Betty McCollum needs to be voted out!!!

If any of this makes you mad, please leave a comment, and let Betty McCollum know how you feel!

30 July 2010

Have I Mentioned Calling Betty McCollum's Office is Useless?

As a constituent of MN CD4, Betty works for me, but calling her office is a painful experience.  I have called a number of times, and each time it feels like they are defensive, and they are very allusive on their answers.  

So I called this morning, and a young intern answered the phone, and I said I have a couple questions for Betty.  He asked what are they.

Me - What is Betty's stance on maintaining Bush's tax cuts?  

Betty's office - I believe she is in favor of letting some expire.   

Me - Let some expire, or all?  

BO - Not sure, I can see if the person who works on that is available.  They aren't available.  

Me - When will they be available?  

BO - I can pass your comments along to Betty.  

Me - Why can't the person who handles the tax cuts for Betty call me back?  Betty will get back to you (I've heard this before, and of all the calls I've made and emails I sent, I have only had one response, a form letter on Obamacare which didn't address the questions I asked).

Me - So I give name, but never got to address as he asked if I had a comment.  

Me - So I said, don't let them expire, keep extending them, as they helped pull us out of possible recession in 2001.  

BO - I believe we are in a recession now (he was in grade school back then by his voice).  

Me - I said tax cuts stimulate.  

BO - Well Betty believes they added 1 trillion to the debt.  

Me - And these stimulus's that haven't work haven't added to it?  Fine, I'm not going to explain economic theory to you (you can't have a serious conversation with a liberal when you have facts...I actually feel sorry for the kid.  Probably right out of college, and he is working in Betty's office getting complaints).

Me - When will Betty finalize the budget?  

BO - It is up in the air.  

Me - What is the Timeline?  

BO - Don't know.  

Me - Will it be done before the election?

BO - Don't know.

Me - Ok, is Betty holding a townhall when home on break?

BO - Don't know, you need to call the local office

Me - Ok, thanks

So I call the local office, and they say they can't answer that, that I need to call the election office 651-603-1505.  I call the election office, and they say to call the district office.  Call back to the district office and get someone else.  

Me - Is Betty is holding any townhalls when she is home on break.  

BO - You need to call campaign office with campaign questions

Me - This isn't a campaign question, I am a constituent, and want to know if Betty plans to meet with constituents when she is home.

BO - I don't know, nothing is planned, but when it is, it will be put out in a press release, and posted on her website.  Do you know her site?

Me - That is how I got your #

BO - Then check there to see when

Me - Can't I call you?  

BO - Yes, but I just gave you the resources

Me - Thanks, but I will call again

This was a real trying experience, and writing it down was even more painful.  You can't get an answer from her team, and they are kind of snarky.  Wonder if that is because they get so many calls that are negative?  I would lean towards getting negative calls, as I haven't heard anyone say anything positive about Betty.  So basically Betty is coming home in a couple days, and has no plans to meet with constituents; the people she works for!!!

Try this yourself, give Betty a call with a couple questions.  Here are some suggestions...

  1. Will Betty meet with constituents when she is home?
  2. Will Betty debate Teresa Collett? (wish I would've asked this one)
  3. Will Betty support extending Bush's tax cuts?
  4. Why did Betty omit "under God" when she led the Pledge of Allegiance?


Ok, this came across on a tweet a couple hours after posting...Betty, please pay attention here, I will let the article explain.  This came from liberty works

Bush Tax Cut Myths and Fallacies (2)

Myth: Reduced tax rates on those earning over $200,000 caused deficits.

The establishment politicians and commentators who make this claim expect you to conclude that the rich paid less income tax after the Bush tax tax rate reductions than before.   This chart, showing the most recent figures available from the IRS tells the truth.
As the chart shows, revenue from the top group was falling each year until the Bush tax cuts were enacted in 2003.  Then revenue increased every year until taxable small business profits were hit by the recession that began in 1988.
If government had collected less tax revenue from “the rich” – mostly small business owners – after the rate reductions they might deserve a share of the blame for deficits.  But in fact, the rich paid more – a lot more.
The establishment elite demonstrate their understanding of the disincentive effect of taxation when they call for taxes on choices and behaviors they dislike.  They advocate:
  • Higher gasoline tax to “nudge” us out of cars and into mass transit;
  • Taxes on sodas and sweets to keep us from getting fat and burdening their government dominated health care “system.”
But those same elites scoff at the obvious disincentives inherent in high income tax rates.   The income tax is a tax on risk-taking, saving, investment, and productive work – all the activities necessary for job creation.
Because higher rates on “the rich,” especially small business owners, discourage work, saving and investing, the people they are designed to target respond by curtailing business activities and thus earning less taxable income.   As a result, higher rates don’t necessarily generate more revenue.  Lower rates are less of a barrier to risk-taking, investment, business expansion and hiring, all the activities that generate more taxable profits.
In fact, as this chart shows, after the tax cuts of 2003 the deficit declined, as the rich paid more income tax.This is not the first time higher income folks paid more income tax after a rate reductions.  During the Reagan Administration there was a series of phased in rate reductions from 1981-83, and another rate reduction in 1986.  The results:
  • In 1980 there were eight tax brackets and the highest was 70%.   People earning more than $200,000 reported a total of $36 Billion in income and paid $19 Billion in tax.
  • In 1988 there were only two tax brackets, 15% and 28%.  The over-$200,000 group reported $353 Billion in income and paid $99.7 Billion in tax.
Over eight years taxable income reported by “the rich” rose 881% and income tax collected from them rose 425%!  But even though the government was the beneficiary of this huge windfall the political-media establishment still promotes the deception that the Reagan tax cuts caused deficits.


No comments:

Post a Comment