How much have Norm Coleman and George Bush’s giveaways to the special interests cost us?
Posted in Blog, News Clips on September 24th, 2008
MEMO:
DATE: September 24, 2008
TO: Interested Parties
FROM: Al Franken for Senate
RE: How much have Norm Coleman and George Bush’s giveaways to the special interests cost us?
BACKGROUND
How much have Norm Coleman and George Bush’s giveaways to the special interests cost us?
$17 billion dollars in tax breaks to the oil companies
$40 billion to companies that ship our jobs overseas
$300 billion to the drug companies
Coleman and Bush have increased the national debt to over nine TRILLION dollars
And Coleman wants to spend a trillion more to privatize social security.
Norm Coleman has stuck with George Bush…and stuck it to Minnesota.
FACTS
Coleman Voted For $5.1 Billion In Tax Breaks For Big Oil And Gas Companies. In May 2006, Coleman voted for the GOP’s $70 billion tax cut bill. According to the Boston Globe, “Big oil companies won their push to keep intact accounting changes that stand to net them $5.1 billion.” [Vote 118, 5/11/06; Boston Globe, 5/12/06]
Coleman Voted For 2005 Energy Bill Loaded With $14.6 Billion In Energy Industry Giveaways, Including $2.6 Billion For The Oil And Gas Industry. In 2005, Coleman voted for the final version of the Energy Bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill “includes $14.6 billion in tax breaks for the energy industry over the next decade.” According to the New York Times, the bill “contained $2.6 billion in new tax breaks for oil and gas drillers and a modest expansion of the 10-year-old ‘royalty relief’ program. For the most part, the law locked in incentives that the Interior Department was already offering for another five years. But it included some embellishments, like an extra break on royalties for companies drilling in the deepest waters.” [Vote 213, 7/29/05; New York Times, 3/27/06; CQ, 12/30/05]
Des Moines Register: 2005 Energy Bill Gives Oil Companies Big Tax Breaks And Does Little To Solve Energy Crisis. In September 2005, the Des Moines Register said that even though the energy bill included provisions promoting the use of ethanol and renewable energy, it also “bestows lavish tax breaks on oil companies and other segments of the energy industry while doing little to wean the nation from dependence on foreign oil. It also doesn’t do nearly enough to promote conservation or invest in energy technology and research.” [Des Moines Register, Editorial, 9/6/05]
Pawlenty: John McCain Opposed 2005 Energy Bill Because It Was Riddled In Tax Breaks To Oil Companies. Speaking as a McCain campaign surrogate in June 2008, Governor Pawlenty told CNN, “If you look at the 2005 energy bill that Dick Cheney and George Bush helped promote, President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Barack Obama voted against it because it, in his view, gave away too many additional tax breaks to oil companies and traditional energy and didn’t emphasize renewable and clean energy enough.” [CNN, 6/17/08]
Coleman Voted For Final 2003 Energy Bill, Stuffed With $11.9 Billion In Tax Breaks For The Oil And Gas Industry. In 2003, Coleman voted to invoke cloture on the final version of the energy bill. According to the CQ Daily Monitor, “Senate Finance Chairman Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, said the tax breaks were expanded to satisfy demands from congressional backers of the oil and gas industry. He said the final version of the bill includes $11.9 billion in tax breaks for the industry.” [Vote 456, 11/21/03; CQ Daily Monitor, 11/18/03]
Pioneer Press: “Citizens Should Remember The Energy Bill Fiasco, Say, When Filling The Tank In The Family Van.” In September 2003, the Pioneer Press editorial board wrote that, even with the $800 billion handout for a Minnesota power plant in the final energy bill, the package “still stinks.” They added, “The federal energy bill, a greased pig waddling to the finish line, stinks. It is too much to hope that it won’t pass. At least the Senate should retain its good sense and say no to drilling in ANWR and ordinary citizens should remember the energy bill fiasco, say, when filling the tank in the family van or paying the heating bills.” [Pioneer Press, 9/30/03]
Coleman Voted Against Replacing Almost $40 Billion In Tax Breaks On Offshore Income With Domestic Manufacturing Credits. In 2004, Coleman voted against an amendment that “would strike $39 billion in tax breaks on overseas income,” according to Congressional Quarterly and “provide for an immediate 9 percent tax deduction for domestic manufacturers.” [Vote 90, 5/11/04; CQ Votes]
Negotiating Drug Prices Could Save Taxpayers And Seniors $30 Billion Per Year, $300 Billion Over Ten Years. In 2007, the Institute for America’s Future released a report on waste and inefficiency in the Bush prescription drug plan. According to the report, “Legislation that would allow Medicare to use its bulk purchasing power to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices could save American taxpayers and seniors more than $30 billion annually. About $10 billion of these savings would accrue to American seniors in the form of cheaper prices… The U.S. government could save roughly $20 billion a year by having Medicare negotiate for the same prices the Veteran’s Administration already gets.” Over a ten-year budget that amounts to $300 billion in savings. [Institute for America's Future Report, April 2007]
The National Debt Has Increased By Over $3 Trillion Since Coleman Took Office. On January 21, 2003, the day after Coleman took office, the national debt was $6,387,841,175,651.97. As of September 24, 2008, the national debt was $9,785,866,165,910.40. [US Department of the Treasury]
COLEMAN SUPPORTS BUSH’S RISKY PLAN TO PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY
2000: Coleman Said Bush Showed “Bravery And Courage” With Social Security Privatization Plan. In July 2000, the Star Tribune reported, “St. Paul Mayor Norm Coleman, chairman of the Bush campaign in Minnesota, said Gore’s new proposal acknowledges that his Social Security plan didn’t fix the problem. ‘You can’t keep the system the way it is, because it’s broken,’ Coleman said. Bush showed ‘bravery and courage’ by making a proposal that he knew might not be popular right away. ‘Leadership sometimes requires you to lead people to places they may not be prepared to go,’ Coleman said. ‘George Bush would rather be right than be popular, and time will prove him right on this one.’” [Star Tribune, 7/3/00]
2005: Coleman: No One In Social Security Debate Is Changing Benefits For Those Receiving Or Nearing Retirement. In a February 2005 op-ed, Coleman wrote, “No one in today’s debate on the future of Social Security advocates changing Social Security for those who are receiving retirement benefits or for those nearing retirement. The retirement security you’re counting on is intact and will never change under any plan. But … we want to give our children and grandchildren a better life than we had. Unfortunately, Social Security on its current course cannot do that.” [St. Cloud Times, Coleman Op/Ed, 2/27/05]
Coleman: Investing In Personal Accounts “Makes Sense.” In a February 2005 op-ed, Coleman wrote, “Letting younger workers invest in personal accounts that draw interest like a 401K plan makes sense as an approach to giving them retirement security equal to if not better than our own. The return on Social Security investment is less than 2 percent. Average annual earnings the past 10 years on conservative investments has been 5 percent. [St. Cloud Times, Coleman Op/Ed, 2/27/05]
Coleman: Americans Should Have A Say In How Their Social Security Money Is Invested. In a February 2005 op-ed, Coleman wrote, “Americans should have a say in how their Social Security money is invested. Allowing people to invest part in conservative investments like a 401K is an opportunity to do this. People could not touch this money until they retire; lump sum withdrawals would be prohibited, and other protections would ensure retirement security.” [St. Cloud Times, Coleman Op/Ed, 2/27/05]
2005: “I Hope The President Stays With Personal Accounts.” In April 2005, Coleman told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, “I think the president has done a good job of letting the public know Social Security has problems. There’s no question about it. My friends on the other side of the aisle haven’t offered anything, haven’t put anything on the table. I hope the president stays with personal accounts, and then dispels some of the myths, by the way, the myths that somehow those who receive disability payments through Social Security will be harmed by whatever the president does. That’s simply not true.” [CNN, 4/28/05]
Bush-Coleman Privatization Plan Would Cost $1.4 Trillion Over The First 10 Years. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, President Bush’s Social Security private accounts plan would add $1.4 trillion to the national debt over the first 10 years (2009-18). [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/22/05]
