“It’s the economy, stupid” – those were the only worthwhile words Bill Clinton ever used. As the political candidates are battling over everything from abortion to the Iraq war, the American people seem to always come back to the economy as one of the most important election topics.
    I think the economy will be one of the deciding factors for this presidential election. If the economy is doing well and there aren’t any major events between now and election time, I think the Republicans will keep the Presidency. If the economy goes south, I don’t think the Republicans will have a chance on any level of government to win elections.
    President Bush is doing his best to make sure that the economy stays humming along. He does get to take some credit for turning things around. He received a faltering economy from President Clinton and the 9/11 terrorist attack blow to the economy, but he still managed to turn things around and we have had some of the best economic statistics in recent memory.
    President Bush is working with lenders to fend off the worsening housing and lending problems and he is pushing for an economic stimulus package to give the economy a boost. But these programs raise some interesting questions, should conservatives support his efforts or are these programs more examples of government waste and intervention in our lives?
    As a conservative, I think the tax rebates are very appropriate. Reducing taxes should be a key policy of any conservative and instead of these one time rebates, I think the tax rate should be reduced in order to continually keep more money in the pockets of consumers.
    Another problem with this tax rebate is that we will be adding to the debt. I think it is good to give the people their money back, but the government must also reduce spending, especially in welfare, social programs and pork projects. Unfortunately, Congress, over the last few years, hasn’t been very conservative when it comes to spending our tax dollars.
    Most of the leadership in Congress has gone along with the President on the tax refund, but the House and Senate are looking at passing different versions of the tax refund. The House bill is exactly what the President was hoping for, but the Senate decided to broaden the scope of the refunds plus, they added additional amendments for heating assistance and other pet projects.
    The Senate bill is allowing people who don’t pay taxes or have income from social security and veterans benefits to get a rebate as long as they make over $3000. I would have to disagree on this part.
    The House bill specifically requires people to earn the income before they get a tax refund. I am not opposed to the elderly or veterans; I am opposed to the able body people who make a living off Social Security from getting a refund. Those people are the ones who don’t deserve to receive a refund because they don’t pay taxes and will probably never pay taxes. The veterans have served their country and have paid not only taxes but, in some cases, have given up their normal lives due to injuries. I think they should be provided for above this process. The same goes for senior citizens who have worked all their lives and have paid taxes and contributed to this country. They should also be able to receive a refund. I think the tax refund should be based on age and number of years of paying taxes, not just what was paid that year.
    This whole effort is due to the fact that the economy has started to slow down and there are many politicians and economists who are talking about the United States heading into a recession.
    I am not one to overly criticize subject matter experts but I have to wonder if all the doom and gloom is not part of a strategy to cause additional political damage to the President. I agree the stock market has taken some serious hits but that is part of the normal free market.
    However, when everyone starts talking about bad economic times ahead and the liberal press constantly prints articles saying how bad it is, the common consumer might decide it is best to start holding onto their money to see how things play out. This snowballs into a decline in spending, a decline in manufacturing, and, guess what, we are in a recession.
    I am not saying that the liberal media is trying to control the economy but I do believe they have some influence on what America thinks. Just look at the liberal media and the global warming hype. They are really pushing that onto the American people and they are starting to buy it.
    Again, I am not against getting more of my tax money back, but part of the economic problem should be blamed on the consumer. Sleazy mortgage banks and lenders have over extended themselves and many consumers.  
    When interest rates dropped and money became cheap to borrow, many banks started aggressively seeking out potential home owners. They offered new and innovative loans, such as the no money down, no interest for three years, etc.
    Realtors and home construction companies jumped onto the money train and started convincing American’s that they didn’t need to worry about things and why not buy or build that house that might be just a little to much for them. The real estate market was red hot and they only needed to stay in the house for a year or two and then they could sell it for a nice profit and they would have enough money to get the next bigger size.
    Nobody bothered to tell the consumers that good things only last for a certain length of time. After the real estate market was saturated and everyone was in over their heads, the bottom fell out of the real estate market and the consumer was left holding the house they couldn’t afford, the banks and lenders were left holding loans that couldn’t be collected on, and the rest of the manufacturing industry didn’t have anyone left buying their products. The house of cards had to fall at some point and it has happened.
    In order to protect consumers from themselves, the government is trying to take care of everyone by working with banks and lenders to extend loan payments and reduce interest rates in order to stop forclosures and repossessions.
    I don’t have a problem with the government stopping unfair or illegal loan practices, but I do have a problem with my tax money being used to try and fix this problem. As the comedian Ron White says “You can’t fix stupid,” and I agree. If the deal looks too good, then it probably is.
    I think many of these people need to realize that they have to take care of themselves. I try to be compassionate but when will it stop? If the government is always there to take care of you, then why should I be worried about buying insurance? We bail out flood victims and allow them to rebuild homes in flood plains, we bail out companies who can’t compete and now we are bailing out consumers who got in over their heads. What about the people who took advantage of the good rates but were sensible enough to buy the right size house? What about the people who didn’t do anything? What kind of deal or cut are those people going to get from the government?
    I think the government is doing the right thing by giving tax rebates but it has gone too far to try to help the people who are greedy. The more the government plays with the economy, the more problems we have. Let’s keep things simple – reduce taxes and reduce government spending. That is what is best for the economy.

