Bredesen, Blackburn make balanced budget pitches

Democratic Senate candidate Phil Bredesen speaks to reporters after at a Farm Bureau speech in Franklin on Aug. 9, 2018. (Erik Schelzig, Tennessee Journal)

Democratic Senate candidate Phil Bredesen and Republican Marsha Blackburn on Tuesday unveiled rival plans for balancing the federal budget.

Bredesen told the Chattanooga Chamber of Commerce that he wants to freeze all spending except Social Security to balance the budget within six years. Blackburn said she supports a balance budget amendment and across-the-board spending cuts for all but military expenditures.

“Everyone gives lip service to fixing the deficit, but there has been no action.  Democrats — my own party — have never been great on the subject, but since the Reagan era, Republicans have completely fallen off the wagon as well,” Bredesen said. “We ought to give it some serious thought.”

Republican Marsha Blackburn also tweeted her support for balancing the federal budget.

“I’ve been a deficit hawk, and I plan to take that same steely commitment to the U.S. Senate,” Blackburn said in a release.

Here’s the full release from the Bredesen campaign:

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — Governor Phil Bredesen, candidate for U.S. Senate, today laid out his proposal for balancing the federal budget within the next 6 years, as part of a series of “fresh ideas” that tackles issues Congress has ignored for years and goes back to the time America would take on bold projects to get things done for Tennessee.

Below are excerpts from Bredesen’s prepared remarks during a speech to the Chattanooga Chamber of Commerce:

“Everyone gives lip service to fixing the deficit, but there has been no action.  Democrats–my own party– have never been great on the subject, but since the Reagan era, Republicans have completely fallen off the wagon as well. We ought to give it some serious thought.

Right now our debt stands at around $21 trillion, and it is growing at almost a trillion a year. The real danger is not the current level, but that this deficit is now structural.  In the past, the deficit went up during depression and wars, but then we we get back to being balanced. Right now there is no path forward.

When I was sworn in the state of Tennessee had a $300 million shortfall. We had to cut 9% across the board and set overall spending level to balance the budget. We parsed out the overall number for each department and they produced plans to meet that requirement. These set spending levels were key.  Without a set overall spending number set for each department, it would be a free for all, which is the classic Tragedy of the Commons. Here in Tennessee, e balanced 8 consecutive budgets, even through the Great Recession and even grew the rainy day fund.

Today, we have an opportunity to balance our national budget and pay off our debt. The idea is simple: agree to hold our spending constant at $3.316 trillion going forward. This is the spending estimate for Fiscal Year 2018, when you take out Social Security. If you pin spending–without gimmicks like making up for inflation– and let revenues catch up with it at a projected growth rate of 5.15%, our deficit would be wiped in the next 5.7 years.

This means that if President Trump wants to balance the budget, he can get it done within his time in office if he has a second term. This is not some far away lofty goal.

I present this as a fresh idea, but this is what everyone else has to do in business and with their families.

Congress and departments work together to determine the best ways to meet the overall target.  Not taking jurisdiction from all these committees, just giving them a number to work to like we did here in Tennessee.

This is the the way every Tennessee business and individual deals with their finances.

We’ve lost the ability in this country to do big things and need to get back to it.

I’ve tried with my fresh ideas to identify some “big things”, ones that will go beyond nibbling at the edges and actually make a difference and get things done.

Where we are now is becoming dangerous.  We will be a stronger, more powerful, safer country if we get back to operating within our means.

I’ve set forth one way of doing this that takes some work and sacrifice.

But no more work or sacrifice than great many Tennessee families and businesses deal with every year.  This is the way everybody else lives. Surely we can expect our well-paid elected representatives in Washington to be at least as hard-working and courageous as the rest of America.”

