.

Roskam: Sequester Remarks Show 'Void of Presidential Leadership'

U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam responds to President Obama's remarks on the sequester.

U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam (IL-06) responded to President Obama's remarks on his sequester with the following statement Tuesday:

“Today, the void of presidential leadership was on full display. Instead of getting in a room with Senate Democrats and passing a sequester replacement plan, President Obama chose to get behind a podium and give yet another speech. Noticeably absent from his speech was the fact that House Republicans have already passed two alternatives to the sequester his White House proposed in the last round of budget negotiations.  

“Everyone agrees that the sequester is not an artful way to achieve the spending cuts that our bloated federal budget desperately needs. But the president gets it wrong when he demands that Americans should pay even more in taxes to fuel more government spending. The federal government runs trillion dollar deficits as a matter of routine—surely we can find a way to shave a few cents off of every dollar the government spends in order to avert the sequester and put our nation on more solid financial footing.”  

Nationwide cuts set to take place March 1 are the first of a decade-long $1.2 trillion budget cut plan that would go into effect unless congress can compromise on a defecit-reduction plan. 

According to the White House, Illinois could lose about $33.4 million in funding for education, work-study jobs, military readiness, law enforcement and public safety funds for crime prevention and prosecution, vaccines for children, public health and the STOP Violence Against Women program. 

READ MORE ABOUT THE CUTS ON PATCH: WHAT WILL ILLINOIS LOSE IN THE SEQUESTER?

