DonYoung

Budget

Our national economy has, no doubt, undergone recent economic setbacks.  As a result, Alaskans and Americans nationwide have been forced to reduce spending in order to pay for basic necessities.  However, with the introduction of H.Con.Res. 85 (the President’s FY2010 Budget), the federal government appears to believe that a massive increase in spending is the best solution.  I completely disagree, which is why I voted against H.Con.Res. 85 when it came to the House floor for a vote.

The President’s proposed budget will produce record increases in government spending, the national debt, the national deficit, and taxes.  It will increase taxes by $574 billion over five years and $1.154 trillion over ten years.  These tax increases will directly affect small businesses, energy, and even charitable donations.  However, the “national energy tax” is what I find most troubling.  Alaskan households already pay energy prices that are higher than the national average.  However, H.Con.Res. 85 will impose a cap-and-trade tax on all businesses that produce carbon emissions.  These increased costs will trickle down to those very same Alaskan households, increasing their already high energy prices by another $3,128 per year.

With these objections in mind, I chose to support the House Republican’s Budget instead.  This budgetary alternative would save the American people $100 billion in 2009 alone, when compared to the President’s Budget.  Deficits would be $3.3 trillion lower for the ten year period.  In the President’s Budget, government spending would nearly double from $2.983 trillion in 2008, to $5.1 trillion in 2019.  As a result, the national debt would double in just five years and triple in ten years.  Furthermore, the Republican Budget would borrow $3.6 trillion less than H.Con.Res. 85, while spending $4.8 trillion less than the President over 10 years.