Summary of Bredesen Balance Budget proposal:

  • If the Congress had the discipline to simply hold the expenditures of the federal government (except Social Security) at their current level for about 6 years, we would no longer have a deficit.
  • Set an overall spending number and let revenues catch up with it
    • Forget mandatory, discretionary, PAYGO
    • Not inflation adjusted (1.9%)
  • Estimated expenditures for FY 2018 are $3.316 trillion, so pin the spending to this number. Revenues for FY 2018 are $2.488 trillion, which makes the deficit of $828 billion
  • Assuming the growth rate of on-budget revenues is 5.15% every year
  • The question becomes– how long does it take to grow $2.488 billion into $3.316 billion at a growth rate of 5.15%? Answer is 5.7 years.
    • 2.488 (1 + .0515)^X= 3.316
    • X= 5.7 years
  • Congress must then assign a target to each department (and within the departments to each section).  Right now, there is a free for all the 16 Senate and 18 House committees.
  • Congress and departments need to work together to determine the best ways to meet the overall target.  Not taking jurisdiction from all these committees, just giving them a number to work to. This is what everyone in the else in the country has to do.
  • During Congresswoman Blackburn’s 16 years in Congress, the national debt has soared more than 240% to $21 trillion and the annual federal deficit doubled to more than $800 billion.
  • Governor Bredesen has a proven track record of rolling up his sleeves and tackling tough problems to get things done for Tennessee. He balanced all eight budgets without an income tax or an increase in the sales tax, closed corporate tax loopholes with overwhelming bipartisan support, and is ready to help address the ballooning national debt as a member of the U.S. Senate.

Benefits of Proposal

  • Focus is on expenses, not finding new revenues.  New revenues don’t let you kick the can down the road, but new revenues can shorten the time period to completion.
  • Gentle phase-in.  Not chop, but not back-load.
  • Simple and clear, no gobbledygook.  Public can follow.  Each year, a simple question.  Do the budgets add up to $3.316 trillion or not?
  • Resistant to the usual game-playing.  Selling assets, overestimating revenues, etc.
  • Not grand gestures, political theater.  Lots of detailed choices proposed by people closest to the front lines.
  • Grown-up way to budget.


And here is Blackburn’s release:

Brentwood, TN – Today Marsha Blackburn announced her pathway to reduce the national debt. Blackburn is well-known for her commitment to fiscal conservatism.

Speaking about the pathway, Blackburn said, “Tennesseans are tired of Washington wastefully spending their money, and it’s just another reason the Senate is broken. I’m a committed fiscal conservative. Beginning with my time as a state senator—where I led the opposition to the state income tax—to my time in the House, I’ve been a deficit hawk, and I plan to take that same steely commitment to the U.S. Senate.”

Balancing the budget and reducing our debt requires a combination of cuts and pro-growth policies. Passing a Balanced Budget Amendment will put an end to the runaway spending that has plagued Washington for decades. Blackburn has supported across the board spending reductions, with exceptions for the military, that will ensure that all agencies shoulder the same burden in order to bring spending under control, but we must couple this with additional tax reform to continue growing our economy.

Find the pathway below and online here.

The national debt currently sits at 21.4 trillion dollars. This is the result of prior Republican and Democrat administrations kicking the can down the road and refusing to tighten Washington’s fiscal belt.

We must stand ready to make difficult choices. Blackburn’s pathway to balance the budget and reduce our long-term debt involves the following:

• Congress should pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution requiring the federal government to balance its budget just like our state is required. Such an amendment would be approved by two thirds of the House and Senate and ratified by three-fourths of the states.

• Across the board spending cuts – with an exception for military spending – are a solution that would reduce spending in a neutral and fair manner because everyone shoulders some of the responsibility. The advantage of passing such legislation is that it can be acted upon quickly. Time is of the essence, and our national debt continues to skyrocket out of control.
• In addition, mandatory spending accounts for approximately 60 percent of all federal monies spent. Social Security is projected to be insolvent by 2034 and Medicare will run out of money by 2026. We must reform entitlement programs by embracing ideas such as block granting Medicaid to the states. Our trust funds, Social Security and Medicare must be stabilized for younger workers, and eligibility requirements reviewed to save these programs for future generations.

• The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act has spurred the economy to four percent growth, sustained record low unemployment, and put more money into the pockets of hard-working Tennesseans. These tax cuts were not “crumbs.” Rather, they were a solution that yielded tremendous economic impacts.
• Congress should move to make the tax cuts permanent and examine further cuts for the middle class and small businesses. Cutting spending alone will not solve the problem, we must grow our economy. Tennesseans have witnessed first hand the benefits of economic growth resulting from low taxation.


