Talk to Jim Himes, Tomorrow at 7pm

Want to talk with U.S. Rep. Jim Himes (D-4th district) about the economic stimulus package? Stop by CTLP tomorrow night between 7:00-7:30, and he’ll answer your questions!

Won’t be here? Leave a question and I’ll ask it for you.

Advertisements

27 responses to “Talk to Jim Himes, Tomorrow at 7pm

  1. AndersonScooper

    I’d like to know if Congressman Himes thinks the stimulus package is going to be sufficient to stop the current downward spiral. (Are we going to be able to stabilize consumer demand and confidence, and will enough jobs be created to keep this recession from snowballing into a full-blown depression.)

    I’d also like to ask him, frankly, if he’s disappointed that the Republicans haven’t made this stimulus package more of a bipartisan effort, when almost all of the major economists say that this is a time to borrow and spend, even though no one wants the country to go deeper into debt.

    Finally I’d love some stories about what his first five weeks in DC have been like. I’m sure there have been plenty of inspirational moments, but how about something more mundane? How is he getting back-and-forth from DC, train, plane or automobile? Has he been to Ben’s Chili Bowl yet? Has Rosa lent him a room in her townhouse? Etc.

  2. I’m disappointed in AS questions.

    I would have expected–

    1) What kind of personal sacrifice are you willing to make, given our dire economy?

    2) Since you are a multi-millionaire, would you be willing to forego your congressional salary and benefits available to no one else?

  3. It’s good to know that despite the changes in both the economic situation and political leadership, some things remain constant. The liberal polynym continues to execute from the same rhetoric playbook:

    I’d also like to ask him, frankly, if he’s disappointed that the Republicans haven’t made this stimulus package more of a bipartisan effort, when almost all of the major economists say that this is a time to borrow and spend, even though no one wants the country to go deeper into debt.

    First we have the straw man argument that the pork laden tax and spend bill that couldn’t attract a single Republican House vote is somehow a failure of Republican bipartisanship. The bi is actually supposed to mean two.

    Secondly we have the qualified statement about major economists. Presumably the definition of major is agrees with me?.

    I am a bit puzzled about the lack of name calling and connection to the Republican state chairman’s addiction problems.

  4. I’d also like to ask him, frankly, if he’s disappointed that the Republicans haven’t made this stimulus package more of a bipartisan effort, when almost all of the major economists say that this is a time to borrow and spend, even though no one wants the country to go deeper into debt.

    Say what? Like whom? Contray to popular belief, Nancy Pelosi and Timothy Geitner are NOT major economists.

  5. I am a bit puzzled about the lack of name calling and connection to the Republican state chairman’s addiction problems.

    He must have not been feeling well last evening.

    Never mind that Healy starts too many sentences in my opinion with; “As you know I’m a recovering …..”

    Let me point out too, for probably the 100th time (my wife says I repeat myself my wife says I repeat myself my wife says I repeat myself) that I was the self-named chairman of the Anybody but Healy committee prior to his election/selection as chair.

    Then he took the helm and has steered our ship well; the crew is cohesive, cooperative and hard working.
    Pleasant as all get out too.
    And, despite a horrible year the CT GOP remains in the black, which is in itself little less than a miracle.

    I’ve never been more wrong in my own assessment of another human being than I was with Chris Healy. I’ve dined on baked stuffed crow, southern fried crow, crow ala king; in short I’ve eaten a lot of crow.

    Many of us would gladly go to the mat for Healy; he’s a class act and a far better man than I had ever realized despite being somewhat familiar with him for over 2 decades.

  6. AndersonScooper

    Guys, the President is trying to lead this country out of what’s going to be the biggest recession of our lifetimes, and the GOP is mired in the politics of the past?

    Major stimulus package, is the concept that difficult? Bolster consumer demand and confidence, and hopefully begin to stabilize the job losses and growth in unemployment.

    Given the degree of recent job loss numbers, it’s staggering that Republicans are choosing not to rally around the President. At what point does this economic crisis become serious to you?

  7. AndersonScooper

    PS– Dude, you ought to ask Jim Himes about his readiness to make personal sacrifices for the good of the country. What you’d hear back is a completely different philosophy than that expressed by Lieut. Governor Fedele the other day, even after Rell made her big speech about shared pain and sacrifices.

  8. Guys, the President is trying to lead this country out of what’s going to be the biggest recession of our lifetimes, and the GOP is mired in the politics of the past?

    Major stimulus package, is the concept that difficult? Bolster consumer demand and confidence, and hopefully begin to stabilize the job losses and growth in unemployment.

    “All of the major economists…” = who? Not just one… you said “all.”

    These are not politics of the past. Obama’s “stimulus” package will not “stimulate” anything. Precisely what leads you to believe that it will succeed, other than the fact that it was promoted by a Democrat? How will it bolster consumer demand and confidence, and “hopefully” stabilize the job losses and growth in unemployment? The way you accomplish those goals is to cut taxes, period.

  9. So why don’t they just pass the President’s bill without Republican support? I don’t get it. The votes are there just do it.

  10. AndersonScooper

    Dobb, I’d Google it up for you if I weren’t on my BlackBerry, but the truth is that government spending, via things like NASA, NSF grants, education $$$, infrastructure projects, etc., is the quickest and surest way to create jobs. Yes, tax cuts have their effect, but that’s a slower route, with less bang for each buck.

    Have you seen the job loss numbers? 600,000 jobs lost in each of the past three months.

    Reality– Like when we go to war, President Obama, in tackling the economic crisis, truly wanted to present the country with a unified government. That’s not going to happen, and thankfully, yes, the Democrats will simply act on their own.

  11. Dobb, I’d Google it up for you if I weren’t on my BlackBerry, but the truth is that government spending, via things like NASA, NSF grants, education $$$, infrastructure projects, etc., is the quickest and surest way to create jobs. Yes, tax cuts have their effect, but that’s a slower route, with less bang for each buck.

    That’s the quickest way to create temporary and public jobs. Google this: the government is not good at creating jobs.

    Besides, less than 21% of the House’s $825 billion package would be spent in 2009; the rest would be spent in 2010 and 2011. How can you call that the “quickest and surest way to create jobs” now? This is about pork, plain and simple.

  12. A public job isn’t a job, now?

    I remember this attitude from when I was a public school teacher. It is simply, unthinkingly biased against anything having to do with government, and it is wrong. Growth in the public sector leads to people having jobs, and money to spend and put back into the economy. I bought my house with money I made as a teacher. I was not some kind of leech or drag on taxpayers, and I resent strongly the implication that I was.

    A third of the bill is tax cuts. Pork, right?

    Tax cuts are not magic pixie dust. They do not cure everything.

  13. A public job isn’t a job, now?

    Oh, it’s a job, and no one is calling you a leech. It’s also a job that typically includes more attractive (read: expensive) benefits packages that have grown to be thought of as a right, not a privilege. Creating such jobs is also a much, much less efficient way of spending money. It is far more efficient to create private-sector jobs, and this “stimulus” package will do very little to accomplish that. Even if Obama is correct (and he is not), the “stimulus” package will cost $200-300,000 per job created.

  14. AndersonScooper

    Well, I hope together we figure this out, because if we keep losing jobs at half a million per month, we could be heading into the Second Great Depression.

    PS– if a stratergy of tax cuts, tax cuts, and more tax cuts were the answer, how did we end up in this mess anyway? I understand that $4.50/gal gasoline, and the sub-prime/derivative mess got the ball rolling last year, but if trickle-down truly worked you’d think we’d be in great shape after almost ten years of wealth accumulating at the top.

  15. PS– if a stratergy of tax cuts, tax cuts, and more tax cuts were the answer, how did we end up in this mess anyway? I understand that $4.50/gal gasoline, and the sub-prime/derivative mess got the ball rolling last year, but if trickle-down truly worked you’d think we’d be in great shape after almost ten years of wealth accumulating at the top.

    Blaming tax cuts for our current dilemma is stupid. Tell me how this situation was created by the Reagan, Clinton or Bush tax cuts. Go ahead. This problem was not caused by tax cuts.

    Take a step back and use your brain for a minute: the goal of a tax policy should be to maximize tax revenue, and we should implement tax rates with an eye toward accomplishing that goal, not to engage in a counterproductive form of class warfare. Maximizing tax revenue can only be accomplished by maximizing the GDP. Accepting those two tenets, if tax cuts are so bad, how can you explain that the top 1% of earners paid 22% of the IRS’s tax revenue in 1981, and 40% of the IRS’s tax revenue in 2006? The Reagan, Clinton and Bush tax cuts increased the tax burden on the wealthiest Americans, and rolling them back will only accomplish the converse.

  16. AndersonScooper

    Dobb, thanks for the softball. It’s obvoius to most of us that real wages for middle class families flat-lined awhile ago.

    If you ask the question, “Are you better off after the Bush era”, the only people who will say yes are the tippy-top of the food chain.

