I Have Questions For Martha Roby

For those of you "in the know," the Wetumpka Tea Party will be holding a "town hall" style meeting on Monday, August 15, at 6:30 PM. At that meeting, US Congressman Martha Roby will be on hand to answer questions.

And man, do I have some questions for Miss Roby.

Unfortunately, I cannot make that meeting. So, I thought I would ask these questions here, and maybe somebody would make sure Roby has to answer them.

They're about her vote on the debt-limit deal. You see, she not only voted in favor of the "Boehner bill" and the, ultimately, final bill, she vehemently defended both the bill and her vote on talk radio. I heard her tell us that the bill was "the best" they could do. I heard her say something along the lines of "you sent me here to make hard choices, and that's what I did."

I have three different questions on this debt limit deal and her vote on it.


Question #1: The "first phase" of the debt limit deal includes $27 billion of spending cuts in the first year. I discount the "planned" cuts in the future, because future Congresses have total control over future budgets. Do you think it's wise to let Obama borrow about $1 trillion over the next year, while we only get $27 billion in spending cuts over the same period?

Question #2: Let's assume that all of the phase one spending cuts happen as planned over the next decade. Do you honestly think that we can return to a fiscally responsible government by allowing borrowing in the current year to grow by $1 trillion, when it will take us TEN YEARS to enact the matching spending cuts? Your position is akin to the driver of a car traveling at 100 MPH towards a cliff... who decides the solution is to slow down to 90 MPH. Do you REALLY think this was wise? How was this the "hard choice" you're pretending it is?

Question #3: The debt limit deal allows Congress (that means YOU, Miss Roby) to punt on choosing spending cuts. The 12-member commission will meet, decide on spending cuts and/or tax increases, and Congress will have to vote on their recommendations without amendments. Is it your understanding that this is the way our legislative system should work, with bills being designed behind closed doors by a small minority while no other Congressmen have input to the process OR the ability to propose amendments to the bill? (If it is, I'd suggest you first resign your position, and then take a social studies class that covers the Constitution... or just listen to this.)

And oh, heck, we might as well toss this one into the mix, just to stir the pudding a bit.

Question #4: Miss Roby, since you defend your vote and call the debt limit bill "what is right for our country," does that mean you think AL Senators Sessions and Shelby, both of whom voted NO in the Senate, are working AGAINST the best interests of the country?

Those are my questions about the debt limit and Martha Roby's vote. Does she honestly expect us to accept her argument that $27 billion in spending cuts is a good return for $1 trillion in new debt? Does she truly expect us to believe that she is honestly working to reduce spending and bring fiscal sanity to Washington?

I'm sorry, but her voting record simply does not support that. The Republicans' "Cut, Cap, & Balance" bill, which I admit I didn't think was anywhere close to perfect but was a lot better than what Roby wholeheartedly supported and defended, passed the House overwhelmingly and missed the 60-vote threshold in the Senate by four votes. That's close enough that passage of it could have happened, had THAT been the only vehicle on the table when the deadline loomed. So why didn't she support THAT bill instead of this piece of junk that does little except allow Congress to keep spending like drunken sailors?

UPDATE: I've already gotten an email, politely but earnestly informing me that their are NO cuts to actual spending in the deal. Yes, I know that. You see, these "spending cuts" are simply reductions in planned spending increases. It would be more accurate to say that the debt limit deal reduces next year's spending increase by $27 billion. Spending next year will still be higher than spending this year.