42 Responses to Bredesen, Blackburn make balanced budget pitches

  • Stuart I. Anderson says:

    The Club for Growth evaluates candidates strictly on economic issues taking no stance on social issues or immigration/border issues. It advocates cutting government spending and income taxes a fair/flat tax and passage of a Balanced Budget Budget Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Masha has a 90% lifetime score from the Club and it has endorsed her in this Senate race against Bredesen.

    • Tennessee Jed says:

      Characterizing Club for Growth as non-political is laughable. They have a PAC and almost exclusively endorse GOP candidates. Routinely support corrupt politicians who only serve to continue to fill the swamp with more mud. It is just more big money donors wanting to mask their political wishes in a harmless-sounding organization.

      • Stuart I. Anderson says:

        I never said anything about the Club being non-political. Of course they endorse mostly Republicans insofar as Bredesen’s Democrats are a leftist party who are ideologically opposed to everything the Club is for. I have outlined the Club’s “political wishes” so it naturally receives contributions from those of us who share those wishes in order for candidates like Marsha, who also share those wishes to get elected. The fact is that those are also the wishes of a solid majority of Tennesseans is why Marsha will be our new U. S. Senator.

        • James White says:

          No, the reason Marsha will get elected is attributed the Harry Hopkins:
          “Tax and Tax, spend and spend, elect and elect, because the people are to damn dumb to understand.”

        • Tennessee Jed says:

          You are characterizing the wishes of Tennesseans with large, unrefined strokes.

          Most Tennesseans (even….gasp…..some Democrats) agree with the idea of cutting taxes, reducing the size of government, and eliminating burdensome red tape that hurts business and does little to promote any social good.

          However, where most Tennesseans and big-monied PACs like Club for Growth differ is who benefits from those cuts. Most Tennesseans that I know think that when there is a tax cut, Main Street should benefit just as much as Wall Street. And when you make a cut, you need to cut spending and balance your budget. Just like fiscally-responsible families do every single day.

          PACs like Club for Growth talk up tax/spending cuts. But the items they support almost exclusively are aimed at reducing the tax burden of their biggest financiers and not all taxpayers. When spending cuts are to be made (almost never), it is never to budget items that affect their bottom lines.

          PACs like Club for Growth are organized corruption. It is what makes the Swamp so swampy. They support candidates who promise to support their desired brand of Big Business “Conservativsm” that delivers cuts that are beneficial to them with no regard for the lack of corresponding cuts to everyday, hard-working, tax-paying Americans. There is no balancing of the budget. Cut taxes for their wealthy donors and foot the rest of the country for the bill.

          Where has it left us? Skyrocketing budget deficits even when the GOP controls every lever of government. Where were they when the Trump Tax Cut was passed without any meaningful reduction in spending? $1 trillion added to the deficit with no cuts in sight.

          These people need to be voted out.

          You won’t agree. But I would rather take my chance on a moderate Dem who has actually cut spending and balanced budgets before rather than a 17-year Washington DC politician who has done nothing to stop the problem in all of her years in Congress.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            You make a tendentious analysis that sounds good to class warriors but it conveniently ignores the fact that our tax code is already dramatically progressive due to politicians ignoring deficits and buying votes from “Main Street.” Thus, in 2015 the bottom 50% of taxpayers with adjusted gross income of less than about $40,000 paid only about 3% of all income taxes while earning 11% of all AGI while the top 5% with AGI above about $200,000 paid about 60% of income taxes while only earning only 36% of all AGI.

            Thus to have any meaningful tax cut in 2017 that would lead to economic growth it was necessary to cut our corporate tax rates which were just about the highest of any first world nation and to cut taxes for those in the highest brackets who, after all, are just about the only ones left paying taxes. Unfortunately, the recent tax legislation also lopped another untold millions off the income tax rolls which does not lead to a fiscally responsible citizenry when you have one group paying taxes and an increasing number paying no taxes at all.

            To use Bredesen’s conduct as a governor of a state with a constitutional mandate to balance the budget in addition to having to deal with a legislature with an overwhelming conservative majority as a basis to vote for Bredesen who thanks to your vote will vote to give control of the Senate to the most fiscally irresponsible elements in our politics is, to put it mildly, a bit difficult to understand. There’s still time for you to think again, however.

