Home Table of Contents Discussion Board
“And no one should be surprised, human
nature being what it is, people will go as far as they possibly can get away
with.” – Senator
Hillary Clinton – D,
Questions for
Hillary Clinton
Senator
Clinton…
1.
in January 2001
the CBO stated the “new economy” of the
1990s and 2000 may be no more than a temporary increase in productivity. Senator, on May
29, 2007 you said: “Now, of course, we can't simply recycle the policies
that worked in the 1990s.”
Senator Clinton, are you now confirming the “new economy” in
the 1990s and 2000 was only temporary?
If not, Senator Clinton, what are the policies that worked in
the 1990s that cannot be recycled?
2. on November 19, 2007 you said: “What was President Bush's answer to seniors who can't
afford to retire? Privatize Social Security.” Later in the same
speech you said: “And we're going to help families save for retirement with
new retirement accounts.”
Senator Clinton, is your recommendation the same as
privatizing Social Security, except under a different name?
3. on October 8, 2007 you said: “Well in the 1990s we were on our way to creating
good jobs….” In January 2001
the CBO said: “The primary negative risk is that the current
slowdown might turn into a recession. Although forecasters widely anticipated
that economic activity would slow, the deceleration has been surprisingly
rapid.”
Senator Clinton, were we really on our way
to creating good jobs in the 1990s when the deceleration in 2000 was
surprisingly rapid?
4. on November 19,
1007 you said: “We had an economic
strategy that worked in the 1990s. We
believed that fiscal responsibility could spur economic growth, so we balanced
the federal budget.” In January 2001 the CBO said: “From 1994 to 2000,
however, the annual growth of those (tax) receipts surpassed that of the
economy (growth rate) for reasons unrelated to new tax legislation. In fact, in 1998 and 1999, receipts increased
as a percentage of GDP despite new tax breaks concerning children and
education.”
Senator Clinton, your economic strategy in the 1990s was
apparently to have tax receipts growth rate surpass that of the economy growth
rate for reasons unrelated to new tax legislation. What was the policy that made this happen and
can the policy be recycled?
Senator Clinton, how was it
possible for tax revenues to increase despite new tax breaks concerning
children and education?
5. on February 7, 2005 you said: “When
President Bush took office, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted
that by 2011, we would have a budget surplus of $5.6 trillion.”
In the same CBO report as the $5.6 trillion projection, the CBO said: “the
baseline projection is not a prediction of future outcomes but
rather a reference point for assessing policy changes.” It further states: “the
probability is 10 percent” it will fall within a close proximity of $5.6
trillion.
Senator Clinton, did
the CBO predict a $5.6 trillion budget surplus by 2011?
6.
there
are laws against a CEO presenting a forward-looking financial statement,
also known as a projection, to the public without meaningful cautionary
statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those in the forward-looking statement. The penalty to the CEO includes prison. Senator Clinton, on November
19, 2007 you stated: “When
President Bush became president, he inherited … a surplus, a projected surplus
of $5.6 trillion.” Your
statement is based on a 2001 CBO report
and the speech did not include any cautionary statement addressing the 11 pages
of uncertainties in the same CBO report.
Senator Clinton, do
you think it is acceptable for a politician to report the results of a CBO
financial projection in a manner that can send a CEO to prison?
7. on
October 8, 2007 you said: “(My father) believed you
should avoid being in debt at all costs and instilled in me the importance
of being responsible with a budget
at an early age.” In the same speech you also said:
“families who
financed their homes with non-traditional high risk loans saw their
mortgage rates jump. Now many families (are) finally stuck with mortgages they
can't pay and expenses they can't afford.”
Senator Clinton, are these people irresponsible?
8. on October 8, 2007 you said: “Well
in the 1990s we… (had) the prospect of being debt free
and having the resources to fund the retirement costs of the baby boom
generation.” In January 2001 the
CBO stated: “Over the longer term, however, budgetary pressures linked to the
aging and retirement of the baby-boom generation threaten to produce record
deficits and unsustainable levels of federal debt.”
Senator Clinton, have we ever had the prospect of having the resources to fund the retirement costs of the baby boom generation?
9. on October 8, 2007 you said: “We have to develop a set of budget rules similar to
those we had in the 90s that required us to fund new expenditures with new
revenues or cut spending.” As you know, Senator, those rules only
applied to Discretionary Spending with Defense Spending being a sub-set of
Discretionary Spending. In January 2001 the CBO reported:
“Although total discretionary outlays were
virtually unchanged from 1991 through 1996, defense spending declined 3.6
percent, while nondefense spending rose
4.7 percent. From 1996 through 2000,
total discretionary outlays increased 3.7 percent, although defense spending
grew more slowly than nondefense spending.”
(see graph)
Senator Clinton, in your attempt to return
to the budget techniques of the 90s, do you plan similar cuts in Defense
Spending?”
10. on May 27,
2007 you said: “But over the past six years,
while productivity has gone up 18 percent -- that means Americans are working
harder than ever…” On October
8, 2007 you then said: “Over
the past six years, worker productivity - that means how hard you're working,
how much you put out per hour of your work…” In January 2001 the
CBO stated: “CBO has raised its projections of both potential and actual
GDP over the past few years in response to the investment boom of the late
1990s, evidence of the economy's
faster growth of productivity,…”
Senator Clinton
can you provide any evidence causing worker productivity growth besides how
hard we are working?
11. on November 19, 2007 you said: “So even though
American workers are (currently) increasing their productivity, their wages
have remained flat.” You also said in the same speech: “We had an
economic strategy that worked in the 1990s.”
Senator Clinton, do you think it is
possible for the
Senator Clinton, do you have any proof wages have
remained flat? (see Appendix IV)
12. on November 19,
2007 you said: “the CEOs and the boards of these
companies are not sharing the wealth. So companies are actually profiting off
of keeping workers' wages stagnant.” Senator, according to the National
Average Wage Index from the Social Security Administration, and adjusted
for inflation, post 2000 wage rates have increased at the same rate as has been
occurring from 1951 through 2006.
Senator Clinton, do you have any proof wages have
stagnated?
13. on
May 29, 2007 you said: “And no one should be surprised, human
nature being what it is, people will go as far as they possibly can get away
with.”
Senator
Clinton, to what extent does this apply to you?
14. on
November 19, 2007 you said: “Think about
that. When President Bush became president, he inherited a balanced budget and
a surplus, a projected surplus of $5.6 trillion.” In 2001 the CBO in the
budget report you reference stated:
“… the baseline projection is not a
prediction of future outcomes…”
Senator, how do you inherit a projected surplus of $5.6
trillion when it was never predicted to occur?
15. on
November 19, 2007 you said: “(In 2005) the wealtiest
1 percent of Americans held 22 percent of America's income.” (Actually it was 21.20%) “That's an astonishing figure, and it is the highest level
of income inequality since the beginning of the Great Depression in 1929.” Senator, according
to the IRS, in 2000 the wealthiest 1 percent held 20.83 percent of
America’s income. In the same speech you
said you planned to restore
“fairness” to our economy.
Senator, is returning income concentration for the top 1
percent to 20.83% as occurred in the year 2000 under the Clinton administration
from the 21.20% in the year 2005 under the Bush administration the difference
between “astonishing” and “fairness”?