Topic: Sen. Patty Murray
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
October 26, 2013 at 8:35 AM
Call on multinational companies to pay fair share of taxes
Sen. Patty Murray is brave to be taking on the task of trying to negotiate with Republicans to find a solution to our pending budget crisis [“Patty Murray’s latest task: Craft budget peace,” page one, Oct. 24].
From shutting down Mount Rainier National Park to threatening benefits of veterans and families of the fallen, the recent closing of our government made the middle class the victim of right-wing Republican ideology.
I hope she will fight for a sustainable solution that focuses on growing our economy through responsible revenue options, rather than cutting Americans’ earned benefits like Social Security, or taking food from hungry children. Big corporations like Microsoft and GE continue to make record profits while avoiding taxes. Many corporations still get a tax break for sending good American jobs overseas. Closing these corporate-tax loopholes is a more responsible approach toward balancing the budget.
Shutdowns, sequesters and other budget crises could be avoided if members of Congress demand that huge multinational companies pay their fair share of taxes. It’s time to change the law, stop the overseas corporate tax dodging, open our government and invest in the U.S. again.
Joelle Craft, Seattle
February 28, 2013 at 4:00 PM
Government spending not acknowledged
Sen. Patty Murray’s op-ed “Avoiding sequestration requires balance, cooperation, certainty” [Opinion, Feb. 27] lays out a purportedly fair plan while blaming the opposition in advance it if fails. What Murray fails to acknowledge is how badly government spending is out of control.
If Murray’s plan to raise revenue by new taxes on the wealthy and oil companies was used to pay down the debt while at the same time cutting spending, it would be an admirable plan. However, the vast array of new spending laid out by the president in his recent State of the Union address is indicative of the out-of-control government and will certainly consume any new revenue.
Murray claims that a strong middle class is essential to prosperity. If the current government spending continues, it is inevitable that the middle class will pay a very large burden sooner or later, and the debt is still growing.
–David Cutler, Medina
Low-income, elderly and disabled will see consequences
I couldn’t agree more with Sen. Patty Murray.
If Congress and the president don’t reach a deal to avoid sequestration, thousands of Washington seniors now living independently will be in real trouble. Across-the-board spending cuts will slash the budget for Project-Based Section 8 housing, which provides affordable apartments for low-income elderly and the disabled.
Bellwether Housing is an independent nonprofit. We own and operate more than 1,800 apartments. Particularly vulnerable to the upcoming March 1 sequester are approximately 400 Section 8-supported Bellwether apartments that serve seniors, people with disabilities and formerly homeless families. The residents pay 30 percent of their income for rent. The Section 8 contracts provided by the federal government are critical to our mission to serve our tenants with safe, affordable, high-quality housing.
If Uncle Sam breaks his word by not paying those rents, the owners won’t be able to pay their mortgages and eventually may be forced into default. Seniors most likely will have to go to Medicaid-funded nursing homes, an option that will cost taxpayers roughly $50,000 a year compared with about $8,000 a year for Section 8.
Across-the-board cutting is penny-wise and pound-foolish.
–Sarah Rick Lewontin, executive director, Bellwether Housing, Bellevue
Murray plays blame game
Talk about irony. Sen. Patty Murray’s blame-it-all-on-Republicans lament over the deadlock in Congress, featured on The Times Feb. 27 Opinion page, tells of Washington constituents’ anger and disgust expressed on her recent in-state tour.
Right on, Sen. Murray, and your holier-than-thou sniffling perfectly exemplified the main cause.
–Don Gulliford, Mercer Island
Budget cuts are not the solution
I was surprised that your excellent columnist, Danny Westneat, bought into the spurious arguments of Rand Paul and his ilk about the across-the-board cuts that probably will occur this week because of the law passed in 2011 [“Time to sequester the hype,” NWWednesday, Feb. 27].
Some facts are that this is the only administration in recession in many years that actually has cut government jobs. In the Reagan administration, more people were hired. The budget deficit has actually shrunk in the last three years. Yet the Party of No keeps saying we have a spending problem.
The administration has already proposed cuts of over $1 trillion in 10 years, yet more is demanded. These cuts come on top of previous reductions and are truly the wrong way to go, placing crucial and necessary programs at risk of reduction or elimination.
Does anyone really believe we have a handle on early childhood education and that more doesn’t need to be done? Do we really have enough food and meat inspectors? Are the long-term unemployed really in a safety-net situation or are they told to just get a job? Is our crumbling infrastructure slated for long-term rehabilitation and replacement?
When do we say “enough already” and show these small-minded haters the door and govern this country from a position of hope and expanded horizons, not small-minded, poorly informed, parochial nitwits. We can do big things.
–Jack McClurg, Marysville
Spending increase should be cut
I was struck by the honesty and accuracy of Danny Westneat’s column, “Time To Sequester The Hype,” and Sen. Patty Murray’s fundamentally untrue op-ed “Avoiding sequestration requires balance, cooperation, certainty” in Wednesday’s Seattle Times.
The Democrats already got their “balanced approach” tax increase in December, with no corresponding reductions in government spending. Now it is the time to cut the government’s yearly 4-percent increase in growth in spending by 1 percent.
Too bad Westneat is not our representative in the Senate. He would bring some honesty and sanity to the management of government.
–Jim Arthur, Tukwila
February 25, 2013 at 4:00 PM
Wild Olympics bill sees diverse support
I support the Wild Olympics bill [“Murray seeks to expand wild lands,” NWWednesday, Feb. 13]. Wild Olympics designates a wilderness buffer around Olympic National Park. The consultation process over the past four years earned support from groups that sometimes disagree. I urge readers to contact state Rep. Derek Kilmer and ask him to support the Wild Olympics bill.
There’s more you can do in designated wilderness than what you cannot. Hiking, camping, climbing, rafting, kayaking, skiing, snowshoeing, hunting, fishing, horseback riding and berry picking are allowed. Mining, logging and motorized use are not.
No forest system roads are inside the 126,000 acres of proposed wilderness. This preserves public access. Existing roadways remain available for motorized uses, like snowmobiles and four-wheelers.
The proposed wilderness does not change existing trailheads. The place you start your hike today is the same place after the bill is passed.
The proposed wilderness does not close new areas to logging. It only affects land where logging is already off-limits, earning endorsement by a Port Angeles timber company and a mill in Cosmopolis.
Washington’s outdoor-recreation industry supports 115,000 jobs and contributes $11.7 billion per year. Other purely economic beneficiaries are in food, fishing, lodging, retail, real estate, fuel and services. Economics like this are especially powerful because they support family businesses on a recurring basis, year after year.
Please ask Kilmer to join 20 hunting and fishing organizations, 200 Olympic and Kitsap Peninsula businesses, Democrats, Republicans and conservationists, and support the Wild Olympics bill
–Tamara J. Gordy, Bremerton
Trending with readers