      • Stuart I. Anderson says:

        FYI, I might add that the Club is most active in Republican Primaries where it supports economic conservative candidates who are opposed to those centrist and tepid conservative candidates supported by the Republican congressional leadership and other establishment types that make up the “swamp.”

        • James White says:

          Marsha Blackburn is the Swamp.

        • MarLE says:

          Stuart ….you got about half of that dissertation on giving tax breaks to those high earners who are, after all, actually paying the bulk of Fed income taxes, correct. You got the fact that they Should, all of them, get a break correct. You got the part that they GOT, all of them, a break wrong. SOME of them got a break. Thanks to the unfairness in the code (initiated and remaining) those in certain industries, those in certain job categories, those in certain loophole-laden niches got a wonderful break. Those earning a paycheck, high income W-2 types got relatively little.

    • MarLE says:

      If she has a 90% they must be grading on a curve! There is nothing flat or fair in this tax code. Nothing! And it certainly doesn’t balance the budget and grows the deficit. Of all the things she doesn’t deserve even a passing grade on it is Fair treatment in the tax code and spending limits. Good Grief. Maybe they have confused with someone else.

      • MarLE says:

        Lifetime 90%. Must have been for votes Way In The Past when Obama was going to veto everything so Republicans were bold when it couldn’t count!!!!!

        • James White says:

          MarLE nailed it !

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            MarLE wrong again I’m afraid. Marsha’s Club For Growth scores over the years were as follows:
            2005-85%, 2006-88%, 2007-98%, 2008-100%, 2009-98%, 2010-97%, 2011-81%, 2012-82%, 2013-77%, 2014-77%, 2015-91%, 2016-96%, 2017-95%.

            Thus, with the exception of a few years of what we can chalk up as youthful rebelliousness leading to a bit of tepid economic conservatism, we have a fine solid record of economic conservatism over the years. What a congressman! She’ll make a great senator!

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            Please make that “2005-95%.”

          • MarLE says:

            So they have been grading on a curve for decades. Obviously!

          • MarLE says:

            Look at the highest years. Those were mostly when Dems controlled the House and/or the Senate. In a couple they controlled the White House as well. Again, most of those votes didn’t carry the day. And when they finally did……in 2017 the votes did NOT reign in spending, added to the deficit and this last go-around in 2018 has been disastrous for out of control spending and blowing up the debt. And as to fairness, what on earth could the CFG be using as a criteria?

          • James White says:

            Stuart, Guess CFG didn’t grade this BOONDOOGLE in 2008, makes me suspect (like MarLE) that they don’t know squat:
            Economic Stimulus.
            H.R. 5140, the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, passed 385-35 on January 29, 2008 (Roll Call 25). It would provide about $150 billion in economic stimulus, including $101.1 billion in direct payments of rebate checks (typically $600) to most taxpayers in 2008 and temporary tax breaks for businesses. Creating money out of thin air and then spending the newly created money cannot improve the economy, at least not in the long term. (If it could, why not create even more money for rebates and make every American a millionaire?) The stimulus has no offset and thus increases the federal deficit by the amount of the stimulus because the government must borrow the rebate money. A realistic long-term stimulus can only be achieved by lowering taxes through less government and by reducing regulatory burdens.
            Marsha Blackburn voted FOR this bill.
            (Source: The New American – July 21, 2008)

          • James White says:

            Or THIS:
            Farm Bill (Veto Override).
            H.R. 6124 would authorize the nation’s farm programs for the next five years, including crop subsidies and nutrition programs. The final version of the legislation provides $289 billion for these programs, including a $10.4 billion boost in spending for nutrition programs such as food stamps. After this legislation was vetoed by President Bush, the House passed the bill over the president’s veto on June 18, 2008 by a vote of 317-109 (Roll Call 417). A two-thirds majority vote is required to override a presidential veto. Federal aid to farmers and federal food aid to individuals are not authorized by the Constitution.
            Marsha Blackburn voted FOR this bill.
            (Source: The New American – October 27, 2008)

  • James White says:

    Marsha has voted for MORE and MORE spending. We do not need a BBA, we need the House to not spend more than we make. Only 218 house members could do that, but a BBA, would take many more and more states. The BBA is just a way to have an Article V Constitutional Convention and DESTROY our current constitution.
    Marsha has voted for many Omnibus Appropriations, Debt Limit Increases, and Continuing Appropriations. She is a SpendAholic.

