Senator Bunning is claiming to be concerned about adding $10 billion to the deficit.
Yet when Bush was pushing for his tax cuts in 2003, Bush claimed that the deficit was not as important as the unemployed and those worried about putting food on the table:
"Yes, I'm worried about the deficit. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the fellow looking for work. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the single mom who's worried about putting food on the table for her children, so she could find work. And that's where the focus of this administration is going to be." May 12, 2003
As it turned out, the tax cuts of 2003 provided over $18 billion to just the 400 richest Americans and another $40 billion to people making over $2 million. And those billions have been added to the deficit every year since 2003 unlike this $10 billion which is a one time expense.
Senator Bunning voted for that, of course, like every other Senate Republican as it passed 51-50 in reconciliation.
Then just 4 months after that tax cut passed, Bush asked for another $87 billion for the Iraq occupation. Something that would add another $87 billion to the deficit. Senator Biden proposed an amendment that would have prevented that. Here's how Biden explained it.
"This $87 billion request will be added to the mountains of debt we have already piled up. From a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion when the President came to office, this administration has, by a kind of reverse alchemy, turned gold into lead. We face a $480 billion deficit this year alone, and that is not counting the $164 billion we will borrow from Social Security. There is no one in this Chamber who is a better expert on Social Security than the Presiding Officer, so she knows the real deficit is actually $644 billion.
So what do I do? I believe the fair, equitable way to deal with paying for this is to say to the wealthiest Americans, the top .7 percent, instead of you getting a total tax cut of $690 billion over the term of this tax cut, you are only going to get $600 billion.
I tried this out on wealthy Americans, and wealthy Delawareans. Can you imagine if the President of the United States, when he announced this $87 billion supplemental, said: And because of this, I am going to ask the wealthiest 1 percent of you--which means you have to be making at least $360,000 to get into that category of income. The average person in that category makes $1 million per year--I am asking you to forgo 1 year of your tax cut; not the whole tax cut, just 1 year of the 10 years of the tax cut you are getting."
Senator Bunning voted against that, opting instead to add the $87 billion to the deficit. In Bunning's eyes it's better to add to the deficit than to give a slightly smaller tax cut to those in the top 1%.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00373And now he says he's worried about $10 billion.
$60 billion a year to people making over $2 million = no big deal
$87 billion borrowed to pay for Iraq reconstruction = no big deal
$10 billion borrowed to help people who cannot find jobs in this economy = time to take a stand.
So Republicans will pretend to care about the deficit when they can use this supposed concern to prevent helping working people but when it comes to handing billions to rich people or military contractors then the deficit is not a concern. Provides another fine example of which side Republicans are on.