the higher rates on the wealthy that he campaigned for. The republicans can claim they decreased taxes. Political silliness, but that's what our government has been reduced to.
@akmscott
Don't forget! January 21st. That's when Barack Hussein Obama places his hand on the Koran and swears to uphold the Communist Manifesto for FOUR MORE YEARS!
Make sure to tune in to watch our democratic process in action. Maybe even Fox will broadcast it.
Four more years...
Hilary After That
By 2016 both Carolina's and maybe Texas will be blue. Repubs can not win the White House or Senate. They will still have pockets of loony white guys in the states where you can buy Confederate flags at gas stations and vending machines.
Are moochers the white guys on Medicare and Medicaid, the Wall St banks that got bailed out by gGW. Bush, the corn farmers, mining and logging companies that get roads paid for with Federal dollars/ Or those in Alaska getting PFD checks, IFQ's and limited entry permits that were given for free to the original holders of them.
And don't forget that Obama was born in Kenya and is a Muslim.
@islander
those were cute idioms. The way I see it is that BHO has resolute posture on the issue of taxation/revenue and there is no room for compromise. He must tax the rich, he must enforce his notion of fair share. Nothing the House could offer short of sticking it to higher income brackets will draw BHO out of his sphere of ideological justice.
if you voted for him, you voted for all this, and what's to come. Should be no surprise when the ship hits the sand and consumer prices go up for everything-- EVERYTHING. Dont ask How did that happen?
aynrand - don't forget
Oil companies and their annual multi-billion dollar 'subsidy'.
I find it interesting that there is so much pushback on this tax issue, when we are talking about tax rates many paid previously. This isn't some kind of unprecidented rise in rates, it's not even close to the highest rate ever paid in this country. My question is always the same - in 2 parts:
1. Simple math tells us you can't spend more than you bring in. If we aren't going to bring in any more revenue - what would you cut?
2. If the answer to #1 is Medicare, Social Security, unemployment, and food stamps (the likely targets of wingnuts on this board) - - - then what EXACTLY do you propose to do about the resulting increase of millions of elderly, sick, and starving homeless people in the streets?
Do we really think deep cuts to these programs would not result in seniors or the unemployed losing their homes? In poor people losing medical care? That there would be no human consequenses?
I think we should all argue and discuss the policies of our leaders. But even people who didn't like President Bush and thought he was unintelligent did not stoop to the kind of crazy, un-American, false and stupid vitriol seen in some of the posts above. All the 'hates America' and 'Koran' comments prove is that the posters are not to be taken seriously.
***
I thought Obamacare was going to fix the health issues. It's coming down the tracks whether you agree or not.
Also thought that BHO was going to do comprehensive review of fed programs to cut wasteful spending.
And what about his Jobs Bill? Maybe he will brush the dust off and try to float it thru Congress again.
Mounting question: why wont the Senate pass a budget? That sounds like the reasonable place to start before talking about tax rate increases.
Grendel -
your crew wants to repeal it, so how will it fix anything if it's gone?
swimmergirl
Who do you think is my crew? That's an us vs them statement, dont you think? I mean, you're pro-abortion but that doesnt necessarily put you in the same camp with progressive radicals that also want to repeal 2nd Amendment, does it? You want the Roman Catholic Church to pony up for birth control, but that doesnt mean you want to strip religious institutions of 1st Amendment protections, does it?
short answer: AHA upheld by Supreme Court decision. It's going to happen and there's not enough bread to make this shitsandwich taste any better.
ps - hope you had Merry Christmas
@aynrand
name one achievement of BHO's where he showed decisive leadership. Taking the wheel of the Choom Van and aiming it at the all-night drive thru on Kapiolani does not count. Nor does the whole UBL take-down in Abbottabad. BHO took 3 days to make decision.
SG
You knew that my Koran statement was satire, I trust.
Grendel, you go on about Obama's "resolute posture" regarding raising taxes on the wealthy. I agree - he painted himself into that corner during his campaign, just like Romney painted himself into a number of far-right corners during the primary. Personally, I think there would be more revenue to be gained by going after the really big tax breaks the wealthy enjoy such as the 15% capital gains and dividend rates, carried interest, extensive write-offs, huge estate tax exemption, etc. But politics are not a perfect world.
That being said, who were the ones to sign 'pledges' to unelected entities regarding taxes? If you're going to talk about "resolute postures" and all...
@Lat
if that is a question directed for me, I have no idea what you are talking about -- 'pledges'?
Grendel
You're kidding, right? Right??
(Google 'Norquist + pledge')
@Lat58
no, I'm not. If this is some sort of whine (did you know today is national whiners' day?) about special interests looking after their special interests, can you blame them?
I dont care if your fed taxes are $3K or $3M, it stings all the same to have the govt point its finger at YOU and accuse you of not paying your fair share so it can finance -- strike that -- pay the interest on foreign loans to expand entitlements at home and abroad.
What was the title of this op-piece again? No budget, no spending plan, but an ambitious plan to keep on spending.
So if you are accusing wealthy pledgers of choosing to put THEIR $$$ behind unelected entities in order to retain (as much as possible) what is theirs, that strikes me as audacious.
Do the google, Grendel
Then opine.
@lat
In port; time on my hands; read the google. So what, whineypants? I agree with him. Listen, I dont mind the fish tax, even though I dont do THA kamikazi trolling, but what's fair is fair and I want to keep fishing. I get it. Fish tax goes toward run sustainment. Easy equation.
I run the boat by myself. I'm a hand-cranker, I earn every last mutherloving cent. I think in terms of fish. Now consider: in 2013 every 5th coho I haul up off a spread goes to federal entitlements. I'm tempted to let her go.
***
NSTR
Grendel
You don't like to pay taxes - fine.
Grover doesn't like taxes - fine.
Your elected representatives vote against taxes - fine.
Here's the issue: the pledge. I don't care if it's taxes or abortion or religion or motherhood and apple pie...our elected representatives pledge to defend the constitution. They are elected to serve their constituents.
Signing any sort of pledge to a third party that binds their vote is contrary to a free democracy. What next - they pledge their vote to a dictator?
You complained about Obama's "resolute posture" on taxes. Signing a tax pledge...seems kind of 'resolute' as well, wouldn't you say?
And glad to see you back in the saddle. You went silent after Obama's reelection. I was worried about you.
Lat58
Let's look at resolute: what has BHO offered in terms of compromise? NOTHING. He does not negotiate. He's a man-child with an agenda, but no plan. And the SoB will ride that torpedo all the way to the boat because he deflects accountability for ANYTHING. So, apparently, do his cronies. Remember laff-a-minute Biden during his clownish debate saying the fiscal cliff & sequester would not happen? And where's accident-prone Hillary - 2 weeks after her concussion that did not require trip to Bethesda?
Lat, I know it's not on you. But to every Obama supporter out there: YOU did this, and what's to come.
Settle down, Grendel
All that froth will damage your keyboard. You really are ramped up on this, aren't you?
Please don't blame me for Obama. I didn't vote for him. In fact, no Alaskan can be blamed for him - all of our state's electoral votes went to Romney. Obama gained zero benefit from Obama voters in Alaska.
Resolute...compromise...blah blah blah. Utterly not the point.
If Obama had signed some sort of pledge to a nonelected party guaranteeing his action on some matter, your head would have exploded. You know it (if you're honest), and I know it. Having third-party pledges poisons compromise and undermines our democracy.
I seem to recall Obama recently offering to limit the tax increase to earners first at $250K, then $400K, then $800K... that's not compromise?