  • James White says:

    By the way, Congress already passed a law that says they must balance the budget, but as usually, it can be and is overridden. Marsha does not know what she is talking about and is looking for Sound Bytes.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      And insofar as Bredesen has given no indication that he will oppose “. . . Omnibus Appropriations, Debt Limit Increases, and Continuing Appropriations” James punch line, as always, is to either not vote EVER, or at least not until you sift through the platforms of all those obscure candidates whose names appear on the ballot and find perfection whereupon you can be one of those one or two dozen voters who accomplish ABSOULUTELY NOTHING election, after election, after election.

      • James White says:

        Never ever vote for either. Period. That is the Constitutional and Conservate thing to do.

        • MarLE says:

          James….sounds like a plan that Stuart would approve of in that he did much the same thing in NOT voting for McCain. He didn’t vote for Obama but he certainly diluted the Republican vote by withholding it. You are advocating much the same conscience vote. Or maybe Stuart will try to argue that Bredesen is worse than Obama. Not!

          • James White says:

            Actually I meant it for Marsha and any member of congress. NEVER vote for “. . . Omnibus Appropriations, Debt Limit Increases, and Continuing Appropriations” .
            And MarLE, Thanks ! , I meant it the other way also.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            It’s my sense of proportion MarLE that I so wish you would acquire. I refrained from voting for a candidate with an inconsistent ideology and a most odious personality ONCE. James finds it impossible to vote for any incumbent political figure at the state or federal level EVER. I am reasonable. James is unreasonable.

        • Eddie White says:

          James, you always identify the problems you have with Blackburn, but you never propose any solutions. So, are you sitting home on election day? Are you voting for a 3rd party candidate? Are you voting for Bredesen? What is your solution James? I don’t think Blackburn is a saint, but who is? I don’t agree with her on every position, but I don’t with any candidate. I trust her more than Bredesen with my tax dollars, and my nation’s security, and all of the social issues that some of us care about, and I will go to the polls and vote for her.

          • James White says:

            Well it will NOT Be Big Government Blackburn. I will see where the Others stand, but Bredesen looks better than Blackburn even now!

          • Eddie White says:

            Well..good for you James. Maybe you have a found a candidate you can vote for. There are some issues that I agree with Bredesen on, but as a conservative I simply know it would not be wise to turn the Senate over to the Democrats. I know what will follow will be increased regulations and increased taxes. And as a matter of conscience, I cannot support a pro-abortion candidate.

          • James White says:

            Well Ed, I don’t see much of a difference who controls the senate, the Debt goes Up, More Wars, less freedom.
            Even when the Republicans control Everything the Debt goes up.
            05/01/2018 21,045,329,035,471.85
            06/29/2017 19,844,554,182,651.33
            07/31/2016 19,358,707,115,589.00
            09/30/2015 18,150,604,277,750.63
            09/30/2014 17,824,071,380,733.82
            09/30/2013 16,738,183,526,697.32
            09/30/2012 16,066,241,407,385.89
            09/30/2011 14,790,340,328,557.15
            09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
            09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
            09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
            09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
            09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
            09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
            09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
            09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
            09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
            09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
            09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
            09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
            09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
            09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
            09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
            09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
            09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
            09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
            09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
            09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03
            09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25
            09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32
            09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16
            09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00
            09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42
            09/30/1985 * 1,823,103,000,000.00
            09/30/1984 * 1,572,266,000,000.00
            09/30/1983 * 1,377,210,000,000.00
            09/30/1982 * 1,142,034,000,000.00
            09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00
            09/30/1980 * 907,701,000,000.00
            09/30/1979 * 826,519,000,000.00
            09/30/1978 * 771,544,000,000.00
            09/30/1977 * 698,840,000,000.00

  • Stuart I. Anderson says:


    “The Club for Growth opposes the FY18 Omnibus and urges all members of Congress to vote NO on it. A vote is expected soon in both chambers. The vote will be included in the Club’s 2018 congressional scorecard.

    It’s hard to see how any member of Congress – liberal or conservative – can vote on this 2,232 page deal less than 24 hours after the contents were made public. On top of that, this monster proposal simply fulfills the budget-busting deal that GOP leaders made with the Democrats last month. Voting for it would only affirm one’s support for permanent trillion dollar deficits.

    It further entrenches Obamacare and its onerous regulations on hardworking Americans. It funds Democrat priorities and throws American taxpayers under the bus. The American people deserve better than being saddled with trillions upon trillions of dollars of debt.

    This plan is just plain madness. The Club for Growth strongly opposes this omnibus legislation and encourages every Member in the House and Senate to oppose it as well.”

    Sometime back MarLE you inquired as to why Marsha wasn’t a member of the House Freedom Caucus and I responded basically that she wasn’t conservative enough. I am happy to inform you (in case you didn’t know) that Marsha’s almost certain successor as Congressman for the Seventh Dist. Mark Green has stated that upon entering Congress he will join Scott DesJarlais as Tennessee’s second member of the Freedom Caucus and he has pledged to support Jim Jordan as the new Speaker should the Republicans maintain control of the House.

  • James White says:

    Why vote for Marsha and More spending? Nothing will changed until you change your vote!!!

    • MarLE says:

      In the case of Marsha …she is not just trying to keep her job (held for 16 yrs already) as one of 435. She is looking for validation of the Excellent Job she has done and is seeking a Promotion~ and one that can’t be re-called for 6 YEARS! So the question is : has she done enough to be rewarded with a big promotion? For those who are not fearful of a Dem in this seat THAT is the real question.

  • MarLE says:

    In the case of Marsha …she is not just trying to keep her job (held for 16 yrs already) as one of 435. She is looking for validation of the Excellent Job she has done and is seeking a Promotion~ and one that can’t be re-called for 6 YEARS! So the question is : has she done enough to be rewarded with a big promotion? For those who are not fearful of a Dem in this seat THAT is the real question.

  • Donna Locke says:

    Let’s see, boys and girls . . . where did our tax dollars go while Bredesen was governor? . . . .

    This is kind of off the topic, and Stuart will have to lie down after this, but I may vote for the Democrat running for state rep in my district. I think I’ve had it with the lying Republicans failing to pass mandatory E-Verify to cover all employers in this state, with tough penalties and fixes for the independent-contractor ruses. This refusal to get rid of a primary magnet to illegal immigration to this state has gone on for many years now. The Democrat couldn’t be worse than that and probably won’t act like a religious minister.

    I’m also tired of theocrats and Republicans parachuting into Maury County to run for office and use it as a stepping stone. I could go on, but I’ll stop in a minute. I never voted for Sheila Butt. I just didn’t vote in that race when she ran. I voted for Republican Scott Cepicky in the primary this time, but I may vote for the clueless but nice Democratic kid A.J. Holmes in the general. A protest vote. Some others here are doing the same because of the behavior of the state Republican Party in our recent county mayor’s race when our Republican mayor was forced to run as Independent after getting shafted by the Republican honchos pushing Andy Ogles, who parachuted in a couple of years ago and won the county mayor’s race with thirty-something percent of the vote by having the R attached to his name. The vote got split, of course.

    Thank you for the opportunity to vent. Here’s a cold cloth, Stuart. I’m still voting for Marsha.

    • James White says:

      Donna, did the Legislature vote to spend the money or not? They are the ones that spend the money.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      Of course your wisdom in voting for Marsha is the big “enchilada” and I don’t want to say anything to infuriate you because with all of your protest votes it looks like you are approaching this election plenty mad already. Speaking of enchiladas, have you spoken to Scott Cepicky about his attitude toward e-verify and immigration in general. I met Scott and sent him a significant contribution in his primary race. He appears to be a bright conservative, U. of Wisconsin graduate and all that, and just the kind of individual we need to fill the ranks of the Republican Party in the legislature. Why don’t you give Scott a chance and if he doesn’t measure up you can always vote to get him out in two years.

  • James White says:

    So when Marsha says: “Washington’s spending habit is out of control & I have voted to reduce it at every turn.”
    That is NOT True. So Marsha Blackburn just told a big fat lie?
    That should bother everyone.

    • MarLE says:

      Not Stuart…doesn’t bother him at all. In fact, she’s charming, he said. So….you, James, don’t find lying to be charming I guess. They say (those who are on his good side) Trump can be charming. So it must be 100% unrelated to truth telling

  • Pingback: Wednesday, September 12

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *