Hochul’s China obsession

October 23, 2012

Kathy Hochul’s union backers are up with a new ad attacking Chris Collins’ record of job creation, trying to hide Hochul’s own dismal record of never creating a single job.

While she and her Democrat backers ‘misleadingly’ attack Collins on job creation and China with claims that have already been deemed false – it’s Hochul’s reckless spending agenda that is forcing us to borrow more money from countries like China.  Not only that, but remember, Hochul has personally profited from companies that outsourced jobs to China.

Hochul has voted to keep tax increases on middle class families to pay for ObamaCare and her tax increases could destroy up to 710,000 jobs.

As you cover Kathy Hochul and her union allies covering up her record of raising taxes and profiting from companies that outsourced jobs to China – consider the following quote:

NRCC Comment: “The facts speak for themselves – Hochul has voted to raise taxes, she spends recklessly – causing us to borrow money from countries like China, and she profits from companies who outsource jobs to China. Hochul and her union thugs attacking Chris Collins’ record of creating jobs with claims that have been deemed misleading could not be more disingenuous and desperate.” – NRCC spokesman Nat Sillin

 

 

HOCHUL’S RECORD ON DEBT AND CHINA:

  • Kathy Hochul’s response to America’s economic crisis has been to borrow money from countries like China so they can keep spending money we don’t have. Working families are still struggling, our national debt is $5.5 trillion bigger and China owns more than $1 trillion of our debt.

 

  • Hochul’s spending addiction is more than just a waste of money—it will hurt future economic growth. Economic studies have shown that rising debt levels are linked to less economic growth.

 

Hochul’s response to America’s economic crisis has been to borrow money from countries like China so they can keep spending money we don’t have. Working families are still struggling, our national debt is $5.5 trillion bigger and China owns more than $1 trillion of our debt:

 

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE AT 7.8%, SAME AS IT WAS WHEN OBAMA TOOK OFFICE, 10.7% IF WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION WAS THE SAME: (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Accessed 10/5/2012)


DEMOCRATS PROMISED STIMULUS WOULD BRING UNEMPLOYMENT RATE TO 5.6% BY NOW: (Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, “The Job Impact Of The American Recovery And Reinvestment Plan,” 1/9/09)

 

$5.57 TRILLION INCREASE IN NATIONAL DEBT SINCE OBAMA TOOK OFFICE: (“The Daily History of the Debt Results,” Bureau of the Public Debt, Accessed 10/22/2012)

 

NATIONAL DEBT CURRENTLY STANDS AT $16.20 TRILLION; SIZE OF NATION’S ECONOMY AT $15.59 TRILLION: (“The Daily History of the Debt Results,” Bureau of the Public Debt, Accessed 10/22/2012; Bureau of Economic Analysis, 9/27/2012) 

 

CHINA OWNS $1.15 TRILLION IN U.S. DEBT: (“Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities,” U.S. Department of the Treasury, 10/16/2012)

 

STUDY: ANNUAL COST OF OBAMA’S DEBT AMOUNTS TO $4,000 A YEAR IN HIGHER TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS: “In a new paper, AEI’s Aspen Gorry and Matt Jensen look at the real annual cost of servicing the debt for households at various levels of income — including a potentially higher tax burden. As the table below illustrates, a household making between $100,000 and $200,000 a year could find its tax liability higher by roughly $2,400 every year. Over ten years, that works out to $24,000. And when you add in the debt already accrued the past four years under President Obama (the second table), that’s another $1,600 a year. So now we are now talking about $4,000 a year, $40,000 over ten years.” (James Pethokoukis, “Study: Obama’s Big Budget Deficits Could Mean A $4,000 A Year Middle-Class Tax Hike,” American Enterprise Institute, 10/2/12)

 

POLITIFACT SAID LAST YEAR THAT OBAMA WAS THE “UNDISPUTED DEBT KING OF THE LAST FIVE PRESIDENTS”: “Obama is the undisputed debt king of the last five presidents, rather than the guy who added a piddling mount to the debt.” (Louis Jacobson, “Nancy Pelosi Posts Questionable Chart on Debt Accumulation by Barack Obama, Predecessors,” Politifact, 5/19/2011)

 

THREE YEARS AND TWO MONTHS OF OBAMA WAS MORE DEBT THAN EIGHT YEARS OF PREDECESSOR: “The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency. The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.” (Mark Knoller, “National Debt Has Increased More Under Obama than Under Bush,” CBS News, 3/19/2012)

 

OBAMA RECORD “THE MOST RAPID INCREASE IN THE DEBT UNDER ANY U.S. PRESIDENT”: (Mark Knoller, “National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama,” CBS News’ Political Hotsheet Blog, 8/22/2011)

 

 

Hochul’s spending addiction is more than just a waste of money—it will hurt future economic growth. Economic studies have shown that rising debt levels are linked to less economic growth:

 

CBO: OBAMA BUDGET WILL “HURT THE ECONOMY IN THE LONG TERM”:  (Erik Wasson, “CBO Estimates Obama’s 2013 Budget Would Hit Economic Growth,” The Hill, 4/20/2012)

 

STUDY: ECONOMIC GROWTH TAKES 25% HIT FROM DEBT LEVELS AT MORE THAN 90 PERCENT OF ECONOMY:  (Rich Miller, “Reinharts, Rogoff See Huge Output Losses From High Debt,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 4/30/2012)

 

GOLDMAN SACHS RESEARCH: STIMULUS SPENDING “WILL EVENTUALLY LEAD TO A DRAG,” HIGHER DEBT LEVELS TAKE ECONOMIC TOLL: “The eventual effect of sustained fiscal imbalance is slower growth and greater risk of a fiscal crisis.  Our estimates suggest that a 10-point increase in the debt/GDP ratio lowers growth four years later by 0.2 percentage point, and increases the probability of a debt crisis by 2.5% in the aftermath of a financial crisis like the recent one.  (See No Rush for the Exit,” Global Economics Paper, No. 200, June 30, 2010 and “When One Crisis Leads to Another,” US Economics Analyst, 11/04, Jan. 28, 2011.)  To avoid this, lawmakers must begin to identify deficit reduction strategies.

 

“Ultimately, what goes up must come down. In the case of the federal budget, this means that a deficit-financed boost to growth will eventually lead to a drag. While policymakers can try to smooth the transition by phasing in cuts and incorporating multi-year fiscal commitments, achieving a sustainable fiscal policy will inevitably be a painful but necessary process.” (Jan Hatzius and Alec Phillips, “Fiscal Restraint: A Question of When, Not If,” Goldman Sachs Global ECS U.S. Research, 3/2/2011)