  17. Google this: the government is not good at creating jobs.

    Good idea; I did and hit this:
    Economic Fallacies 101

    From that link Mike Adams uses this scenario:
    “Consider three people living in an island, running their own tiny economy. Bob, Sarah and Charlie …….

    One day, Charlie decides he wants to be the Governor of the island…….

    Then it turns out that the Governor is busy governing things on the island (i.e. deciding what everybody else should do), so he has no time to grow his own food. So he initiates a 50% tax on the productivity of Bob and Sarah, confiscating their food, clothing and resources in order to provide those items to himself without actually having to work for them. (This is a key function of government: To confiscate wealth from those who really work and redistribute it to those who pretend to work.)”

    There’s the problem.
    While no one’s suggesting that public employment isn’t work; it rarely (if ever) produces anything directly.

    Thus, regardless of whether it’s a needed or required task, such employment tends to be parasitic on the economy as a whole.

    Once again – no one is saying we don’t need school teachers, etc and et al.

    Some private sector employment is parasitic as well; but often those jobs are as a direct result of some action by government.
    Keeping track of taxes for example; maintaining full compliance with a literal alphabet soup of regulatory agencies and so forth.

    Last time I looked it took up to 12 separate licenses to operate a convenience store; it’s probably more than that now and lord only knows what the licensing fees add up to.
    The annual visits from various state agency professional stone-crushers are always sure to be a treat too.
    They can’t prove they were there unless they find something wrong and hit the operator with some sort of penalty.

    Meanwhile…
    Quite literally nothing happens in our economy until someone sells something and the check clears the bank.

    Until then, no one’s building a car or a house, delivering a case of soft drinks, nope – nothing happens at all.

  18. If you ask the question, “Are you better off after the Bush era”, the only people who will say yes are the tippy-top of the food chain.

    That’s a load of crap and you know it. Like President Hope and Change, you’re doing us all a disservice by peddling lies and fear.

  19. AndersonScooper

    Dobb-
    Maybe you’d be nice enough to provide us the data that shows real wages on the rise…

    ACR-
    Thanks for the treatise on “wealth confiscation”.

  20. Dobb-Maybe you’d be nice enough to provide us the data that shows real wages on the rise…

    http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=122006A

    Not sure that they must rise for people to be better off, but this one’s a good start. Besides, “[w]hen poor families can afford what even middle-income families couldn’t imagine having 30 years earlier, aren’t things working out pretty well?”

  21. ACR-Thanks for the treatise on “wealth confiscation”.

    It keeps all of us that do work, poor.

    We need a lot less government and we could use government that worked right.

    Defend the price of a CNA test (few hundred bucks for the “opportunity” to change bed pans) and explain why the state has contracted a New Jersey firm to administer it.

  22. AndersonScooper

    Big Business endorses stimulus?

    No way. I mean I thought the GOP was the party of Big Business. I guess that was until it was taken over by ideological right-wing nutjobs!

  23. AndersonScooper

    New RNC Chair Michael Steele as insane as some of our CTLP wingers!

  24. New RNC Chair Michael Steele as insane as some of our CTLP wingers!

    There was some part of that you didn’t understand??

  25. There is no disagreement that we need action byour government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy.
    Barack Obama

    With all due respect Mr.President,that is not true. There is no is agreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy. Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance.
    More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the
    burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

    A boatload of “minor” economists

  26. PS– Dude, you ought to ask Jim Himes about his readiness to make personal sacrifices for the good of the country. What you’d hear back is a completely different philosophy than that expressed by Lieut. Governor Fedele the other day, even after Rell made her big speech about shared pain and sacrifices.

    So he would be willing to give up his salary?

    That’s terrific.

  27. I have a few questions…..

    Does he think Senator Dodd (the state’s congressional delegation’s most senior member) should be more forthcoming about his home refinancing? Will he call for Dodd’s full disclosure and release of information?

    Does he believe not paying taxes should have disqualified from being Treasury Secretary or any other appointed or elected position?

    Does he think Rep Charles Rangel – the chair of ways and means committee — should at least temporarily step aside while his tax evading charges are dealt with?

    Since the economy is in such a slump, following the lead of AndersonScooper, would he be willing to make any personal sacrifices to help the country? For starters, since he is very wealthy, would he be willing to forego his congressional salary?

    Do you have any substantial financial interests in any wall street or financial services companies that are benefiting from government bailout programs? Will you disclose? Does this present a conflict of interest?

    My mother received a solicitation for a campaign contribution for your 2010 re-election effort. What success or accomplishments can you point to in the last 5 weeks that would already suggest that you are deserving of another term?

    Thank you for participating in the conversation!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s