-Steve White 

    The recent bipartisan effort by the President and Congress to jump start the economy with an economic stimulus package has been lauded as an example of what can be accomplished when partisan differences are set aside.
    However, a closer look at the proposed plan reveals that the politicians behind it are more interested in garnering votes than dealing with the short and long term challenges facing our economy.
    The plan supported by the President and passed by the House was a work of compromise. The Democrats agreed to not increase spending for food stamps or the length a person can receive unemployment benefits. In exchange, Republicans agreed to give rebates to Americans who pay social security but do not make enough money to pay income tax.
    Once the plan is “improved” and approved by the Senate it will take between two and four months to get the tax rebates to consumers. Ideas in the Senate to “improve” the plan include giving rebates to senior citizens on social security and allowing those on unemployment to receive an additional 13 weeks of benefits.
    According to the politicians, tax rebates will act like a shot of adrenaline for the economy. Increased consumer spending will stimulate economic growth and investment.
    So why are the elderly receiving tax rebates? Why are the unemployed being given another 13 weeks on Uncle Sam’s teat? These are not people who are going to go out and buy big purchases to spur the economy. They will use tax payers’ money to pay bills and buy food.
    If paying our bills and buying food stimulated the economy, America would outpace the rest of the world in economic growth and performance until the end of time. Although these people will not be going out to buy a new flat screen TV, they will remember to go vote for the politicians who sent a check their way.
    Legislation to help bail out people affected by the sub-prime mortgage crisis also found its way into the plan approved by the President and House. The plan calls for raising the cap on loans that government organizations like Fannie Mae can buy. It also includes money allocated for credit counseling.
    It is hard to listen to the stories of people who were evicted from their homes after defaulting on their mortgage payments. Many of them were dubbed by companies into believing they would pay low fixed interest rates and be able to refinance their mortgages later.
    However, it is just as wrong to make American tax payers assume the liability for these high risk loans. The government should not be helping some citizens live beyond their means at the expense of others.
    One of the better parts of the stimulus package is offering tax breaks to companies who invest in new equipment in 2008. The incentive to buy new machinery and software now instead of later will entice companies to make changes sooner to save money. The new equipment will improve efficiency which will free up more money to expand and make new investments.
    Although tax rebates for Americans and tax breaks for businesses could help stimulate the economy both the House and Senate plans are laden down with pork to ensure the reelection of incumbents. What is even more disturbing is that very few politicians are talking about the effect these plans would have on the national deficit.
    Whether interference of the government to prevent a recession actually helps or harms the economy depends on your economic school of thought. What should be obvious for everyone to see is that when politicians are more concerned with getting reelected than considering the impact of legislation on Americans we have a problem.

-Neil Rapp