BEN LANGE

Ben Lange supports policies that would hurt average working Americans. He thinks the Ryan Plan had a lot of good ideas, even though it creates deep and painful cuts to Social Security and Medicare. He supports a balanced budget amendment, which could threaten the stability of the entire economy. Finally, Lange opposes cutting taxes on the middle class, but he supports cutting taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

Paul Ryan Has A Lot of Good Ideas

Lange Applauded Paul Ryan for Putting Out a Budget With A Lot Of Good Ideas. When asked about the Ryan Budget plan at a town hall event, Ben Lange said, At least he has the guts to put up a proposal. I think Paul Ryan has a lot of good ideas out there. I havent subscribed wholeheartedly to every aspect, I havent read every aspect to his budget plan but what he talks about is returning those personal choices to individuals as opposed to a top-down government run health care system. [Youtube, 7/12/12] Wall Street Journal: Ryan Plan Would Essentially End Medicare. According to Naftali Bendavid at the Wall Street Journal, The plan would essentially end Medicare, which now pays most of the health-care bills for 48 million elderly and disabled Americans, as a program that directly pays those bills. [Wall Street Journal, 4/4/11] Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel: Ryan Budget Plan Would Nearly Double Out-OfPocket Costs for Seniors. The Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel reported that The Ryan budget plan would cut federal spending on Medicaid, which provides health care for the poor, and begin distributing money by block grant to states. The plan would do away with Medicare's direct payment for health care for seniors, replacing it with a voucher system in which recipients choose private insurers. The plan would do away with Medicare's direct payment for health care for seniors, replacing it with a voucher system in which recipients choose private insurers. The Congressional Budget Office found that part of the plan, which would take effect in 2022, could nearly double out-of-pocket costs for seniors. [Ft Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, 4/16/2011] Economic Policy Institute: Ryan Budget Would Result in Roughly 900,000 Jobs Lost in 2012 and Roughly 1.3 Million Jobs Lost in 2013. According to the Economic Policy

Institute, Using a standard macroeconomic model that is consistent with that used by private- and public-sector forecasters, we estimate that the shock to aggregate demand from near-term NSD spending cuts would result in roughly 900,000 jobs lost in 2012 and roughly 1.3 million jobs lost in 2013. Cumulatively, cuts of this magnitude would result in a loss of 2.2 million jobs over the next two years, or 3.1 million full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs. [Economic Policy Institute, 4/13/11] Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: Two-Thirds of the Ryan Plans Cuts Come from Programs Helping the Poor and Middle Class. In April 2011, Robert Greenstein, President of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said that nearly two-thirds about $2.9 trillion of the Ryan Plans $4.5 trillion in budget cuts over ten years comes from programs aiding the poor or disadvantaged. The $2.17 trillion of these cuts come from Medicaid and repeal of the expansion of Medicaid under the 2011 health care reform law. The remainder of the $2.9 trillion would come from non-health related services to the poor, such as Pell Grants, food stamps, and low-income housing programs. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Press Release, 4/20/11, 4/20/11] New York Times Editorial: Ryan Plan Would End Medicares Guaranteed Benefit. The House Republican budget would mean that older Americans no longer have a guarantee that Medicare will pay for their health needs. [] He would still offer the elderly a fixed amount of money to shop for their own health insurance, but allow the option of enrolling in traditional Medicare. [New York Times Editorial, 3/20/12]

Supported a Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment

Lange Supported a Balanced Budget Amendment. When asked during an interview what his top priorities would be, Ben Lange answered, Well clearly addressing the national debt. [] We dont have people in office with enough guts to put principle before party and thats what we have to do to address that issue and I think that starts with supporting the balanced budget amendment which Bruce Braley clearly does not, he has voted against it. [Youtube, 3/29/12] Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP): Balanced Budget Would Threaten Significant Economic Harm While Raising a Host of Problems for Social Security. According to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, A balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution including the version that the House is expected to consider this week would be a highly ill-advised way to address the nations long-term fiscal problems. It would threaten significant economic harm while raising a host of problems for the operation of Social Security and other vital federal functions. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/27/11] CBPP: Balanced Budget Amendment Would Risk Tipping Economy Into Recession and Making Recessions Longer, Causing Large Job Losses. According to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, By requiring a balanced budget every year, no matter the state of the economy, such an amendment would raise serious risks of tipping weak economies into recession and making recessions longer and deeper, causing very large job losses. Thats because the amendment would force policymakers to cut spending, raise taxes, or both just when the economy is weak or already in recession the exact opposite of what good economic policy would advise. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/27/11]

CBPP: Balanced Budget Amendment Would Force Benefit Cuts in Social Security, Military Retirement. According to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Social Security could not draw down its reserves from previous years to pay benefits in a later year but, instead, could be forced to cut benefits even if it had ample balances in its trust funds, as it does today. The same would be true for military retirement and civil service retirement programs. Nor could the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation respond quickly to bank or pension fund failures by using their assets to pay deposit or pension insurance, unless they could do so without causing the budget to slip out of balance. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/27/11]

Opposed Tax Cuts for the Middle Class

Lange Opposed 2009 Stimulus Act. According to Des Moines Register, Braley said his support for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 not only created more than 10,000 jobs in Iowa, it provided millions of dollars for infrastructure projects in the 1st District and helped many cities and counties to continue to provide essential services. There has been more than 2,300 grants and 350 contracts for almost $2 billion of funding that has created a substantial number of jobs, improved our economy as well as improving our states infrastructure. It allowed a lot of local governments to maintain a lot of services, Braley said. Lange contends that the $787 billion bill was wasted spending. Look at the results; unemployment is still at unacceptable highs, Lange said. If we borrowed the money in hopes of encouraging job creation, it just hasnt happened. [Des Moines Register, 9/19/10] Stimulus Included $116 Billion Payroll Tax Reduction. According to WCFCourier.Com, The reference is to the $814 billion federal stimulus package, which along with increases in spending programs also included tax cuts provisions such as a $116 billion payroll tax reduction. [WCFCourier.Com, 10/4/10]

Supported Tax Cuts for the Wealthy

Lange in Favor of Extending Bush-Era Tax Cuts to Wealthy. According to WCFCourier.Com, Already, the two campaigns have clashed on extending the Bush-era tax cuts for individuals making $200,000 or more and couples making more than $250,000. Braley has been critical of the idea, while Lange is in favor. [WCFCourier.Com, 10/4/10] Bush Tax Cuts Already Cost Over $2 Trillion. According to Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, The 2001 tax cuts, along with the expansions and extensions in 2003 and 2010, will have cost the Treasury well over $2 trillion by 2012 when they are scheduled to expire. [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 6/7/11] Extending the Bush Tax Cuts Would Cost More than $2.8 Trillion. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that extending these provisions through 2022 will cost more than $2.8 trillion, even without counting interest costs. [CBO: The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022, 1/12] Letting the Bush Tax Cuts Expire Would Get US to Economically Sustainable Level of Deficits. According to Christian Science Monitor, Congressional Budget Office projections have shown repeatedly that achieving the current-law baseline level of revenues

 the level consistent with letting all the expiring tax cuts actually expire is one way to get us to an economically sustainable level of deficits over the next decade or two. [Christian Science Monitor, 5/15/12] Preserving Tax Cuts for Wealthy Would Cost $80 Billion in 2013 Alone. According to Washington Post, A Republican proposal to preserve tax cuts for the nations wealthiest households next year would cost about $80 billion more than a Democratic proposal to extend the cuts solely for middle-class taxpayers, according to official estimates released Thursday. [] Neither party is calling for a permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts. Instead, both sides are seeking a one-year extension that would give lawmakers more time to enact a complete overhaul of the Byzantine federal tax code in 2013. [Washington Post, 7/19/12]