Daniel Thomas February 27, 2013 at 02:21 PM
You know there is a Democratic plan, but your party of NO has not been interested in anything but their own ideas since Obama was elected.
unheard February 27, 2013 at 02:22 PM
Mr. Roskam, it seems to me that President Obama tried, many times in vain to work with your party, especially in his first term in office. SInce you made it clear it was your way or the highway, why are you somehow surprised at his reluctance to do so now? News flash, he was reelected so it's time for your party to step up to the plate or face the consequences. It really is that simple.
Gregg Slapak February 27, 2013 at 03:22 PM
http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x766873736/Our-Opinion-Congress-Obama-should-repeal-the-sequester
Gerard Schilling February 27, 2013 at 04:04 PM
Letter to Mr. Roskam To allow DHS on their authority based on claimed budget limitations to set free thousands of alien criminals on society as a punishment is treasonous and should be treated as an act of terror against us. Why did you allow DHS to buy 2 billion rounds of ammo to use on us? Why do you allow this when you control the purse strings and over site of these agencies? They are going to do the same thing with the TSA and flight times. There is a big push for a third party and you guys better wake up and start protecting us from these thugs. I have been a Republican all my life but frankly I am feed up and am ready to support a third party because I don’t see the Republicans doing anything to protect and support us.
Dan F. February 27, 2013 at 04:12 PM
When Harry Ried and the President control 2/3rds of government, budgets and proposals that are passed in the House disappear in the Senate. Look in the mirror. Republicans only have the power to stop bad things, not push good things through into law.
DG Guy February 27, 2013 at 04:23 PM
Maureen, most all of the tax loopholes are for the middle class. By dollar value 83% of the Bush tax cuts went to the middle class and that was on top of what was already there. The middle class is in trouble, but tax loopholes are not the problem.
Dan F. February 27, 2013 at 04:25 PM
Democrat plan: Raise taxes again. Some plan.
Cleary1 February 27, 2013 at 04:45 PM
Ideology trumps on both sides. Yes we have a spending problem but we also have a revenue problem. Tax revenue as a % of GDP is historically low. Gov't spending is high because all of us Baby boomers are retiring and taking Medicare, while what is called a discretionary side of the budget is at an all time low. We have suffered in the middle class. Housing value, retirement funds, wages have all been hampered. Now Peter's solution is to cut our social security and medicare. Here is a suggestion, cut $1 from each medicare and medicaid provider's bill. Have a $1 co pay for every medicare and medicaid procedure. Have 50 cents a day added to your social security tax for both employee and employer plus raise the maximum to $150K. Identify the so called tax loopholes and have them reduced proportionately 5% the first year 10% the second on and on until gone. They can be reinstated only by congressional action. That should take care of the revenue side with the addition. Have all gas and oil lease revenue go specifically to debt redemption, not the general fund.
unheard February 27, 2013 at 04:57 PM
Mr. Roskam I realize this is a completely different issue but, your credibility and intelligence came into serious question when you felt it was a good idea to trap and kill coyotes in Wheaton. We appreciate leaders who understand the importance of common sense.
Rosemary Arellano February 27, 2013 at 05:23 PM
Based on the comments posted, the Republican Party is still not getting their message across on how President Obama and the leaders of the Democratic Party have gotten us into this fiscal mess in the last 4 years. They did have control of the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives the first 2 years. Why don't all of the Senators follow Rand Paul's lead - cut your own budgets and return the unused amount. The $600,000 may not seem like a lot of money until you figure out how many middle class taxpayers it took to raise that amount of tax dollars! Then the House of Representatives can do the same. You can control those budgets. Lead by example!
Cleary1 February 27, 2013 at 06:11 PM
Dear Rosemary, Maybe the Repubs have a problem with their message because it is misleading, like the 2 year claim of Dem control. Remember Franken not being seated for 6 months remember the late date that Arlen Spector jumped parties. Remember Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrds continuing absence because of illness. In those 2 years the Dems had a fillibuster proof majority for 76 days. A bigger messaging problem is that the republicans want us to believe lowering marginal tax rates increases tax revenue and that the Community Reinvestment Act caused the Great Recession
Linda Twomey February 27, 2013 at 06:47 PM
Really. Our representatives need to stop self interest and party loyalty and do what is best for the people who elected them. What is that. Get it together. Pass a budget that is balanced. Stop adding to the deficit. Spend less than you bring in, just like individuals should do. Simplify the tax code, eliminate loopholes for everyone, reduce wasteful spending, stop paying people more to work than not to work, punish contract kickbacks, fund education, stop loaning college students mire than they could repay in their lifetime, repeal Obamacare and stop crippling businesses so they can create jobs without fear of the cost of insurance, realize that the government was never intended
Linda Twomey February 27, 2013 at 06:55 PM
Sorry, finishing thought. Government was never intended to pay for all social problems, people help people in need, even through the churches, and government will go broke trying to do it all for everyone......ooops.....too late?........maybe...... Help people toward independence not dependence on government. Save the help for those who truly need it
Mac Miller February 27, 2013 at 09:55 PM
Linda is right. We have so many government "assistance" programs it's laughable not commendable. I would bet that on any given day, there is enormous overlap and abuse in ALL these programs. We need to help people but only when they PROVE that they are helping themselves. We have a government who seems to enjoy making the recipients of these programs life long takers. Forgive me if I am not excited about helping the woman who procreates 5-6 kids with 5+ fathers. Forgive me if I don't agree that 99 + weeks of unemployment is a good thing. Especially when the government checks are more lucrative than a real job! Forgive me for not wanting to contribute to someone elses future via a pension. Forgive me for being angry at the fact that our politicians are blood sucking criminals who would sell their mothers to the highest bidder. Allow me to not lay blame on one party over the other. Anyone who believes that the republicans are the party of No and that the democrats are the party of we make it all better, is, in my opinion, stupid. Frankly, I say let the democrats have EVERYTHING they ask for. The republicans should step back, smile and yell yay to all things "progressive". The people have spoken when Obama was re elected. Give them what they want. Then we can sit back and see what happens. If it doesn't work out, then the dems have to own it without laying blame at anyone but themselves. LOL....yeah right! If it works out, then dems win.....forever!
