Letter to Barack Obama, President of the United States - Regulations, Spending Cuts, and Tax Reform

Letter

June 29, 2011

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
Washington, DC 205500

Dear Mr. President:

Three weeks ago, I had the privilege of attending a meeting at the White House with my fellow Republicans to discuss our financial crisis. I was encouraged by this invitation--I believe that finding a solution that ends our spending binge while protecting jobs is a worthy, non partisan goal.

Mr. President, I emerged from this meeting more than a little disappointed. In particular, you said that you have not proposed an alternative to our budget and dept plan because you knew that Republicans would simply object based on political considerations. The truth is there is no way to know what would happen if you offered a plan because you simply have refused to do so, leaving the nation without a leader when it needs one most. Let me be clear--I do not agree with many of your policies, but the void your inaction had created is real and it is dangerous.

I look back to the early 90s when President Bill Clinton was faced with many of the same political problems you now face. He was unpopular and unable to govern in an ear in which the people were fed up with liberalism and seeking a return to conservative principles. President Clinton, however, did not shy away from his position as president of the greatest nation in the world. He embraced his role as a leader and, along with a Republican Congress, forged consensus agreements that were good for the county.

Today the political talking heads may still argue over whether the resulting economic boom should be credited to Bill Clinton or the Republican Congress; notwithstanding, what the majority of the American people remember is that their work together resulted in a period of economic prosperity that continued until the end of his administration.

After being extended a gracious invitation to come to the White House, I would like to extend to you an invitation of my own: to work with us to guide this nation back to prosperity. And while I recognize that it is difficult to put politics truly aside in Washington, DC, there are three areas where the rhetoric from both sides is in agreement. Now we must simply put these words into action.

The first area is in repealing burdensome regulations. On January 18, 2011, you wrote in the Wall Street Journal, "[W]e are also making it our mission to root out regulations that conflict, that are not worth the cost, or that are just plain dumb." Even though this is one of the key priorities of the newly elected Republican majority, you have not engaged in a dialogue on this issue. If you came to the House of Representatives with a plan to repeal and reduce burdensome regulations, it would not be rejected out of partisan rancor.

In spite of your rhetoric, your agencies have continued to issue regulations "that conflict, that are not cost effective, and that are just plain dumb." A great example is in the new rules placed on electric utilities. Your administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, said the new rules were "expected to create jobs" due to the mandated "demand for pollution control technology." Left unsaid was how many jobs would be lost due to the $17,800,000,000.00 annual cost of these regulations and a 10 percent increase in average electric costs.

The second area where we seem to be in agreement is in the area of spending cuts. On April 13, 2011 you called for trillions of dollars in spending cuts and said, "We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt." This too is the exact same message the Republicans in the House have been proclaiming. In fact, it is the message that got us all elected--you included.

Republicans have since unveiled a very detailed agenda that includes trillions in spending cuts of our own. In this instance, it was you who responded with knee-jerk objections grounded in pleasing your liberal base. You have yet to detail any plan to reduce spending and hide behind your fear that Republicans will simply object to your plans. Republicans knew you would have objections and that we would open ourselves up to vicious attacks, but the mantle of leadership requires action. House Republicans acted, and now we await your spending reduction plan--perhaps not with open arms, but we do have open minds.

The final area in which we are in agreement on the need for action, if not necessarily the specifics, is tax reform. I understand this is an area particular prone to partisan bickering and stone throwing, but there are areas in which we can agree. We have the highest corporate income tax in the world. We can all agree on the need to lower overall tax rates while broadening the base. We agree that the tax code is unwieldy and riddled with loopholes and exceptions. This results in the perception that if one has enough money to hire lawyers and accountants, one can find a way to avoid paying taxes. We can pass a revenue neutral tax reform plan that lowers tax rates while broadening the base by closing loopholes and exceptions.

In 1994, no one got everything they wanted. Partisan bickering did now cease to exist. I can still point to Clinton-era policies that I believe are devastating to the West. But the greater point was that on many of the important economic issues, leaders on both sides of the aisle staked their reputations and futures on bold action.

Republicans in this Congress have stepped forward with bold actions of their own, and I respect your opposing viewpoint. But I would rather be arguing two years from now over who should get the credit for an economic turnaround--as our predecessors did in 1996. Without your engagement, I am afraid in two years we will simply be arguing over who to blame.

Sincerely,

Raul R. Labrador
Member of Congress
1st District, Idaho

Source