Pawlenty: McConnell plan is like a “band-aid on a broken bone”

posted at 7:10 pm on July 15, 2011 by Tina Korbe

In a pre-taped interview for this week’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” which airs this weekend on Bloomberg TV, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty expressed his disapproval of Mitch McConnell’s debt ceiling backup plan.

“I don’t like it,” Pawlenty said. “I think it’s a Band-Aid on a broken bone. … It doesn’t solve the problem. … I don’t like it.”

The interview featured some of the strongest quotes yet from Pawlenty, who, this time, kept the focus squarely on why voters should pick him over President Barack Obama, as opposed to why voters shouldn’t pick one or another of his GOP competitors.

Take his defense of his approach to tax reform. Pawlenty’s proposed tax plan would include the largest tax cut ever and, under that plan, the top 0.1 percent of wealthiest Americans would get an average cut of $1.4 million a year. Pawlenty refused to allow that to be painted as a negative proposal.

“If you’re into wealth redistribution, vote for President Obama,” he said. If you’re into growing the economy so the other 97 percent of us can have jobs and pay our mortgages and put gas in our car and get our kids to college, then vote for me, because I don’t really think the main issue in the country is whether some small percent of the country gets a little more wealthy or a little less wealthy. I think the issue is the economy overall has to grow, and we’ve got to provide jobs, so that the 95 percent or so of the country that depends on jobs for their quality of life has them available to them. That’s what I’m after.”

He wouldn’t be baited into class-warfare calls for increased sacrifice from top CEOs either.

“I don’t look at this from a wealth redistribution standpoint,” Pawlenty reiterated. That’s not the measure of our country. The measure of our country, are jobs growing? Are we providing jobs? … In my reform plan, I look at means testing part of Social Security, specifically the cost-of-living adjustment. So if you’re wealthy, you won’t get that. … It’s not government’s place to set compensation. … If you want to have wealth redistribution or focus on what percent of the top 10 percent are paying in taxes – and, by the way, they’re paying a bucket load already – then vote for Obama. That’s his argument. If you want Robin Hood, vote for Barack Obama. If you want to get the economy overall moving and do the things that are going to require you or help you get a job, vote for me.”

Solid, solid performance and one I’m proud to applaud.

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

No, the McConnell plan is not like a band-aid on a broken bone.

It is like another broken bone.

keep the change on July 15, 2011 at 7:12 PM

The interview featured some of the strongest quotes yet from Pawlenty

i.e. the polls and focus groups are speaking to him loud and clear.

fed-nad on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

What’s Yawnlenty’s energy policy.

wheelgun on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

In my reform plan, I look at means testing part of Social Security, specifically the cost-of-living adjustment. So if you’re wealthy, you won’t get that. … It’s not government’s place to set compensation. … If you want to have wealth redistribution or focus on what percent of the top 10 percent are paying in taxes – and, by the way, they’re paying a bucket load already – then vote for Obama.

So wealthy people will pay more into SS and get less, while poorer people will pay in less and get more.

How is that not wealth redistribution?

Aquateen Hungerforce on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

I thought it was a hydrogen blimp on a bonfire myself. Pawlenty boring he is.

astonerii on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

That’s a solid performance? The man doesn’t appear to understand the words he uses. Sigh.

Aquateen Hungerforce on July 15, 2011 at 7:14 PM

How is that not wealth redistribution?

Aquateen Hungerforce on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

No doubt. The man is as bad as Romney on some things. Might as well vote for Obama like he says.

astonerii on July 15, 2011 at 7:15 PM

Hey Tim, How about you take an anology bromide and take a long sabattical from the campaign trail. But, before you leave, can I ask you a question – have you ever had an original thought in your brain?

devolvingtowardsidiocracy on July 15, 2011 at 7:19 PM

He’s right.

Golf claps for T-Paw.

portlandon on July 15, 2011 at 7:21 PM

He must of liked Ron Paul’s new ad going in Iowa: No compromise.

The amazing thing is that if we stop the debt ceiling from passing, Obama would still have enough money to fund interest on the debt, but he wouldn’t have enough money to pay all entitlements and pay the troops.

Stopping debt ceiling from passing should be the priority. That way we pull out all the troops and decrease government spending this year not 10 years from now.

Plus undo QE2 and QE1 and we could get 1.6 trillion.

The two parties over overhyping this like they did the TARP fund so that they all feel pressured to raise the debt ceiling.

Spathi on July 15, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Ron Paul’s first canpaign ad: No Compromise

Airing in Iowa today.

Spathi on July 15, 2011 at 7:23 PM

If you want Robin Hood, vote for Barack Obama. If you want to get the economy overall moving and do the things that are going to require you or help you get a job, vote for me.”

T-Paw needs to understand a little more about Robin Hood. He and his band were not stealing from the “rich” to give to the poor, but taking from the Crown (the governmental owner of all capital and lands and, effectively, the people) to give to the poor, and why so he was hunted by the King.

TXUS on July 15, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Whoa! Easy there, Pawlenty! Calm down.

*yawn*

SouthernGent on July 15, 2011 at 7:36 PM

So wealthy people will pay more into SS and get less, while poorer people will pay in less and get more.

How is that not wealth redistribution?

Aquateen Hungerforce on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Social Security is just another welfare program; there’s no reason that we should be paying benefits to the wealthy, especially when the program is facing insolvency. I’d prefer SS was done away with completely, but politically that won’t happen.

I know the counter argument- “but they paid into it, why shouldn’t they get benefits too”? Answer: Every taxpayer pays (directly or indirectly) for programs they don’t get reimbursed for, be it farm subsidies, college grants, disability payments, welfare, food stamps, etc.

