Rehberg Proposals to “Reduce the Deficit” Will Actually Increase It, Studies Show

Dennis Rehberg does not like getting asked tough questions.It looks like Montana’s sole Representative in the U.S. Congress, Dennis Rehberg’s proposals to reduce the deficit by permanently cutting taxes for all income, regardless of whether the person is a billionaire or makes $35,000 a year, will actually increase the national deficit by an additional $700 billion through the year 2020, according to fiscal analysts.

In an extensive story in this Sunday’s September 19, 2010 Great Falls Tribune, entitled  “Roots of U.S. debt run deep and parties are miles apart on what should be done,” mysteriously not available online, reporters Maureen Groppe and Ledyard King of the Tribune Washington Bureau report that Rehberg claims that:

[I]t’s dishonest to say that cutting taxes has the same impact on the debt as increasing spending.

But according to a study by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, Rehberg is wrong.

Looking at just the effects of extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the CBO at the time concluded that they would initially help the economy but would have a negative effect in the long term because of the impact on the deficit.

It gets worse.  The article goes on to explain that the largest 10-year increase in the deficit came from tax cuts passed under Rehberg’s watch,

…which added about $1.7 trillion to the deficit, according to the Congressional Research Service.  Legislation passed in fiscal year 2009, including the financial bailout passed in late 2008 and the stimulus package passed in 2009 increased the deficit by$509 billion compared with a $903 billion increase caused by tax cuts and spending programs enacted from 2001-2008.

Also under Rehberg’s tenure.

Share

9 Comments on "Rehberg Proposals to “Reduce the Deficit” Will Actually Increase It, Studies Show"

  1. This doesnt suprise me if you look at national debt between 1978 and 2010 Republican presidents racked up 9.1 trillion dollars with GW Bush being the biggest debt hog and Regan being the second and Democratic preisdents only racked up 2.1 trillion dollars worth of debt, in fact when Bill Clinton left office there was a balaced budget and in fact if you remember the 2000 presidental election was on the surplus money GW Bush wanted to give tax cuts and Al Gore wanted to put it in a lock box to strengthen social security. GW Bush tried to give away social security to wall street fat cats that says alot about the parties dont believe the yelling and screaming of Rush Limbaugh and his ilk look at the numbers

  2. And lets not forget – Iraq? I mean, at least domestic spending doesn’t kill 100,000 people AND rack up debt.

  3. Wow. Of course that’s an excellent point. Rehberg is the worst.

  4. Your whole premise is flawed on tax cuts.

    From the time of JFK to George W., cutting taxes increased revenues to the Federal Govt.

    The Govt Revenue for 2007 (GWB)was 2.568 Trillion dollars, versus 2.025 trillion dollars for the year 2000.(Clinton)

    Now let’s talk about The Messiah, The Great Leader, The Protector of the Poor, President Obama.

    From the day he was elected until January 1, 2009 businees cut 2,000,000 jobs, seeing what was ahead for them.

    Revenues for 2009 dropped to 2.105 trillion dollars because of this, and the resulting Obama economy.

    Representative Rehberg has sound ideas to revitalize our economy, but since Reid/Pelosi have ran Congress since Jan 2007 you won’t see common sense measure come to light.

    But fortunately, America is poised to fix Congress this November.

    • Your entire comment is a fallacy, Eric. It’s called false causation.

    • Ok Eric if Republicans are actually fiscal conservatives how come our national debt was the most under George W. Bush????? Now I remember him runing in 2000 as a “reformer with results” during the Republican primary between him and Senator McCain and then after the primary he was a “compasioniate conservative” yet we had a bigger national debt under him and he racked up more debt then any of his predessors and had more debt then the other 41 men combined. The very definition of debt is spending money you dont have aka selling your tommrows that son of a b-tch not only sold my tommrows but the tommrows of my children grandchildren and great grandchildren and probley my great great grandchildren if I should ever have children. Yes I agree that President Obama has racked up some debt but he is cleaning up the mess your man Bush made. Frankly I think GW Bush and his buddy Dick Cheney should be put on trial for treason and if found guilty hung by the neck or send to prison for life. This country has a big big big mess now if your party has a plan to clean it up lets hear it but Denny Rehbergs plan doesnt clean it up according to the congressional budget office and the congressional research service in fact it makes a big mess bigger so how the hell is he a fiscal conservative just cause he dosent spend rich mans money and taxes the sh-t out of the working class thats conservative cause that seems to be the Republican way

    • I like how Eric skips from 2001 to 2007. Pretty clumsy attempt at a sleight of hand.

      http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html

      • Omitting facts is the only way republicans can convince themselves they are right. Teabaggers on the other hand never even consider facts when choosing their political ideologies.

  5. This isn’t my premise, it is that of the Congressional Budget Office and the Congressional Research Service.

Comments are closed.