All four Republican congressmen in S.C. voted against H.R. 5116: the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010.
Yes, Republicans do not want us to compete. Screw science.
The $96 billion legislation increases investments in science, research and training, and advocates have hailed it as a commitment to an “innovation agenda” in Congress. Our Republican congressmen, however, have a different agenda.
Gresham Barrett wants to be our governor. His recent vote doesn't support what he preaches, though. Let it be known he does not want innovation to be part of S.C.
Henry Brown is retiring. Start the wildfire, no pun intended. His no votes really spell disaster for S.C. With 11 GOP candidates wanting to replace him, we could be in for more of the same - which is bad news for the 1st District.
4 comments:
If I may, it seems that the writer of this post equates voting AGAINST the bill with voting FOR something akin to a ban on science, innovation, or research and development. I'm not sure that's a fair characterization.
I would have voted against it too, only for the $96 billion price tag. For me, it comes down to some fundamental questions when spending money:
"Are we in a recession or not? Are we staring at borrowing more money or not? Are we looking at a 14 trillion dollar debt or not? Are we serious about spending or not?"
This logic very well could have been the logic of those voting in opposition.
It's not that it's a bad bill. With a Clinton-esque surplus, I don't see why NOT to vote FOR it. But we're already behind. Something has to give on the spending.
...
And I would understand the "we can't afford NOT to spend this" argument. I guess the theory would be that this sort of funding creates new products and ideas that can eventually produce tax revenue.
This may be where I differ with the author. There's too much risk there and not enough confidence in the reward.
Um, the writing is plain and simple. I am the author and the Republicans in this state do not want us to compete. Now, if you want to talk about debt, the let's mention what was done years ago, Cory. You see, that doesn't get a pass here because you can't cash out when your term of presidency is up. It sticks with us. If you want to cut spending, we can start with the Iraq war. That's a great start. I have all the confidence in the world in my country, its people and the technology we can discover and create - given the chance to COMPETE (fairly).
What I'm seeing is that you've created a "False Delimma"
The choice in front of Congress -- the one you're upset about -- was NOT:
"Should we cut spending in Iraq AND increase spending on research and development?"
That'd be an easy one for a lot of folks.
The question was, in essence:
"With no spending cuts, should we spend almost $100 billion on research and development in the midst of a recession and unsettling debt ratios?"
It's imperative that our analyses and criticisms come from the questions that actually exist -- not from the questions we WANT to answer.
And finally, I appreciate your optimism in some American citizen making that next big breakthrough that would provide the needed return-on-investment. I wish I shared it.
.........
My conclusion:
If my claim is: we just have to stop spending somewhere. It's extras like this that I'd stop.
Then, the argumentative response can't be:
"Well, we're spending in Iraq. Cut that."
That's edging on a non-sequitur.
The response would be to justify the spending itself. BAD spending when we're hurting-- like in Iraq -- doesn't justify GOOD spending when we're hurting.
Cory, this country has operated on a debt for how long now? Quite a long time, given the history. Now, I am a firm believer in spending money to create a positive outcome. I never heard so much outcry for the debt and/or deficits under Reagan or both Bush presidents. All of a sudden, we hear it loud with anger. You know, the rich, big business people are out their with their arms up, sweating on the streets with their fancy signs. No, they have the brainwashed people of this country doing that. I, however, realize that more domestic spending is needed, has been needed and will be needed to take this country further. It will also need strong lawmakers to reign in big business and their fat-cat, free-market way of life to bring more power to this country.
Right now, it really doesn't matter. China owns us. If they call for their payment, then what? Thank the sell-out Republicans of this country. A few Democrats can be blamed as well.
This country needs true campaign finance reform. Enough of the bought and paid for politicians. Both Parties.
In order to pay down debt, you don't just cut everything people rely on. You have to bring in revenue. Taxes. Let the rich-guy tax cuts expire.
Post a Comment