But don't worry. We'll go off the cliff. The taxes will go up on most everyone, even you presumably. Then the republicans will negotiate to CUT taxes on the middle class. They can then claim they didn't raise taxes (the Bush rates simply expired) and Obama will get his increase on the high earners (don't worry, hand-trollers probably don't fit in that class, unless the price of cohos has gone up substantially).
If the debt bothers you, ask why Bush didn't immediately raise taxes to pay for the two devastatingly expensive wars he plunged us into. You've been a warrior - who do you think pays for those things? They cost real coin. But not for Bush - he just charged them to the China credit card. The bill has come in.
Now get a tissue and wipe the spittle off of your screen.
Lat - I did, sorry....
....just used it anyway since the board is repleate with people who are actually serious about that kind of thing.
I guess FOX has avoided any mention of Grover Norquist......surprise surprise. I've noticed in the last fiew days they've spent a lot more time on Secretary Clinton's illness than the Fiscal cliff.
Your last post was SPOT on. Grendel - if you were even honest for a second, Lat is right, your head would explode if the President had made such a pledge to an unelected person.
grendel -
just FYI - many Catholic institutions, including the first Catholic institution of higher learning in this country, have been providing birth control to their employees for decades with no moral outrage in sight.
It's more than a little weak for them to pretend it's a 'deeply moral' issue for them now.
'crew' simply meant anti-President Obama.
Obama dont make pledges
that would make him ACCOUNTABLE. He's the master of non-accountability. 4 yrs from now there will be 8 yrs transpired where nothing was nobody's fault but everybody wants to know how the hell it happened: we're worse off.
and wheedling up the income bracket is not a compromise. That's saying "I'm gonna get those richbastards! One way or another I'm going to breach-load them." He's resolute on maintaining the momentum on entitlement expansion. And his base is for it [see para 1 above].
SG
it's not just the "anti-Obama" crew that wants to repeal it. You dont have to look too hard to find Obama sympathizers that say aloud, "What the hell were they thinking?"
there's all kinds of warts on the AHA. It was packaged as the Cure, but so far nothing promised has presented. Health insurance will go up and you should probably learn Spanish to navigate thru the robo-customer service menu faster. Brace for heavy seas.
Also, you missed a vital point again. So what if Catholic institutions had coverage that included bc? They weren't COMPELLED to. Get it? When I order the Full Meal Deal I sometimes dont eat the pickles -- doesnt cost more to have the pickles, but I set them to the side.
Hey thumbs down on NSTR (nothing significant to report)
how about F-Y?
(I'm tired of this partisancrap; I'm tired)
Good one
And your 1:16 and 3:15 rants weren't partisan??
But I do agree with you to an extent about the AHA. Note that it's modeled after the Massachusetts plan that Romney implemented as governor, and it was dreamed up by a bunch of conservatives from the Heritage Institute.
A far more intelligent, effective, and inexpensive system would have been a universal healthcare system, similar to the ones already successfully operating around the world. The current system will be targeted by the vampires of the insurance and healthcare industries.
And note, I did not downthumb your NSTR. But I did go upthumb it just now to make you feel better.
to Lat58
1. you're a sweetheart.
2. I'm a dyed in the wool conservative, not a republican. Does that mean anything? Not really, when you consider the alternatives.
3. It kills me to see a US president act like wuss on daily basis. I dont see much concern in here, but this president is scrogging our foreign relations to extent that will take decades to repair. Because he is arrogant and incompetent.
4. I know you'll probably go to your grave blaming GWB for lots of stuff, but let me give you some perspective: muslims were responsible for the 9/11 attacks; recall that right after the attack GWB flew to Offutt AFB and the next thing that happened was Tomahawk strikes in Afghanistan. THAT was leadership. The enemy does not play by our rules, nor respect our rules. GWB understood that, but he couldnt fight it on the terms that needed to be used because of American sensitivities.
5. Now we have sensitive president (it conceals his ineffectiveness & indecisiveness). In 4 yrs he may well make us all equally worthless.