H.I. McDunnough February 27, 2013 at 10:11 PM
I'm a struggling middle class fella with a family to feed and I say, go ahead and raise my taxes. Its ok as long as the fed gov't makes sensible cuts in spending.
Cleary1 February 27, 2013 at 10:15 PM
Forgiven Mac. That is how you FEEL. I like facts SNAP has a strong record of program integrity. SNAP error rates declined by 61% from FY1999 to FY2010, from 9.86% to a record low of 3.81%. [vii] The accuracy rate of 96.19% (FY2010) is now at an all-time program high and is considerably higher than other major benefit programs, for example Medicare fee-for-service (89.5%) or Medicare Advantage Part C (85.9%). [viii] [ix] Two-thirds of all SNAP payment errors are a result of caseworker error. [x] Nearly one-fifth are underpayments, which occur when eligible participants receive less in benefits than they are eligible to receive.[xi] "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?" Ebenezer Scrooge
Mac Miller February 28, 2013 at 12:06 AM
Cleary1, Here's your program integrity! Perhaps you need a dictionary. http://www.gop.gov/policy-news/12/05/07/reeling-in-government-waste
Jan February 28, 2013 at 05:11 AM
I can't help but wonder what the next 24 hours are going to bring. They're getting to be pros at waiting til the 5 minute deadline. How can anyone think that years of fiscal irresponsibility and revenge, wars, and egos are going to be called down this quickly? 10 years really is quick considering all the years it took making this mess. We need solutions, not miracles. We need a better mentality than grade school playground tactics on the hill.
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:00 AM
The most unnecessary federal assistance program is the one that provides R&D subsidies to high profit oil and gas companies. Let's get rid of corporate welfare before we start pinching the poor.
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:07 AM
Stop attacking the President Roscam and start doing the job that you are being paid to do, that is to represent the people of your district not special interest groups. Perhaps you also should get a 20% cut in pay along with all other government employees. Perhaps you should give up your government healthcare since you don't want it for others. Judy Biggert did not listen to the voters of her district and she is no longer in office. Let that be a lesson for you.
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:36 AM
This is a response to Dan F.'s comment to Dan Thomas. The Democrats plan raises revenue by eliminating businesses' ability to take tax deductions by relocating facilities overseas, 200 million ( yes they actually get a deduction for eliminating American jobs) and it closes the tar sands loophole, 1,7 billion (tar sands do not even pay the taxes that oil, gas and coal do) It also imposes the Buffett rule on high earners. Do you have a problem with that Dan F.?
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:42 AM
Social Security doesn't need to be touched under the Democrat's plan. They prepose to eliminate deductions for relocating businesses' overseas, increase taxes on those making over one million a year, close the tar sands loophole, impose the Buffett rule, cut subsidies to big oil, gas and coal, and cut defense spending in a more balanced sensible way. The big tax loopholes don't need to be identified, congress already knows what they are.
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:47 AM
"This fiscal mess" didn't suddenly appear in the last four years. We have had a decade of unfunded, uneccesary wars, a housing market crash, and jobs and facilities shipped overseas. On top of that add tax cuts for top earners and later the middle class and innumerable loopholes created by a Congress that catered to special interests. News flash. That did not take place in the last four years but the previous eight.
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:52 AM
Repeal Obama care? Give up your right not to be discriminated against for pre-existing conditions? Give up being able to have your college age children on your health insurance policy? Give up the savings to medicare? Don't believe that "job creator" line that Roskam and the others in his party want you to believe. Where are all the jobs that were supposed to come as a result of the tax cut to the wealthiest Americans? That didn't materialize in over eight years. Where is this trickle down effect that was also supposed take affect? Have you seen any of this Linda?
Leigh March 01, 2013 at 03:54 AM
Your posted link is from 2007. Perhaps you need a time machine.
DG Guy March 01, 2013 at 01:58 PM
Leigh - Businesses get to deduct most all of their expenses. There is no special deduction for moving operations overseas. It's just another expenses on their books and all the expenses are dedcuted. If you want to exclude expenses related to movnig, you need to force business to better categorize all of their expenses. Which legal bills are for launching a product in the US vs which bills were for leases overseas. Tracking expenses at that level would be difficult for the business and near impossible for auditors to verify.
DG Guy March 01, 2013 at 02:01 PM
Leigh - Most of the tax cuts went to the middle class. $3,200 billion over 10 years for the middle class and 700 billion for the wealthy. For what it's worth I agree with the rest of your statement.
DG Guy March 01, 2013 at 02:03 PM
Leigh - Judy Biggert is not in office because of gerrymandering. Her district was redrawn so that she would not be reelected. Both parties do this and nobody ever complains loudly enough.
Mac Miller March 01, 2013 at 02:45 PM
Leigh, you are dillusional if you think after 2007 we have less corruption. Under Obama we have seem a huge increase of those receiving "assistance" from one of our many programs! Are you commenting from your Obama phone??? As for Judy, she was in office for over 10 plus years. I can't imagine what she did or didn't do that got her defeated? She is a replica of all of our pols. She flipped, flopped, flipped back and repeated. She was just another soulless individual walking the halls of Capitol Hill! The shady redrawing of lines surely did her in.
Leigh March 03, 2013 at 02:35 AM
DG Guy, I resided in Judy's district before and after redistricting. True she was in office for over ten years mostly due to name recognition I think. For the last several years she did nothing of any value. She did manage, as a last gasp, to get Navistar a sweet deal in Lisle though. I saw her at several town hall meetings were she just went on talking points never responding with any substance to any of the real concerns people were voicing. I truly believe that although districts were redrawn people were also fed up and that is what ended her political career.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »