Skip to:

ROVE GROUP RELEASES NEW HYPOCRITICAL ATTACK AD

INSTEAD SHOULD TURN ATTENTION TO OSE'S RECORD OF RECKLESS SPENDING

Karl Rove's shadowy attack group Crossroads GPS is at it again, trying to prop up Rove's friend, former Congressman Doug Ose, by running an outrageous, hypocritical ad about Dr. Ami Bera's record. The ad blames Bera for our country's debt, when the truth is that Bera's opponent former Congressman Ose voted to grow the debt exponentially while he was in Congress.

"If Karl Rove wants to talk about out-of-control spending, he should take a look at his friend former Congressman Doug Ose," said Bera spokesperson Allison Teixeira. "When Ose was in Congress he voted for two unfunded wars and for tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, to line his own pockets and help his friends on Wall Street. Those votes squandered America's record surplus and turned it into a record deficit, and raided our seniors' Social Security along the way."

Karl Rove was a senior advisor to President George W. Bush. His interest group, Crossroads GPS, is funded by New York billionaires supporting an agenda of tax cuts for wealthy Wall Street and corporate CEOs while forcing the middle class to carry an even heavier burden.

Bera is fighting to make Washington more responsible with taxpayer dollars, and he's leading by example. That’s why he gave his own Congressional pension back to the U.S. Treasury to pay down the debt. He also helped lead the effort to pass the No Budget, No Pay Act, which says if Members of Congress don’t do their jobs and pass a responsible budget, they don’t get paid.

As a leader of the bipartisan Problem Solvers group, he also introduced a package of 9 bipartisan bills, called Make Government Work, that would save taxpayers billions of dollars. One of those bills, the 21st Century Healthcare for Heroes Act,  is now law, and will merge electronic health records from the Department of Defense with the VA to save taxpayers money and help address the VA backlog. Bera is also a sponsor of the SAVE Act, which will cut $200 billion dollars in government spending over ten years by eliminating duplication and waste in government, and voted for bill that requires the President to submit a balanced budget, or an estimate of when the budget will be balanced.

Dr. Ami Bera represents Sacramento County in Congress. He’s working to make Congress a place for service and fighting to rebuild an economy that works for middle class families. As a leader of the No Labels' Problem Solvers, Bera is leading the charge to find bipartisan solutions to our nation’s challenges, and worked to pass the No Budget No Pay Act, which says if members of Congress don’t pass a budget, they don’t get paid. He and his wife Janine live in Elk Grove with their daughter Sydra.

BACKGROUND:

OSE REPEATEDLY VOTED TO RAISE DEBT LIMIT, TOTALING $2.23 TRILLION

Ose Voted 3 Times to Raise the Debt Limit, Raising it by Over $2.23 Trillion in Total. Between 2002 and 2004, Ose voted to raise the debt limit three separate times, from $5.95 trillion (2001 limit) to $8.184 trillion (2005 limit), totaling $2.234 trillion. [Congressional Research Service, “The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases,” 10/15/13]

2002: Voted to Increase the Debt Limit by $450 Billion. In 2002, Ose voted in favor of a bill, S 2578, which raised the national debt limit by $450 billion to $6.4 trillion. The bill passed 215–214 and was signed by President Bush on June 28, 2002. This bill eventually became Public Law 107–199. [S 2578, Vote #279, 6/27/02; The New York Times, 6/28/02]

2003: Voted to Increase Debt Limit by $984 Billion. In 2003, Ose voted to adopt a conference report on a budget resolution that triggered a rule that deemed HJ Res 51 in the 108th Congress to have passed. This legislation raised the debt limit to accommodate the spending and revenue levels approved in the adopted budget resolution. Specifically, the debt limit was raised from $6.4 trillion to $7.384 trillion. The report was adopted, 216–211. This bill eventually became Public Law 108–24. [H Con Res 95, Vote #141, 4/11/03; HJ Res 51 (108th Cong.) Enrolled; CRS Report, 4/5/11]

2004: Voted to Increase Debt Limit by $690 Billion. In 2004, Ose voted in favor of a budget resolution that would increase the public debt limit by $690 billion to $8.1 trillion. [S Con Res 95, Vote #198, 5/19/04; Associated Press, 5/19/04]

OSE VOTED AGAINST INSISTING DEBT CEILING INCREASE BE TIED TO STRICTER FISCAL DISCIPLINE IN PASSING TAX CUTS

2004: Ose voted against a motion to insist that an increase in the debt ceiling be accompanied by stricter fiscal discipline when passing tax cuts. The motion failed 194–218. [CQ Floor Votes, 11/18/2004; S 2986, Vote #535, 11/18/2004]

2004:  Ose voted against similar measures to re-establish PayGo. The motion failed 196-218. [CQ Floor Votes, 6/25/04; HR 4663, Vote #317, 6/25/04]

2004:  Ose voted against similar measures to re-establish PayGo. It too was defeated, 179-233. [CQ Floor Votes, 6/24/04; HR 4663, Vote #314, 6/24/04]

