We have to quit passing the bill to the next generation.

Transcription

1 2 Debt Ceiling Should Congress raise or eliminate the debt ceiling? We have to quit passing the bill to the next generation. REP. JOE BARTON (R-TX) THE TOTAL U.S. NATIONAL DEBT is currently around $9.8 trillion, an amount that currently exceeds the United States gross domestic product (GDP). This means that the U.S. spends more money than it makes. According to a June 207 report by the Congressional Budget Office, over the next decade (from 207 to 2027), outlays are projected to grow more quickly than revenues in the U.S. THE ISSUE: In December, Congress will have to decide what to do about the debt ceiling once again. The question is, should we raise or eliminate the debt ceiling? The debt ceiling, also called the debt limit, is a limit on the amount of national debt that may be issued by the U.S. Treasury after it has spent and incurred that debt. The debt ceiling limits how much money the federal government can borrow to pay its own bills. Generally, Republicans believe the debt ceiling shouldn t be raised. Instead, the country s debt should be reduced by overhauling costly safety-net programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Conversely, Democrats typically believe the debt ceiling should be raised or eliminated altogether. They say the debt ceiling has led to declines in stock prices and a downgrade in the U.S. credit rating. THE CONTROVERSY: Congress has voted to suspend or raise the debt ceiling multiple times and almost always at the very last minute. From Oct. to 6, 203, the U.S. government shut down because of a stalemate between Democrats and Republicans. The two parties couldn t reach an agreement to either appropriate funds or pass a continuing resolution to temporarily keep the government running. Soon, the time will come for Congress to either increase the legal borrowing limit, suspend the ceiling for some period again or eliminate the debt ceiling all together. Many Republicans have said they d like to see the country s debt reduced by overhauling expensive federal safety-net programs. Also, repeatedly raising the debt ceiling defeats its purpose. We can t keep kicking the can down the road. Yet many Democrat legislators believe the debt ceiling needs to be raised or eliminated. Rep. Brendan F. Boyle (D-PA) recently introduced legislation to eliminate the U.S. debt ceiling, which would mean that Congress wouldn t set a cap on the amount of money the government borrows to pay its bills. THOSE FOR raising the debt ceiling or eliminating it all together argue that failing to do so would cripple the economy and force the U.S. to default on its loans and financial obligations. The debt ceiling has never worked and is a counterproductive means of slowing down spending. THOSE AGAINST raising or eliminating the debt ceiling say the government should look at cutting federal programs instead of raising the cap or elminating that safeguard. Putting the country into further debt is not the answer and we need to look at long-term effects this will have on future generations. Each time the debt ceiling is raised, the current debt is just being pushed off for future generations to pay. 5 5

