WASHINGTON, D.C. – Montana’s Congressman, Denny Rehberg, earlier this week laid out four key principles he wanted to see reflected in the federal budget.  Now, using those principles, the advantages of the budget he supports in the U.S. House of Representatives can be measured.

“Republicans in the House have a responsible budget that ensures Washington, D.C.’s out-of-control spending doesn’t become chronic.  While the Pelosi alternative creates enormous new spending obligations, our budget reigns in spending and provides permanent tax relief that stimulates real economic recovery.  Congress has a choice between our budget and the Pelosi alternative, but if the goal is national prosperity, there isn’t much of a choice.” – Montana’s Congressman, Denny Rehberg

In Four Rounds, Plus A Knockout - Keep Reading!

Round 1: Secure Jobs

The Republican Budget, which Rehberg supports, nets an increase of more than 2 million jobs by 2014 compared to the Pelosi alternative.

Economic models run by the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation predict that the Republican Budget actually creates jobs while the Pelosi Alternative has a net job loss.  The high energy costs experienced last summer taught us that low energy prices are a critical ingredient of economic health, while high prices hinder economic growth, destroy jobs, and place businesses and consumers in a financially vulnerable position.

The Republican Budget rejects the proposed $31 billion-$80 billion tax increase on domestic oil and natural gas producers.  These industries also produce jobs; in fact for every $1 billion invested in the oil and gas industry — 5,400 high paying jobs are created.  Such a tax could cost the economy 167,000 to 432,000 jobs, and would increase U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

The Republican Budget also makes it more attractive for business to create jobs here, instead of overseas.  The U.S. corporate income tax is the second highest in the industrialized world and its burden affects everyone: it leads to lower wages for workers; it reaches consumers in the form of higher prices; and it affects retirees and investors through lower stock prices.

Advantage: Republican Budget

Round 2: Honest Presentation

Hidden within the Pelosi Alternative Budget is an increase of revenue that results from a $1.5 trillion tax increase – the largest in American History.  This means higher taxes for more than 325,000 Montanans starting in 2011.

The Republican Budget prevents this increase by making the tax relief passed in 2001 and 2003 permanent.  This means lower marginal tax rates, lower taxes per child, the maintenance of the 10-percent tax bracket, a guarantee that the Alternative Minimum Tax will be fairly adjusted for inflation, incentives for savings and investment, and lower tax burdens for businesses and investors.

One of the most notable and interesting aspects of the Pelosi Alternative Budget is that it chooses to map out a plan over five years, rather than a ten year horizon.  A five year estimate hides the costs as the debt skyrockets as a result of all the new spending.

The Republican Budget projects deficits and spending for the full ten years. In fact, the difference in spending between years five and ten is one of the most compelling reasons to support the Republican Budget.  All told, the Republican Budget saves $3.3 trillion over the course of the next ten years.

That’s $3,300,000,000,000.00

Advantage: Republican Budget

Round 3: Fairness to Rural America

Montana is an energy producing state, while states like California refuse to utilize their energy production potential.  The Republican Budget rewards the energy production of rural states like Montana – where well over half of our electricity use comes from coal – while the Pelosi Alternative Budget actually punishes it with cap-and-trade policies that are literally designed to increase costs on Montana consumers, accelerate the loss of jobs in the energy sector and put Montanans out of work.

The Republican Budget, which Rehberg supports, positions the U.S. to meet three interconnected energy goals: reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil and natural gas, developing more clean and renewable energy sources and ensuring that energy policy facilitates economic growth rather than constraining it.

The Pelosi Alternative Budget actually constrains energy development in the attempt to force the market to meet artificial government mandates.  It’s an approach that has failed in California, and it’s an approach that is too expensive for the nation.

Advantage: Republican Budget

Round 4: Control Spending

The Republican Budget, controls spending while the Pelosi Alternative sets a record for fiscal irresponsibility.  Consider:

The Republican Budget saves $100,000,000,000.00 ($100 billion) in 2009 alone.
Over Ten Years, it saves $3,300,000,000,000.00 ($3.3 trillion)

The Republican Budget borrows $3,600,000,000,000.00 ($3.6 trillion) less because it spends $4,800,000.000,000.00 ($4.8 trillion) less.

The Republican Budget reduces federal spending to the historic average of 20.7 percent of GDP by freezing nondefense spending (except for veterans) in 2010-2014 and then allowing moderate increases through 2019.

Advantage: Republican Budget

Final Decision:
Republican Budget 4, Alternative Pelosi Budget 0

<<And the Knock-Out>>

2 million more jobs, long-term projections of fiscal control, tax relief for 325,000 Montanans, a comprehensive plan to fix our energy crisis while creating Montana jobs and 3.3 trillion in savings.