If that is true at the State level, why do we not make America a supermajority Nation for future tax increases? Why not take that principle which has worked at the State level and adopt it at the Federal level, so that we promote further economic growth across this Nation because we make it slightly harder for the U.S. Congress to raise taxes yet one more time. We force the Members of this Congress, you and I and the gentleman in the Speaker's chair who has joined us in voting tomorrow for this, make it a little bit more important that we look a little bit more carefully at how we spend the dollars. It is worth noting, many people across America are very, very upset at the General Accounting Office audit which came out just a few days ago showing that our government is wasting massive amounts of dollars. Indeed, those numbers show that in some instances we cannot trace where the money has gone. We cannot find equipment that was supposed to have been purchased. We are literally kind of allowing money to slip through the hands of the Federal Government and not even get real value added. That should offend every American taxpayer. That should be, I hope, the driving force which puts this amendment over the top tomorrow. Because if we make it just a little harder to raise taxes, we will have to be just a little bit more careful, hopefully a lot more careful about how we spend those hard-earned dollars that we take out of the pockets of the American people.
Editor's note · Context
Advocating for a supermajority requirement for federal tax increases during a floor debate.
Share
More from John Shadegg
I think they have failed to provide economic coverage to the American people. I think they have failed to hold down costs. I think that the health insurance industry is largely to blame for a system that wastes a ton of money; yet it's the…
Oh, the cost went up. Wait, the cost went up? They have forced everybody in Massachusetts, like this bill would do, to buy a health insurance plan on the premise that the cost would go down. But in Massachusetts where they did it, the cost…
So the reason you wouldn't want to stand on the floor and vote for that Senate bill is not just because of the policy in it, it is because that bill will contain the Cornhusker Kickback, right?
Ah, so it's Republicans who oppose this bill that are the pals of the health insurance industry? I don't think so. And you're telling me that in the one State where we've already tried this, a mandate that you must buy health insurance…