DEBT GREW BY NEARLY $2 TRILLION, OR OVER 35 PERCENT, DURING OSE’S TENURE

National Debt Grew by Nearly $2 Trillion while Ose was in Office. Between January 3, 1999 and January 3, 2005, the national debt grew by $1.98 trillion from $5.61 trillion to $7.59 trillion, or about 35.5 percent, during Ose’s tenure in office. [Treasury Direct, accessed 8/26/14]

OSE VOTED FOR BUSH BUDGET, TAX CUTS, WARS THAT INCREASED DEBT BY TRILLIONS

2001 & 2003: Ose Voted for President George W. Bush’s Tax Cuts. [HR 2, House Vote #225, 5/23/2003; House Vote #149, 5/26/2001; House Vote #118, 5/16/2001]

Ose Voted for War in Iraq. In October 2002, Ose voted in favor of President Bush’s resolution allowing him to declare war on Iraq. The resolution granted Bush with sweeping war powers. The resolution passed 296-133. [HJR 114, Vote #455, 10/10/02; Navy Times, 9/30/02]

Bush Tax Cuts, Wars Account for Nearly $6 Trillion in Deficits from 2009 to 2019. In 2013, CBPP reported that, “Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration - tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009 and will account for nearly $6 trillion in deficits in 2009 through 2019 (including associated debt-service costs of $1.4 trillion). By 2019, we estimate that these two policies will account for almost half — over $8 trillion — of the $17 trillion in debt that will be owed under current policies. These impacts easily dwarf the stimulus and financial rescues, which will account for less than $2 trillion (just over 10 percent) of the debt at that time. Furthermore, unlike those temporary costs, these inherited policies do not fade away as the economy recovers.” [CBPP, 1/03/13]

2003: Voted for $2.4 Trillion in New Debt in Republican Budget. In 2003, Ose voted in favor of a budget resolution that added “$2.4 trillion to deficits and the national debt between 2003 and 2013.” The resolution passed 216–211. [HCR 95, Vote #141, 4/11/2003; Center for Budget and Policy Priorities,4/17/2003; CQ Floor Votes, 4/11/2003]

2003: Opposed Alternative Balanced Budget Plan with $500 Billion Less Debt. Ose voted against an alternative budget plan to balance the budget by 2010 with $500 billion less public debt than the GOP-sponsored proposal. Unlike the GOP plan, the alternative would not cut domestic spending below the level needed to keep pace with inflation and would not contain any cuts in mandatory spending. Furthermore, the alternative plan provided $500 billion more in new funds for a Medicare prescription drug benefit than the GOP-sponsored budget. The budget plan was defeated 192–236. [HCR 95, Vote #81, 3/20/2003; CQ House Action Reports, Legislative Day, 3/30/2003]

2004: Opposed Budget Plan to Cut Deficit in Half in Two Years. Ose voted against a substitute to the budget resolution that would cut the deficit in half in two years and balance the budget in 2012. The bill would have temporarily extended tax cuts for working families, such as the $1,000 child tax credit and the marriage penalty relief, but would have linked further tax cuts and spending to offsets. The budget was defeated 183–243.  [HCR 393, Vote #89, 3/25/2004; CQ Weekly, 3/26/2004]

2001: Opposed Debt Reduction Plan, Tax Cuts. In 2001, Ose voted against a budget plan that focused on reducing the national debt over tax cuts. The so-called “Blue Dog Coalition” budget called for dividing the projected budget surplus over five years (The Republican budget set a 10-year budget framework). One-half would be designated to reduce the public debt; one-quarter for increasing priority discretionary spending projects; and one-quarter for cutting taxes. The amendment also called for surpluses generated by Social Security and Medicare to go toward debt reduction. The budget plan was defeated, 204–212. [H Con Res 83, Vote #67, 3/28/2001; CQ Floor Votes, 3/28/2001]

VOTED TO PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY, INCREASING DEBT BURDEN ON TAXPAYERS BY “TRILLIONS”

Voted for Taking $600 Billion from Social Security to Pay for Privatization. In 2001, Ose voted in favor of a budget that critics said used about $600 billion of the Social Security surplus to fund new privatized retirement accounts for stock market investment. The budget passed 222-205. [H Con Res 83, Vote #70, 3/28/01; House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, 3/27/01; Rep. Bentsen, Congressional Record, page. 4849, 3/28/01]

Privatization Would Cut Benefits and Increase Tax Burden on Taxpayers by Trillions. According to the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, “privatization is not a plan to save Social Security; it is a plan to dismantle Social Security. Privatization means increased retirement risks, severe cuts in Social Security benefits, and a multi-trillion dollar increase in the federal debt. Privatization diverts money out of Social Security into individual accounts leaving an even larger solvency problem. Privatizers fill this funding gap by dramatically cutting Social Security benefits. They cover the rest by borrowing money, thereby increasing the debt burden on all taxpayers by trillions of dollars over the next half century. With market-based accounts, the risk of an adequate retirement is placed entirely on the individual.” [National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare website, accessed 8/26/14]