Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
DOES IT REALLY SAY THAT?
CAN IT REALLY DO THAT?
SENATOR RON JOHNSON SITS ON
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE.
THE REPUBLICAN SITS LIVE ON
CAPITOL HILL.
THE PLEASURE TO TALK TO YOU.
THE REPUBLICAN SIDE OF YOUR
COMMITTEE, THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE, REPORTEDLY DID A
PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND
DETERMINED FOLLOWING FROM
THE BUDGET.
NOT 600 BUT 800 BILLION IN
TAX INCREASES.
7.3 TRILLION IN NEW DEBT.
AN ACTUAL DEFICIT REDUCTION
OF ONLY 280 BILLION.
TWO QUESTIONS, IS THAT
ROUGHLY ACCURATE, AND,
SECOND OF ALL, IF IT IS, IS
THAT UNACCEPTABLE?
>> YEAH.
I MEAN IT IS NOT A SERIOUS
BUDGET.
IT NEVER PROVIDES BALANCE.
DOESN'T PUT US ON A GLIDE
PATH TO LIVE WITHIN OUR
MEANS.
10-YEAR SPENDING COMPARED TO
WHAT THE HOUSE PROPOSES.
IT RAISES SPENDING BY $5
TRILLION.
MORE AN TRILLION DOLLARS
OVER THE CBO BASELINE AND
HOUSE BUDGET AND INCREASES
DEFICIT BY $4 TRILLION OVER
THE HOUSE PROPOSAL.
GREGG, WHAT YOU REALLY NEED
TO CONCENTRATE ON IN ANY OF
THESE 10 YEARS BUDGETS IS
THE FIRST YEAR.
IN THE FIRST YEAR PRESIDENT
OBAMA'S BUDGET SPENDS $160
BILLION MORE THAN THE CBO
BASELINE, INCREASES THE
DEFICIT BY $128 BILLION MORE
THAN THE CBO BASELINE.
LET'S FACE IT.
REALLY WHAT IS THE PRESIDENT
REALLY IS PROPOSING,
INCREASING SPENDING AND
INCREASING THE DEFICIT THAT
FIRST YEAR.
THEN EXTRAPOLATE NEXT 10
YEARS.
THAT IS WHAT HIS PROPOSAL
LOOKS LIKE TO ME.
MORE INCREASED SPENDING.
MORE INCREASES TAXES AND
UNFORTUNATELY MORE INCREASED
DEFICITS.
GREGG: BUT FOR THE VERY
FIRST TIME THE PRESIDENT IS
PUTTING IN WRITING HERE A
CONCESSION ON
SOCIAL SECURITY TO REDUCE
THE GROWTH OF
SOCIAL SECURITY BY USING A
DIFFERENT INFLATION MEASURE
FOR CALCULATING COST OF
LIVING INCREASES, THE
SO-CALLED CHAINED CPI THAT
GIVES A LOWER MEASURE OF
INFLATION.
WOULD REPUBLICANS, IN
EXCHANGE FOR THAT, BE
WILLING TO AGREE TO SOME
REVENUE TAX INCREASES?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I
THINK IT IS HELPFUL THE
PRESIDENT IS PUTTING CHAIN
CPI ON THE TABLE.
A MORE ACCURATE REFLECTION
OF TRUE INFLATION.
IN TERMS OF DOING A DEAL
RAISING MORE REVENUE,
REPUBLICANS WANT TO RAISE
MORE REVENUE THROUGH
ECONOMIC GROWTH.
GREGG, A COUPLE FIGURES EVEN
WITH THE MEAGER ECONOMIC
GROWTH FROM 2009 TO 2012,
REVENUE INCREASED $34
BILLION PER YEAR IF WE
RETURN TO A NORMAL ECONOMY
WHERE REVENUE GENERATION IS
18.1%, THAT WOULD ADD
ANOTHER $435 BILLION PER
YEAR.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE
PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL, IT
INCREASES TAXES.
IT WILL HARM ECONOMIC
GROWTH.
THE FISCAL CLIFF DEAL WILL
RAISE $41 BILLION NEXT YEAR.
RAISING PEOPLE'S TAXES WILL
HARM ECONOMIC GROWTH AND
LIKELY RESULT IN LESS
REVENUE THAN WE CAN GET
THROUGH GROWING OUR ECONOMY.
GREGG: WHAT IF YOU'RE ONLY
TAXING HIGH INCOME WAGE
EARNERS FOR EXAMPLE?
FOR EXAMPLE THE PRESIDENT
WANTS TO MAKE THOSE EARNING
MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS
PAY AT LEAST 30% OF THEIR
INCOME IN TAXES AND 28% ON
CAP ON DEDUCTIONS FOR HIGH
EARNERS.
WHAT ABOUT THAT?
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT?
YOU'RE ONLY HITTING THAT ONE
SMALL SECTOR?
>> BUT THAT ONE SMALL SECTOR
IS COMPRISED OF SMALL TO
MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES THAT
REPORT THEIR BUSINESS INCOME
THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL TAX
RETURN.
THOSE ARE THE INNOVATORS.
THOSE ARE THE JOB CREATORS.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT WE
REALLY ARE RELYING ON TO
GROW OUR ECONOMY.
SO YOU HARM ECONOMIC GROWTH
AND, I HOPE I PROVED THAT
ECONOMIC GROWTH IS GOING TO
BE FAR MORE EFFECTIVE AT
REALLY INCREASING REVENUE
AND REDUCING DEFICITS THAN
PUNISHING SUCCESS.
UNFORTUNATELY THIS PRESIDENT
DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
LISTEN, I'M GLAD HE IS
TRYING TO TAKE A LOOK AT
SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT EVEN
CHAIN CPI, GREGG, THAT WILL
SUPPOSEDLY RAISE ABOUT $230
BILLION OF, WELL ACTUALLY,
CLOSE THE GAP IN
SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT OVER
THE NEXT 20 YEARS,
SOCIAL SECURITY IS RUNNING A
CASH DEFICIT OF $5.1
TRILLION.
WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS START
LOOKING AT EACH ONE OF THESE
PROBLEMS INDIVIDUALLY AND
START SOLVING
SOCIAL SECURITY, SOLVE
MEDICARE.
WE NEED PRO-GROWTH TAX
REFORM.
WE START USING OUR ENERGY
RESOURCES IN THIS COUNTRY.
SO I'M NOT LOOKING FOR A
GRAND BARGAIN.
I'M LOOKING ADDRESSING THESE
PROBLEMS BY FIRST AND
FOREMOST, GOING TO THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE AND
DESCRIBING THE TRUE
SERIOUSNESS, THE TRUE DEPTH
OF THE PROBLEM.
THAT IS THE FIRST STEP IN
REACHING SOLUTIONS.
GREGG: SENATOR, SOME PEOPLE
SUSPECT THE PRESIDENT ISN'T
REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT ALL OF
THIS, OTHERWISE HE WOULDN'T
BE TWO MONTHS LATE
PRESENTING HIS BUDGET.
ALREADY OF COURSE THE
WHITE HOUSE ESPECIALLY OVER
THE WEEKEND WAS CONDEMNING
REPUBLICAN PUBS EMBRACING
THE MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY
APPROACH.
ARE YOU WORRIED THAT THE
PRESIDENT IS PLAYING
POLITICS AND ALL HE IS
TRYING TO DO IS SOCIETY UP
REPUBLICANS FOR BLAME WITH
AN EYE TOWARDS THE FOURTH
FOURTH ELECTION?
>> OBVIOUSLY RELEASING A
BUDGET TWO MONTHS LATE IS
LEADING FROM BEHIND WHICH IS
NOT REAL GOOD IDEA.
BUT I'LL TELL YOU WHAT.
I WILL BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT
IS SERIOUS ABOUT SOLVING
THESE PROBLEMS WHEN HE
STARTS STATING PUBLICLY WHAT
HE SAID PRIVATELY.
FOR EXAMPLE, HE DESCRIBED
THE PROBLEM IN MEDICARE,
THAT AMERICANS PAY ONE
DOLLAR IN AND TO GET $3 OUT
IN BENEFITS.
THAT'S A HUGE PROBLEM.
HE FURTHER WENT ON TO SAY,
AMERICANS DON'T UNDERSTAND
THAT.
WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA NEEDS
TO DO.
HERE IS THE FIRST ACT OF
BIPARTISAN, GREGG.
WE NEED TO SIT AT TABLE TO
AGREE ON DEPTH OF THE
PROBLEM.
GO TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
TOGETHER IN A BIPARTISAN
FASHION TO ACCURATELY
DESCRIBE THE DEPTH OF THE
PROBLEM.
RATHER THAN TRYING TO TALK
ABOUT SOLUTIONS RIGHT NOW.
WE NEED TO CONVINCE THE
AMERICAN PUBLIC WE HAVE A
REAL SERIOUS PROBLEM.
TO DATE THE ONLY THING I
EVER HEARD ABOUT MEDICARE,
WE NEED MODEST REFORMS.
LISTEN, WHEN YOU'RE PAYING
ONE DOLLAR AND PAYING $3 OUT
IN BENEFITS AFTER $575
BILLION A YEAR PROGRAM THAT
WILL REQUIRE MORE THAN
MODEST REFORMS.
WE NEED TO BE TRUTHFUL AND
HONEST WITH THE AMERICAN IN
A BIPARTISAN FASHION.