SENATOR SHELBY'S THOUGHTS ON....

U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby thinks a pair of proposals  could help solve the nation’s financial problems.

The first is a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which he said would curb runaway spending by ensuring that the federal government does not spend more money than it takes in each year.

The second is a bill to establish a flat income tax rate of 17 percent, an idea that Shelby said would drastically simplify the tax code, reduce Americans’ tax burden, eliminate corporate welfare, and boost American competitiveness..

“We spend too much. We borrow too much. We tax too much. We need straightforward solutions to these clear problems,” Shelby said.

Shelby was one of just eight senators who voted earlier this month against legislation to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff.” He said he opposed the bill because it would lead to more borrowing, and that he was committed to finding solutions to the nation’s ballooning debt.

Sequester:   This will affect north Alabama       

“Today, we will hear from our witnesses on the impacts of the sequester, which is appropriate and timely because the cuts are poised to take effect in just 15 days.  It should be noted, however, that the sequester is something that the Congress and the President set in motion, knowing full well that this day could come.

“The sequester will bring spending cuts that are automatic and across-the-board for most discretionary accounts.  A rigid formula will determine how cuts are made, instead of what’s best for economic growth, safety and prosperity.  Cuts will happen without regard to a program’s merit or efficacy.  Some of the most severe cuts will hit defense programs.

“The real driver of our debt is not discretionary spending, but entitlement spending.  As CBO reports, the combination of an aging population, rising health care costs, and an expansion of health insurance subsidies will drive up the cost of mandatory programs.  Absent reform of entitlements, this will lead to an unstoppable debt spiral. 

“Although we must reduce spending, it should be done in a deliberate way.  This is why I opposed the bill that created the sequester in the first place.  The sequester was supposed to be a last resort if the so-called Super Committee failed to agree upon measures to reduce the deficit.  In the end, the Super Committee reached an impasse.  It did not produce even a penny of deficit reductions.

“It’s been over one year since the Super Committee’s failure.  Although we have seen the sequester coming, we haven’t taken any steps to fix it.  In fact, Congress has only delayed it further.  This situation presents a perfect opportunity for the President to exercise some leadership.  Although he has called on Congress to act, he has not put forward a proposal of his own with specific options.