Alan's Positions

GOVERNMENT SPENDING, THE DEFICIT AND TAXATION

Producing sufficient tax revenues to fund much needed government programs is important.  But, the question pertains to how to maximize the amount of tax revenue without unreasonably burdening the individual American citizen. 

Fundamentally, the answer is easy: For example purposes, let us say that we have an economy with five people.  If you have one person working who is paying 50% of their income as taxes and that person is earning $100 per year, then that person is generating $50 in tax revenue for that economy to cover government programs.  In that economy, we have four unproductive people who are likely being supported by the $50 in tax revenue.  If we have five people who are working who are paying $25 per year in taxes, the government has $125 in tax revenue to support government programming.  I would rather have five people working, feeling independent of government support and pursuing their dreams, than just one.  I would rather have lower tax thresholds and higher disposable income than higher tax threshholds, lower disposable income and a stagnant economy.

Therefore, I believe that we should expect government to run as efficiently as possible, produce policies that facilitate entrepreneurship and support a growing economy, and that enables individual citizens to gain greater independence and to build more secure futures.

Today, the need for government services appears ever-expanding. With technology, we should be able to, on a periodic basis, institute a new paradigm to the traditional service of government that translates into leaner/more effective operating models thereby reducing the unnecessary expansion of government. Therefore, I will support legislation that would direct the Federal government to evaluate and implement leaner and more effective service models on a periodic basis.

I will support legislation that will eliminate "pork-barrel" spending.  There are bills in Congress which have line items within them that have nothing to do with the purpose of those bills.  This type of spending circumvents the democratic process and therefore should not exist.  Instead, these spending proposals should be presented by themselves and if they have sufficient merit, they will be supported.

I will support legislation that would not isolate working groups for taxation. The provider tax is an example of a tax isolated to a single working group.

Regarding the deficit, if at all possible, government should spend less than it takes in.  When we spend more, that money must eventually be paid back with interest.  Therefore, deficit spending is clearly a mortgage on our future.  But, there are times when the government may be forced to run a deficit.  For example, spending during a severe recession can spur economic growth.  In the long-run, we should do whatever we can to to reduce the deficit, but we should seek out mechanisms that do not include increasing taxes or stimulating inflation.  Programs that spur economic develop which includes programs supporting research into new technologies, commercializing applications for that research, and the reskilling of the workforce are key components towards that end.

With all of that said, the deficit now stands at more than $557 billion.  An economic downturn could spur an even larger deficit which could not only devastate our economy, but create global instability (because so much of the global economy relies upon the strength of the U.S. economy).  Therefore, we must return to a fiscally prudent posture.

Applicable Background: I have helped business leaders exercise fiscal prudence for nearly two decades. I know how to read and construct a balance sheet.  I was the chief financial officer of a company, a public accountant and an investment banker. I know how to build and work with budgets, raise and deploy capital, and achieve bottom-line goals on a shoestring. I have been on the front line in terms of job creation and employee retention.