Andrew Roth - October 20th, 2005
We just issued the following press statement:bq.
Andrew Roth - October 05th, 2005
We issued the following press release following John Campbell’s open primary victory last night in California’s 48th congressional district. If you’d like to get more information on the race, including election results, the OC Blog has excellent coverage.
New Strategy of Early Support Already Generating Results For Pro-Growth Agenda
Washington, D.C. – With substantial assistance from the political action arm of the Club for Growth, the nation’s leading free-market advocacy organization with over 31,000 members, California State Senator John Campbell won the Republican nomination in the open primary in California’s 48th congressional district. The seat was vacated by Rep. Chris Cox, who recently became chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
“The voters of California’s 48th congressional district have made a strong statement in favor of the limited government, lower taxes agenda for which Sen. Campbell is a leading advocate,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “It was because of Campbell’s leadership on these issues that the Club for Growth PAC was among his first and biggest supporters.”
For the 2006 election cycle, the Club for Growth PAC has established a new and more aggressive approach to begin the campaign process much earlier and give proven, pro-growth candidates the best possible chance to win their races. As part of that new strategy, the Club for Growth PAC endorsed Sen. Campbell on August 8th because of his stellar record of opposing higher taxes and higher spending in the California General Assembly and State Senate.
Following the endorsement, Club for Growth members donated more than $115,000 to Sen. Campbell’s campaign. The Club for Growth PAC was also the first organization on the air with ads, spending more than $56,000 to make clear that Campbell’s opponent, Marilyn Brewer, was not a leader on pro-growth issues.
“The Club for Growth PAC’s early endorsement of John Campbell for Congress, our aggressive efforts to raise money for his campaign and our independent expenditure radio and TV ads demonstrate the sort of influence the Club for Growth PAC will have throughout the 2006 cycle,” continued Toomey.
The Club for Growth PAC has already endorsed four other congressional candidates for 2006: Sharron Angle (NV-02), Phil Krinkie (MN-06), Bill Sali (ID-01) and Rick O’Donnell (CO-07).
Andrew Roth - August 17th, 2005
Andrew Roth - August 12th, 2005
The Club just issued this press release:
SOCIAL SECURITY 70TH ANNIVERSARY: The Country Has Modernized, Time To Update Our Retirement System Too; Failure To Modernize In Last 70 Years Threatens Program, Under Serves Americans
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Sunday’s 70th anniversary of President Roosevelt’s signing Social Security into law is a reminder that the failure to modernize Social Security over the last seven decades has created a situation where the nation faces dire consequences unless steps are taken now to reform the program and add increased ownership opportunities through personal retirement accounts.
“Despite massive changes in our nation’s economy and population during the last 70 years, Social Security has failed to change with the times. As a result it is under serving Americans and threatening to bankrupt the country,” said Pat Toomey, President of the Club For Growth, the nation’s leading pro-growth advocacy group.
The Heritage Foundation reports that under the current program, Social Security spending will exceed projected tax collections in 2017 and will quickly balloon to alarming proportions. Annual inflation-adjusted deficits will reach $96 billion in 2021, $205 billion in 2026, and $324 billion in 2034.
“Because of the leadership of the President, we have an extraordinary opportunity to modernize this system so that it becomes sustainable, increases ownership opportunities for Americans and generates a better return on the investment of their hard-earned money,” continued Toomey. “Personal retirement accounts would give Americans significantly more control over their retirement and even with modest, secure investment options would generate a better rate of return.”
According to research by the Cato Institute, if a 28-year-old worker making $13,500 per year and paying $1,674 in Social Security tax were allowed to invest in a conservative savings program that earned just a 4 percent return, she would accrue $177,147 by age 67. That amounts to a monthly benefit of $1,243 — $400 more per month than the benefits promised by Social Security.
“Leaving the program untouched means it will swamp our economy in a sea of debt that can only be alleviated through massive tax increases or drastic benefit cuts,” concluded Toomey. “We can do better, but we need to act now while the political window of opportunity created by the President’s leadership is open. It’s time for Congress to move forward with a plan for meaningful Social Security reform that includes personal retirement accounts.”
Andrew Roth - July 29th, 2005
Highway Bill ’05“Under the final version of the surface transportation bill, total obligation limitations for surface-transportation programs (combined with contract authority that is exempt from obligation limitations and general fund appropriations for public transportation) must not exceed $283.9 billion over the period 2004 through 2009. Likewise, the net authorization level must not exceed $283.9 billion over the six years. (To the extent the gross authorization level exceeds $283.9 billion, an offsetting rescission should be included in the legislation.) Should the obligation or net authorization levels that would result from the final bill exceed these limits, the President’s senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.” (emphasis in the original)– STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY: H.R. 3 –Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, April 26, 2005“The President has clearly stated that we need to have legislation that meets our transportation needs but that also keeps us on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009. The President put forward a responsible budget and a responsible plan for meeting our transportation needs. We have made it very clear, and we reiterated here today, that the President’s senior advisor would recommend a veto if that legislation exceeded the $283.9 billion that we have proposed.” (emphasis added)– Scott McClellan, White House Briefing, May 17, 2005“But our view is very clear that if it exceeds that limit, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto that legislation.” (emphasis added)– Scott McClellan, White House Briefing, May 17, 2005“Now Bush is threatening to veto this one [highway bill] over an $11 billion difference. ‘Our position is real and strong,’ White House spokeswoman Dana Perino says.”– USA Today, May 27, 2005“‘Our position [veto threat] hasn’t changed, because the president’s number is 284,’ said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, referring to the amount in billions of dollars that the House approved and the Bush administration has been requesting for authorized federal transportation spending between FY04-09.” (emphasis added)– CongressDaily, June 7, 2005“We’ve continued to reach out and work with members of Congress so that we can move forward on this legislation. It’s an important piece of legislation. We want to get it done and get it passed. And our commitment continues to be to the level of $284 billion.”– Scott McClellan, White House Briefing, June 21, 2005“The President’s position is well known…And I don’t believe that Congress is going to send us a piece of legislation that the President would need to veto.” (emphasis added)– Scott McClellan, White House Briefing, June 21, 2005Highway Bill ’04“And our views are very well-known in terms of the President being prepared to veto legislation if it goes beyond his — or if it does not meet his principles and goes beyond the resources that he outlined in the legislation.” (emphasis added)– Scott McClellan, White House Briefing, March 31, 2004“In total, the House bill authorizes $284 billion in spending on highways, highway safety, and mass transit over the next six years, a full $28 billion above the President’s request for the same period. Accordingly, if this legislation were presented to the President in its current form, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.” (emphasis in the original)– STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY — H.R. 3550 – Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, March 30, 2004