Mr. Andrew Roth - September 16th, 2015
September 16, 2015
Dear Member of Congress:
On behalf of our organizations and the millions of members we represent,
we urge you to ensure that any legislation providing discretionary funding
for Fiscal Year 2016 adhere to the discretionary spending levels set forth
by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA).
Congress passed the BCA with bipartisan support and a promise to cap
overall discretionary spending every year for the following decade. Even
with these modest spending limits, discretionary spending will still
increase in 2016 and every year thereafter.
Since its implementation, the BCA has been a rare victory for fiscal
responsibility in Washington and has helped to control the growth of
government spending and reduce deficits. Sadly, though not surprisingly,
some in Washington want to abandon the BCA caps in order to spend
more taxpayer money and add to the growing debt burden for current and
Facing an $18 trillion national debt, abandoning these modest spending
limits by directly breaking the BCA caps or using budget gimmicks to get
around them would be fiscally irresponsible and send a dangerous
message to the American people. Hard-working Americans deserve to
have their policymakers live up to their promises on spending. Under the
BCA, total discretionary budget authority in FY 2016 is capped at $1.016
trillion. Any discretionary spending legislation exceeding that level would
break the promise made to the American taxpayers.
Marc Short, President
Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce
Phil Kerpen, President
Coley Jackson, President
Americans for Competitive Enterprise
Rick Manning, President
Americans for Limited Government
Brent Gardner, Vice President of Government Affairs
Americans for Prosperity
Grover Norquist, President
Americans for Tax Reform
Norm Singleton, Senior Vice President
Campaign for Liberty
Andrew F. Quinlan, President
Center for Freedom & Prosperity
Tom Schatz, President
Citizens Against Government Waste
David McIntosh, President
Club for Growth
Jonathan Bydlak, President
Coalition to Reduce Spending
Lawson Bader, Executive Director
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Pete Hegseth, CEO
Concerned Veterans for America
Penny Nance, President and CEO
Concerned Woman for America
Adam Brandon, President and CEO
Andrew Clark, President
Mario H. Lopez, President
Hispanic Leadership Fund
Heather R. Higgins, President and CEO
Independent Women’s Voice
Carrie Lukas, Managing Director
Independent Women’s Forum
Daniel Garza, Executive Director
The Libre Initiative
Brandon Arnold, Executive Vice President
National Taxpayer Union
Andrew Moylan, Executive Director
R Street Institute
Steve Ellis, Vice President
Taxpayers for Common Sense
Paul J. Gessing, President
Rio Grande Foundation
Mr. Andrew Roth - October 22nd, 2014
In a follow-up from the last blog post, here’s this news item about what the private sector is doing about Ebola.
Johnson & Johnson will begin safety testing in early January on a vaccine combination that could protect people from a strain of the deadly Ebola virus.
The health care products maker said Wednesday that the vaccine being developed by its Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies protects against an Ebola strain that is “highly similar” to the virus that has triggered the current outbreak in West Africa. Johnson & Johnson also plans to test whether its vaccine protects against the version causing the outbreak, which has killed more than 4,500 people.
The New Brunswick, New Jersey, company has committed up to $200 million to speed up and expand production of the vaccine program.
Mr. Andrew Roth - October 22nd, 2014
There’s two sides to every coin. On one side ($):
“The CDC and NIH clearly do not have the resources they need,” said Rosa DeLauro, ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, said in a statement to CQ Roll Call. “Congress should immediately come back to Washington and vote to provide emergency funds before the November election. If we do not do so, our ability to fight and cure diseases could be at risk.”
And on the other side:
The director of the National Institutes for Health claims a vaccine for Ebola “probably” would have been developed by now if not for the stagnant funding for the agency, which has a $30 billion annual budget. Yet NIH did come up with the money to pay to give Swedish massages for rabbits [emphasis added].
The NIH also doled out money to investigate the meditation effects of reading Buddhist literature ($533,376). And it spent money sending text messages to alcoholics ($480,500), obese people ($2.7 million), and meth addicts ($360,113).
These questionable projects (and unfortunately more) come from Senator Tom Coburn’s 2014 Wastebook. It should be required reading for anyone who thinks the government is wisely spending our money, and thus, deserves more of our hard-earned tax dollars.
Mr. Andrew Roth - July 17th, 2014
KEY VOTE ALERT
“NO” ON SENATE TRIA BILL (S. 2244)
The Club for Growth urges all Senators to vote “NO” on the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (S. 2244) sponsored by Sen. Chuck Schumer. A vote is expected later today. This vote will be included in the Club for Growth’s 2014 Congressional Scorecard.
This program was meant to be temporary when it was created in 2001, so terminating the program or, at the very least, winding it down, would be the best course of action. Instead, this bill extends the program for seven more years with only modest reforms. A country that believes in free markets should not have a federal government subsidizing insurance policies at the bidding of various special interests. Fiscally conservative Senators should vigorously oppose this legislation.
Our Congressional Scorecard for the 113th Congress provides a comprehensive rating of how well or how poorly each member of Congress supports pro-growth, free-market policies and will be distributed to our members and to the public.
Mr. Andrew Roth - January 20th, 2014
Economist David Malpass offers a good rebuttal to Democrats who are trying (yet again) to exploit income inequality this election year: