What more information does she need? Tax cuts work (JFK even knew that), especially for the small businesses that make more than $250,000 and use that money to invest in the future and create jobs. Not only jobs within their companies, but also jobs to build new facilites, expand existing ones, run new wires, plumb new pipes, pour new concrete, build new space.

I guess the only information she doesn’t have is Nancy Pelosi’s instructions on how to vote.

This is one indecision that is a no brainer and illustrates why she shouldn’t be where she is. It is a shame. A lot of people expected a lot more from her two years ago. Time for a change.

“…despite consensus among economists that they will continue to add to the deficit.” You forgot a word in there, you meant to say among KEYNESIAN economists. Yes, keep recycling discredited theories and expect a different result.

It’s the spending, stupid.

The Congressional Budget Office has shown that the Bush tax cuts are the biggest contributor to the federal deficit. Tax the rich! Even JFK knew that the top marginal tax rates should be at 70% not 35% like now.

And JFK knew Keynesian economics worked too!

I thought jfk lowered taxes???

Maybe, just maybe, she wants to see how they’re going to pay for them or what crap they attach to the bill. There are a lot of maybe’s here. I give her credit for not being a typical politician and saying whatever she thinks people want to hear. Someone who actually pays attention to the details and thinks things through – what a novel idea!

Liz,

Did Kathy pay attention to how they were going to pay for healthcare and what was in the bill??

NO!!

Did she pay attention to what the voters in her district wanted with the healthcare?

NO!!

That is a nice try, but she has already proven she doesn’t care what is in the bill and she definately doesn’t care if we have the money to pay for it.

She only cares how Nancy Pelosi wants her to vote.

Respectfully,

J.D. Gib

PS – I am in the 3rd District and I voted for Kathy because Phil was a RINO. She had her chance and now it’s time to VOTE HER ASS OUT!!

frank,

JFK lowered the top marginal income tax rate (applied to income over $400,000 I believe it was)from 90%, the rate under the preceding Republican Eisenhower Admin! to 70%. 70%!!! Still amazingly high. That rate stayed in place until Reagan cut the top marginal rate to 30+ percent. Then Reagan went on his spending spree and the deficit ballooned. By the end of Clinton, who raised the top marginal rate slightly, we had the deficit well under control. But then that genius Bush and the Republicans had to cut taxes and do another spending spree with their wars and medicare drug plan etc.

Oh yeah and frank I forgot to mention Bush’s bailout of Wall Street as part of his spending spree.

Pretty sure she didn’t read the healthcare legislation – especially since BFF Nancy wanted it passed so they could then “figure out what was in the bill”.

My guess is she is holding out the same way she did on health care so she can garner similar attention for being one of the saviors of the tax bill…just a guess

A wild guess and based on no sense of reality. I attended a health care town hall with Kathy and was impressed with her grasp of the issue and the legislation. I am a resident of the 3rd district too John, and I wanted healthcare reform. I work everyday and can’t afford my employers healthcare, my contribution keeps going up every year and my net income down. I thought reform would be the way to go. So maybe she listened to us, we all aren’t like you. There are voters who wanted reform.

LIZ~

I am J.D. — not John…think ya got us mixed up…anywho:

Look at the polls Liz – this District didn’t want healthcare.

NOTICE – I didn’t say healthcare reform – it isn’t reform.

Liz, you will find out on November 2nd that people are sick of the Washington talk that Chatty Kathy has fallen a victim and prey to. She went there as an average person & has returned a liar.

I am happy she voted for Obamacare because it will close the coffin door on her Congressional career!!

-J.D.

Hey frank,

John doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

First of all, during the 60′s & &70′s no one paid the 70% rate. The tax code was full of loopholes and the rich contributed very little to federal income tax revenues. By the way, federal spending at the time was a fraction of what it is today, hence a growing economy and relatively balanced budgets.

The income tax reform during the Reagan years did lower marginal tax rates and eliminated many of the tax loopholes, as a rsult the percentage of income tax revenues paid by the rich dramatically increased, and the economy grew causing revenues to the federal government to increase despite the “tax-rate cuts”. John is right about the excessive spending, which by the way, was initiated in the Democratic controlled House (remember Tip O,Neill??).

The balanced budgets (actually surplusses) during the Clinton years happened after the Republicans took control of the House and limited spending coupled with the end of the S&L bank bailouts of the early 90′s.

Unfortunately the dumb-ass Republicans forgot what they stood for and started spending like Democrats hence the huge budget deficits we have today.

Bottom line, it’s all about federal spending which is why Dahlkemper has to go!