Hollowpoint on July 15, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Say, Timmy, do you like the size of government as it is? Or could you find some areas to cut it?

Not at the program level, mind you, but the Agency level… anything we can do without these days to save some cash from being spent? Like the EPA? Or are you still with the AGW religion?

ajacksonian on July 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Get out there and sell Paw! His 5% plan is great, but he has got to find his voice. He’s right about McConnell’s plan to. A-B-C Always Be Closing.

T-Paw has provided the best message on our economy. He is the only one to put forward a coherent supply side plan. His plan is gutsy and a direct challenge to PBHO and the leftists.

I am just worried about his ability to win the primaries. If he gets the nomination he’ll have a megaphone. But the primaries are a crowded street corner with venders crying out, hawking their wares. It’s easy to get drowned out by the noise and that is what’s happening to him.

MJBrutus on July 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM

In a pre-taped interview for this week’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt

Get back to me when this guy finally says something to their face.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Knucklehead on July 15, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Knucklehead on July 15, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Here ya go. Enjoy!

MJBrutus on July 15, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Take his defense of his approach to tax reform. Pawlenty’s proposed tax plan would include the largest tax cut ever and, under that plan, the top 0.1 percent of wealthiest Americans would get an average cut of $1.4 million a year

Pawlenty is just pandering to the far right… knowing full that no serious analysts believe that tax cuts can be part of the equation. Bernanke and Greenspan, both GOP appointees, have made the same case, in addition to the WSJ and other independent parties.

The sad truth is that this country doesn’t face a fiscal challenge- it faces a political one. This country has more than the financial means to reach a $4 trillion reduction in the deficit. If it doesn’t, there’s little doubt that the credit rating agencies will start downgrading the US, first at the federal level with corporate debt to follow. And that will be a very, very hard blow to the US economy.

bayam on July 15, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Social Security is just another welfare program; there’s no reason that we should be paying benefits to the wealthy, especially when the program is facing insolvency. I’d prefer SS was done away with completely, but politically that won’t happen.

And can you believe that a majority of voters support zero cuts to these entitlement programs? Of course benefits should be cut. But it’s just as likely that the right will refuse to accept tax cuts, while the left refuses to accept social security cuts unless there’s a tax increase for those in the top income tax brackets.

As long as the politicians remained focused on pandering to their respective bases, nothing will happen to seriously reduce the deficit. The final outcome might not be less than devastating for the economy.

bayam on July 15, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Is HA’s endorsement of T-Paw official yet? All this praise for someone operating at a kind of basic level of intellectual activity is gonna get downright depressing if it lasts a whole year….

MrScribbler on July 15, 2011 at 8:05 PM

The McConnell plan is like. . .Vichy France.

Emperor Norton on July 15, 2011 at 8:31 PM

Hollowpoint on July 15, 2011 at 7:40 PM

I was simply pointing out that Pawlenty’s word choices are suspect.

I don’t care if people say they dislike wealth distribution, I care if they prevent it. Pawlenty would not.

Aquateen Hungerforce on July 15, 2011 at 8:32 PM

“I don’t like it,” Pawlenty said. “I think it’s a Band-Aid on a broken bone. … It doesn’t solve the problem. … I don’t like it.”

I don’t think the McConnell plan is supposed to solve the problem, it is supposed to stop a default. That is not the same thing. In fact McConnell made the point of saying that the problem would not be solved so long as Barack Obama is president.

It is easy for these candidates to say whatever they have to in an effort to appeal to the base, but it does not tell us what they would do. After all, Barack Obama said the same kinds of things when he was running and we know how that turned out. One thing about Pawlenty however, his governing style showed some real skill as Governor. At least he does have a record to look at.

Terrye on July 15, 2011 at 8:45 PM

The McConnell plan is like. . .Vichy France.

Emperor Norton on July 15, 2011 at 8:31 PM

I am not so sure about that. I read something by Kudlow on this and he seemed to think it was not all that bad. One thing about it, no tax increases and it requires cuts to go with the increase. It has definite draw backs, but it is not all good for Obama either.

Terrye on July 15, 2011 at 8:49 PM

“I look at means testing part of Social Security, specifically the cost-of-living adjustment.”
I guess it is just a matter of where to draw the line. Federal income tax is “means tested.”

GaltBlvnAtty on July 15, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Kudlow is a shill for Wall Street. He used to work for Bear Stearns. He wants a debt ceiling increase because without one, his stock portfolio and those of his buddies would be vaporized.

No debt ceiling increase means an instantly balanced budget, not the modest little cuts Kudlow is peddling.

Emperor Norton on July 15, 2011 at 11:09 PM

Good for T-Paw…

Gohawgs on July 16, 2011 at 1:48 AM

Say, Timmy, do you like the size of government as it is? Or could you find some areas to cut it?

Not at the program level, mind you, but the Agency level… anything we can do without these days to save some cash from being spent? Like the EPA? Or are you still with the AGW religion?

ajacksonian on July 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Actually, he does want to make significant cuts to agencies. Severly restrict EPA. He also may have mentioned abolishing Dept. of Education, but the meeting was over a week ago, so I could be confusing an audience question on that with his answer. He wants to limit the governments take of the GDP.

DakotaBoy on July 16, 2011 at 2:23 AM

What’s Yawnlenty’s energy policy.

wheelgun on July 15, 2011 at 7:13 PM

He told us at the townhall meeting last week. Said it consists of 3 words. I figured “Drill, baby, drill”. It wasn’t, but it is just as good: USE AMERICAN ENERGY.

DakotaBoy on July 16, 2011 at 2:26 AM

MJBrutus on July 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM

What you said.

DakotaBoy on July 16, 2011 at 2:28 AM