2 North Korea Should the U.S. take preemptive military action against North Korea? There will be a war with North Korea over their missile program if they continue trying to hit America with an ICBM. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC) THE DEMILITARIZED ZONE is a region that separates North Korea from South Korea. The 50-mile-long region incorporates territory on both sides of the cease-fire line as it existed at the end of the Korean War in 953. The Demilitarized Zone, or DMZ, is one of the most heavily militarized zones in the world due to deeply held hostility between North and South Korea. Large numbers of troops are still stationed along both sides of the line, each side guarding against potential aggression from the other side. North Korea has about.2 million military personnel compared with 680,000 troops in South Korea, where 28,000 U.S. troops are also stationed. THE ISSUE: In the last several months, tensions have risen between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un, North Korea s Supreme Leader. Since 2006, North Korea has been conducting missile tests in violation of international law and has threatened to attack a city in the U.S. mainland with its nuclear arsenal. On Sept. 9, President Trump said in a speech to the United Nations that if the U.S. is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but totally destroy North Korea. In response, North Korea issued a statement warning that President Trump will pay dearly for his threats. THE BACK STORY: North Korea is sometimes referred to as the hermit kingdom because it is isolated from the rest of the world. The country s government is ruled by Kim Jong Un, an aggressive young dictator who routinely imprisons people whom he perceives as enemies in gulags (prison camps) where human rights abuses occur. North Korea dislikes our country and calls the U.S. an imperialist aggressor because the U.S. participated in the Korean War of the 950s. After the Korean War, the nation that was once Korea split into two countries South Korea, which is a democracy, and North Korea, which calls itself a socialist state but in practice is closer to a dictatorship. South Korea is an ally of the U.S. while North Korea is an ally of China. THE CONTROVERSY: North Korea boasts one of the world s largest standing armies, numbering roughly million. North Korea has been stockpiling nuclear weapons, some of which they say could reach cities in the United States. North Korea is also threatening to strike South Korea and Japan (both are U.S. allies). Some members of Congress believe the U.S. should take a strong stand against Kim Jong Un s aggression and belligerence by striking North Korea preemptively. Others say this is not a good idea because North Korea could easily attack South Korea and Japan. Striking first could also draw China into a war with the U.S. THOSE FOR taking preemptive military action against North Korea point out that negotiations over the past two decades have failed to rein in North Korea s provocative behavior. Sanctions haven t worked either. Further, it s inevitable that North Korea will strike the U.S. It s time to demonstrate with a show of force that there are severe consequences for Kim Jong Un s actions. There aren t many other good options for preventing a future attack on the U.S. homeland. THOSE AGAINST striking North Korea say this is not a good solution because a number of U.S. soldiers and Korean civilians would likely die. Plus, a nuclear catastrophe could occur, possibly on our own soil. South Korea and Japan are within striking distance of North Korea, which would likely attack them if the U.S. struck first. A better solution is to levvy heavier sanctions or negotiate through diplomatic channels. 2

3 2 Climate Treaty Should the U.S. rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement? Scientists, business owners, even our kids know climate change is real. Our government shouldn t run away from it. SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY) HURRICANE HARVEY wreaked havoc on Houston due to intense flooding, as shown in this image depicting a submerged stop sign. In a four-day period, many areas received more than 40 inches of rain. Estimates of Harvey s cost vary, but some indicate the storm will be the most expensive in U.S. history at over $90 billion, surpassing Hurricane Katrina. THE ISSUE: In September, Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria hit U.S. soil, leaving a trail of destruction in their path. First, Hurricane Harvey caused catastrophic flooding in Texas cities, including Houston. The storm displaced some 30,000 people and prompted 7,000 rescues. Then Hurricane Irma struck the southeastern U.S. coast, namely Florida, in what was the most intense Atlantic hurricane to strike the U.S. since Katrina. Then, still in September, came Hurricane Maria the strongest hurricane to make landfall in Puerto Rico (a U.S. territory) since 928. Maria was the tenth-most intense Atlantic hurricane on record and the costliest hurricane to hit the region, resulting in 78 fatalities and $9.2 billion in damage. Environmentalists believe there is a link between the increased ferocity of hurricanes and global warming. THE CONTROVERSY: On Dec. 2, 205, under the Obama administration, 90 nations adopted a global climate treaty at a summit near Paris, France. The accord, which is called the Paris Climate Agreement, details a plan to limit global warming to less than two degrees Celsius. Each nation is required to design policies to limit emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. On June, President Donald Trump announced that he is planning to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement. Some lawmakers believe the U.S. should rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement, in light of the severe storms thus far in 207. Yet other legislators believe it was good to withdraw from the climate treaty because it would have resulted in profit-crushing regulations that would hamper businesses and hurt the economy by killing Americans jobs. THOSE FOR the U.S. rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement point out that some scientists believe the increased amount of greenhouse gases in the air are due to human activity and have contributed to the increase in the average global temperature. Also, global warming may be a cause of increasingly severe storms, resulting in billions of dollars of damage. Climate change has already affected the economy and will continue to drive up costs if left unchecked. THOSE AGAINST the U.S. rejoining the agreement say it was structured in a way that didn t require congressional approval, which is unconstitutional. Businesses have long voiced their concern that they would be unfairly targeted by environmental regulations that would be put in place to ensure the U.S. meets its goals under the Paris Climate Agreement. The World Resources Institute estimated the emissions target would reduce the U.S. gross domestic product by.7 percent, or $70 billion, by 2030 therefore dealing a crushing blow to the economy and killing Americans jobs. 5 5

