Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins latest brochure of lies

[hfojvt]

First lie: "Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins is listening to you".

Can't prove it, but I do not believe it is true. If her positions and policies benefit the rich, it is likely she is listening to the rich. The rich give her money to try to convince the rest of us that policies that benefit the rich will help us all, and now Jenkins also uses our tax dollars to lie to us. She's not listening when she is spewing pro-rich propaganda.

Second lie: "Reining in out of control government spending ...will grow the economy in both the short term and long term."

This is just nonsense. Cutting spending does not create jobs. Not in the short term and not in the long term. State and local governments have been cutting spending, and the Bureau of Labor statistics reports that they have shed over 400,000 jobs since September 2008. Those lost jobs mean lost revenue for merchants and also for the drivers and factories that are supplying those merchants. This downward pressure makes the recession worse. Here's how economist Dean Baker summed it up:

"The most obvious effect of reducing the budget deficit right now would be to raise the unemployment rate, slow economic growth, and lower investment, thereby leaving a less productive economy for our children and grandchildren.
While some deficit reduction cults may view this as a positive economic path, there are not many economists who would agree with this position."

Third lie: The Republican budget that Jenkins voted for would "protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid for generations to come."

Except that it really would end Medicare as we know it. According to the non-partisan CBO under the Ryan plan "most elderly people would pay more for their health care than they would pay under the current Medicare system."

Fourth lie: Jenkins says "I also support simplifying our tax code".

That would actually be a good thing, but what Jenkins really means is that she supports tax cuts for the rich and she is calling that "simplifying". She mentions later that her plan is to reduce the top rate to 25%. The top rate is only paid by couples who make more than $373,000, so only they would receive huge benefits from such a change. Reducing the top rate doesn't make things any simpler for the rest of us.

Fifth lie: The third lie is repeated in the answer to the next quesion.

Sixth lie : The Ryan plan helps "government to begin to live within its means, just like Kansans have to."

Except that, first of all, many Kansans who are buying homes have borrowed a lot of money to do so. So many Kansans have debt and secondly, most people would not begin to live within their means by reducing their income. The Ryan plan "cuts $6.2 trillion in spending and reduces the deficit by $4 trillion." So it clearly includes $2.2 trillion in tax cuts, mostly for the rich. It also includes tax increases on the middle class that are not specified. The CBO analysis said that the plan, which specifies many tax cuts for the rich, would increase tax revenues to 19% of GDP, but that it does not include a specific proposal which would actually do that. To do that, the Ryan plan is going to need tax increases which they are not specifying.

Seventh lie: "We are in a debt crisis because the federal government spends too much, not because it taxes too little."

First, we are not in a 'crisis'. Second, the Bush tax cuts cost $1.9 trillion over the last ten years. In 1997, debt held by the public was $3.7 trillion, by 2007 it was $5.0 trillion. Only $1.3 trillion more. Total debt grew at the same time by $3.47 trillion. Either way, another $1.9 trillion in revenues would have closed much of that gap and also saved billions in interest payments. It would also have certainly helped if we hadn't invaded Iraq. Jenkins probably would have voted for that, like Ryun did. The Bush tax cuts are projected to cost over $3 trillion in the next decade, $400 billion of which is going to the richest 1% of Americans. Ending the Bush tax cuts would cover at least 75% of as much debt as the Ryan plan without needing to mess with Medicare.

Eighth lie: "Some suggest we should increase taxes on the wealthy, but the truth is that even if we taxed the top three brackets at 100% if would not generate enough revenue to cover even this year's deficit alone."

First, that is a ridiculous example. But the top three brackets start at $82,250 for singles and at $137,050 for couples. According to IRS statistics for 2009, filers with income over $100,000 had total income of $4.31 trillion and paid taxes of $769 billion and subtract their first $100,000 in income (or $1.8 trillion) and you would bring in $1.7 trillion which would cover this year's deficit of $1.6 trillion. Do it for ten years and you'd reduce the deficit by $17 trillion. That's far more than the Ryan plan she is so enamored with, which would also not cover this year's deficit.

Ninth lie: "Since the Democrats' 'stimulus' was signed into law in February 2009, the economy has lost a net of 1,908,000 jobs"

Imagine if you will a used car salesman who tells you about a car he's trying to sell. He tells you that it has brand new tires and a really nice radio and a very large trunk. All of that can be true, but still a way for him to lie, because he is NOT telling you that the transmission is shot. This lie is more insidious because it is technically true, but still dishonest. Trying to claim that the stimulus did not work. In 2008, when Bush was still in office, the economy lost 3,563,000 jobs. In January 2009, before Obama was sworn in, the economy lost another 726,000 jobs. In February 2009, when the stimulus was being passed, the economy lost another 796,000 jobs. In March, before the stimulus had much time to take effect, the economy lost another 660,000 jobs. By July, the economy "only" lost 231,000 jobs. The stimulus was like a parachute. When you open a parachute, you still keep falling, but at a much slower rate. After slowing the fall in 2009, the economy rebounded. In 2010, the economy created over 900,000 jobs. In 2011, the economy has created almost 700,000 jobs. This in spite of Republican budget cuts that have cost over 400,000 jobs.

We should have had another round of stimulus preventing state budget cuts to schools and programs for the needy, and it could have been paid for by ending the Bush tax cuts on people making over $150,000. But Republican politicians like Jenkins continue to put the greed of the rich ahead of the needs of America.


Lies brought to you by your own tax dollars: "This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense."

Note to Jenkins, if you really wanna cut government spending, you can start right there.

[MuseRider]

1. I always return her stuff.

When she asks what she can do for Kansas I tell her to never ever ever consider running for office again. It would be the best thing she could do for all of us. :-) Of course my husband is the only one who gets things from her, apparently I don't count.

[hfojvt]

2. See, right there

she's clearly not listening to you. But anybody who wins in the 2nd district is gonna have a whole bunch of people who do not like him/her.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. She laughed at a woman who asked her about health care

I won't forget that.

She is awful.

[mbob731325]

4. +100