In an interview this past week at the Freedom Works event FreePAC, I had the opportunity to ask Indiana Senate hopeful Richard Mourdock his thoughts on the best way for Congress to promote real economic solutions. The Indiana State Treasurer was a featured speaker at the event that boasted over 14,000 attendees.
Mourdock said the solutions really aren’t that hard. And quoting the great Ronald Reagan he commented, “There are always simple solutions, but there are never easy solutions.” With the release of the second quarter reports and only a dismal 1.5% growth in GDP, the economy continues to stall, the left continues to blame Bush and the GOP and they refuse to admit what they are doing isn’t working, at all.
“The simple solution is to reduce the size of Government. Let people keep more of their money,” Mourdock insisted. “And to get the regulatory environment that’s coming out of DC changed so that businesses have certainty. People don’t want to invest unless they know what the rules are.”
Recently the Bush tax cuts have been the subject of debate and votes. Obama from the very beginning of his Presidency has touted raising taxes on the so called “wealthy” and having them pay their “fair share.”
“Taxing the wealthy is a farce,” Mourdock said. He explained that depending on what the economy does by collecting taxes on those making over $250,000 per year would only generate $36 billion in a bad economy and up to $80 billion in a good one.
He continued by saying “if nothing else is changed and since we are currently spending $4 billion dollars a day more than we are taking in, by January 1st of 2014, if Obama gets his way and the wealthy are taxed, it would only allot for 20 days of a balanced budget.” That’s it.
When asked what he considered the motivation for the Obama administration to tax the wealthy was, he replied, “This is nothing more than about separating Americans and creating class envy and it’s flat out wrong. Obama’s plan is to divide America and he’s doing very well.”
Mourdock explained that most people assumed when Obama was talking about “change” they assumed he would change Washington D.C., but in hindsight most realize, “he wanted to change America.” And not for the better.