4 North Korea Should the U.S. take preemptive military action against North Korea? YES: SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM NO: SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN There is a military option: to destroy North Korea s nuclear program and North Korea itself. [Trump] is not going to allow the ability of this madman [Kim Jong Un] to have a missile that could hit America. If there s going to be a war to stop him, it will be over there. If thousands die, they re going to die over there. [Using a military option] is inevitable unless North Korea changes, because you re making our president pick between regional stability and homeland security. He s having to make a choice that no president has wanted to make. They ve kicked the can down the road for 20 years. There s nowhere else to kick it. Now is time before it s too late for Republicans and Democrats to make clear no preemptive strike against North Korea can happen without a vote by Congress. President Trump should follow the advice of Teddy Roosevelt. Speak softly and carry a big stick. I don t think threatening war is a very smart thing for the President of the United States to do or others to do. What we want to do is ratchet down the tensions but at the same time, be very firm and ratchet up the pressure through economic sanctions and diplomacy. 2 Climate Accord Should the U.S. rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement? YES: SEN. TOM CARPER NO: REP. DAVID B. MCKINLEY Instead of seizing the opportunity to lead the world in battling climate change, our president has decided that the United States will cede its role as a global leader. Meanwhile, over 90 nations will remain united in moving forward without us to combat what is, perhaps, the greatest challenge we face today: climate change. President Trump s decision also means we abandon the economic opportunity that comes with innovation and technology advances in clean energy. The European Union and China already have plans to fill the gaping hole left by the United States. President Trump s decision to withdraw is a bold statement that he will put America first even in the face of intense international pressure. The Paris Climate Agreement is a flawed deal that puts America s energy needs and economic growth on the back burner, while transferring money and power to unelected international bureaucrats. Moving forward, the best way to lead on this issue is to prioritize energy research and promote new technologies that will allow countries around the world to use all their resources including fossil fuels in the cleanest and most efficient manner. 3

5 Notes: Charter Schools Should charter schools be funded with tax dollars? YES: SEN. TED CRUZ School choice continues to be the civil rights issue of our era. Each and every child has the right to access a quality education. Not only does school choice give low-income children the same choices and opportunities that children from wealthy families have always had, it also improves the public schools, making them stronger and more effective. This legislation [the Educational Freedom Accounts Act or S. 2455] ensures that every child in Washington, D.C., regardless of race, ethnicity, or zip code, has the same opportunity to choose the school that best fits their needs and will help them achieve their very best. Your vote on each NO: SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN Many charter schools in Massachusetts are producing extraordinary results for our students, and we should celebrate the hard work of those teachers and spread what s working to other schools. But I am very concerned about what this specific proposal [to raise Massachusetts cap on charter schools] means for hundreds of thousands of children across our Commonwealth, especially those living in districts with tight budgets where every dime matters. Education is about creating opportunity for all our children, not about leaving many behind. 2 Debt Ceiling Should Congress raise or eliminate the debt ceiling? YES: REP. BRENDAN BOYLE NO: REP. JOE BARTON The debt ceiling, and the constant crisis it creates through repeated threats of government shutdown, is unnecessary and problematic to say the least. It s no wonder that only a handful of countries around the world currently follow this disruptive, arbitrary and restrictive fiscal practice. When you receive your credit card statement at the end of the month, you can t decide I ll pay this, but won t pay that. Our current process of governing by deadline and playing chicken with the debt ceiling is essentially doing just that and risking the full faith and credit of the United States. This is reckless and irresponsible. When the hurricane reliefdebt ceiling increase bill came back from the Senate, I voted no. I am not against voting for relief programs to help hurricane victims, but I am against raising the public debt ceiling without a plan to reduce deficits in the short term, and eliminate them in the long term. The money we vote to spend today will have to be paid back by our children and grandchildren. We have yet again missed an opportunity for substantial reforms and reduced spending. Until we seriously address entitlement reform, we will have the same dilemma in a year that we face today. We have to quit passing the bill to the next generation. 3