FLASHBACK: 85 Percent Of House Republicans Who Were Serving In ?08 Voted For Bush?s Stimulus Act
Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on September 1st, 2011 4:36 am by HL
FLASHBACK: 85 Percent Of House Republicans Who Were Serving In ?08 Voted For Bush?s Stimulus Act
President Obama and congressional Democrats have been pushing to extend a payroll tax holiday that was enacted as part of the December 2010 tax deal and is set to expire in in January. Congressional Republicans, finally discovering a tax hike that they can get behind, have opposed the extension. The tax holiday benefits every working […]
President Obama and congressional Democrats have been pushing to extend a payroll tax holiday that was enacted as part of the December 2010 tax deal and is set to expire in in January. Congressional Republicans, finally discovering a tax hike that they can get behind, have opposed the extension.
The tax holiday benefits every working American, but Republicans have derided it as having no benefit to the economy. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) called the holiday “sugar high economics,” while Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) said that “not all tax relief is created equal for the purposes of helping to get the economy moving again.” A spokesman for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said Cantor “has never believed that this type of temporary tax relief is the best way to grow the economy.”
However, the Center for American Progress’ Michael Linden and John Griffith note that not only were these GOPers supportive of temporary tax cuts to boost the economy under President Bush — they voted for just such a policy move (plus some additional spending) by approving Bush’s Economic Stimulus Act of 2008:
In January 2008 when the economic picture was far less dire and the unemployment rate was only 4.8 percent, 165 Republicans in the House of Representatives and 33 Republican senators voted to pass a stimulus package with an estimated cost of $152 billion. That package provided tax cuts of up to $600 for individuals or $1,200 for married couples, plus an additional $300 per child. The bill also contained a number of temporary tax breaks for businesses. And just in case you thought President George W. Bush’s stimulus bill was simply a bunch of tax cuts, it also included $40 billion in direct spending. The legislation was even called the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008.
President Bush lauded the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 for providing “a booster shot for our economy … [putting] money back into the hands of American workers and businesses.” Reps. Eric Cantor (R-VA) and John Boehner (R-OH) as well as Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) all seemed to agree, as did nearly 200 other Republican members of Congress that voted in support of the bill.
In fact, as Linden and Griffith point out, “of the 134 current House Republicans that were also serving in 2008, 85 percent voted in favor of temporary tax cuts and additional spending as economic stimulus,” including Cantor, though he “never believed” in temporary tax measures to boost the economy:
Of course, since President Obama came into office, the GOP has consistently found reasons to oppose ideas that it once supported.
Grassley Backpedals After Town Hall Constituent Corrects Him On Health Care ?Rationing? Lie
ThinkProgress filed this report from a town hall in Carroll, Iowa. Politifact’s 2009 “Lie of the Year” was that the landmark health care reform legislation contained a clause authorizing “death panels.” The smear, started by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), was propagated by other Republicans, including long-time Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who warned that […]
ThinkProgress filed this report from a town hall in Carroll, Iowa.
Politifact’s 2009 “Lie of the Year” was that the landmark health care reform legislation contained a clause authorizing “death panels.” The smear, started by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), was propagated by other Republicans, including long-time Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who warned that the bill could “pull the plug on grandma.”
At a town hall in Carroll, Iowa, on Monday, Grassley repeated the falsehood that the health care reform law would lead to “rationing” and result in seniors not getting the care they need. One Iowa constituent, however, challenged Grassley’s characterization.
Sharon Gruber politely told the senator that what the law actually does is “move away from [paying for] procedures and going to [paying for] outcomes.” In a surprise twist, Grassley not only agreed with the woman’s assessment that the law simply shifts to a pay-for-outcome model, but the Iowa senator actually reversed course and agreed that “what you say is absolutely right and should be done,” less than two minutes after calling the provision “rationing.”
GRASSLEY: The reason why I think you have to worry about this panel rationing, or leading to rationing, is because presently, health care costs go up about two to three times the rate of inflation. Their goal is to not have health care costs after they kick in more than 1.5 percent the rate of inflation. So where’s that going to come from? That’s going to come from not reimbursing doctors, hospitals, etc. as much, and then that’s going to lead to people deciding, “if you’re over 80 years old, should you have a knee replaced?” Whereas nowadays there’s no question about it.
GRUBER: I think that what they’re trying to do is move away from the fact that doctors and hospitals are paid on the procedure that’s used. […] We’ve gotta get the fraud out of the system because that’s where a lot of the costs go. And this is part of it. They’re looking to move away from procedures and going to outcomes, from what I understand.
GRASSLEY: And that’s a very good thing to do. But they’re still limited to the decisions they’re making to be within 1.5 percent over inflation. But what you say is absolutely right and should be done. Not everything in the president’s health care reform bill is bad.
Though Grassley told Gruber that “[n]ot everything in the president’s health care reform bill is bad,” it’s important to remember that the Iowa senator joined every one of his Senate Republican colleagues in voting to repeal the entire bill in February, including the shift to a pay-for-outcome model, a ban on preexisting conditions, and increased funding for community health centers.
ThinkProgress spoke with Gruber after the event to get her reaction. She said she was “very disappointed” in Grassley for promoting the myth of rationing and death panels. Gruber noted that in the past he had “tended to be above […] these talking points,” but that was no longer the case:
